badgers007

Wisconsin has promoted one coach from within: Jim Leonhard. A tad different than Oregon's "several [internal]" changes. Paul Chryst's connection to Wisconsin only serves as a reminder that he coaches and recruits the way that has made Wisconsin successful for the last 25 years, unlike his predecessor. No more, no less.

Dave Aranda is top-notch, but I wonder if we can really tag Justin Wilcox as such.

Not sure what Oregon has to do with Wisconsin. Wisconsin has stability at HC. Paul Chryst grew up in Wisconsin, played at Wisconsin, and has coached at Wisconsin on two separate stints. He understands the foundation on which Wisconsin was built and has not tried shied away from that identity (getting big bodies from in-state, utilizing a highly-successful walk-on program, going after kids that can get into school, and finding players that fit the traditional Wisconsin scheme), unlike his predecessor (Gary Andersen). Similarly, his OC is another that has coached at Wisconsin on two different different occasions and also knows the foundation on which Wisconsin was built. Think Wisconsin's defense needs to be given more credit than they have. Dave Aranda was terrific, and still is, but many thought Wisconsin's defense would drop off a cliff when he left for LSU. Instead, they helped catapult Justin Wilcox to a Pac-12 HC job, after getting fired from USC, in less than a calendar year. Other than your perception, which I can respect, there isn't a whole lot to suggest Wisconsin is going anywhere.

Feel awful for Jack Cichy. Kid is an absolute terror on the field. Wisconsin lost him halfway through 2016, too. Big shoes to fill next to T.J. Edwards, but Chris Orr / Ryan Connelly could start for almost any team in the conference. Cichy could qualify for a sixth-year, but I'm not sure if he'll get it.

It's one thing to "recruit talent," which is an inexact science in itself, and another to develop it. Not many programs do it as well as Wisconsin. Since 2000, Wisconsin has produced 72 NFL Draft picks. In that same time-frame, Nebraska has had 68 players drafted. Nobody is arguing that point. Your draft picks stat sort of points out my point. The W/L record since joining the conference between the two is illogical. My point is that it's because of what's between the ears of each team. As much as Nebraska players have a mental block when it comes to playing Wisconsin, Wisconsin players have great confidence. The NFL Draft pick statistic was meant to show that the talent differential is not what you make it to be. What the recruiting services have to say, you're taking to heart. It's an inexact science. Not only do players develop differently, both physically and mentally, but services hardly have a chance to appropriately assess/scout every commit. Simply, some will slip through the cracks of improper evaluation. As an example, 247 has done a good job, after the NFL Draft, of going back and looking at hits/misses in their evaluation of drafted players. ETA: On a separate note, I am planning on making my first trip to Lincoln this fall. Lincoln and College Park (surprising since D.C. is so close) are the two B1G towns/stadiums that I have yet to see. I am very much looking forward to it.

It's one thing to "recruit talent," which is an inexact science in itself, and another to develop it. Not many programs do it as well as Wisconsin. Since 2000, Wisconsin has produced 72 NFL Draft picks. In that same time-frame, Nebraska has had 68 players drafted.

Wouldn't go so far to say that Nebraska is any type of "afterthought" to Wisconsin, but the two programs do not have much history before 2011. They and the fan bases are still becoming familiar with one another. Although Wisconsin and Minnesota has been one-sided (Badgers have won 13 in a row and 20 of the last 22), this is a long-standing rivalry that extends beyond football. The big one is reciprocity of tuition, meaning you see a lot of HS students from both states crossing borders. Outside of that, there is a large-contingent of Wisconsin alumni scattered throughout the Twin Cities and a number of towns/cities in Wisconsin are closer to Minneapolis than Madison/Milwaukee. Really, for Wisconsin/Minnesota, the rivalry is personal and extends well beyond football, basketball and hockey. As someone without a horse in the Iowa/Nebraska race, do you consider the Hawkeyes & Huskers a rivalry? Do you speak with Iowa fans, and if so, do any of them consider the Nebraska game a rivalry? Anyone else reading, keep in mind that I am an outsider to the Iowa/Nebraska matchup. Spent much of my life in Madison. Grew up, went to high school, and eventually became a Wisconsin alumnus. Despite 100+ people from my graduating class ending up at Wisconsin with me, you can understand that many others wanted to leave. I would guess that close to 50 ended up at Minnesota (also some went to Iowa, which I will get into). Sort of plays along with my initial post of tuition reciprocity, among other factors, that deepens the Battle for Paul Bunyan's Axe. Now, Wisconsin/Iowa and Minnesota/Iowa also have longstanding rivalries. The former plays for the Heartland Trophy and the latter plays for Floyd, which is a pig. You likely are becoming more familiar with particular trophy games. Wisconsin/Iowa sees some overlap. Iowa City and Madison are, relatively, close to one another and many Iowa natives flock to Minnesota, whether it be Rochester or Minneapolis. Despite this, there is not the social/cultural overlap that you see from a Wisconsin/Minnesota perspective. On the surface, I consider Iowa/Nebraska to be a bubbling rivalry. Its been a competitive series (3-3) since Nebraska joined the B1G. I am aware of the outcomes of each game. That being said, Iowa has deep roots in two other rivalries and Nebraska is still integrating itself into the B1G (congratulations on full-financial revenue, by the way). Because of that, I, personally don't look at this game as a fully-ingrained rivalry. However, I do like seeing the timing of this game after Thanksgiving. When the game kicks off, there is a tremendous atmosphere, which lends credit to Iowa and Nebraska's fantastic fan support. Assuming we keep seeing the back-and-forth nature of this series, and the continued animosity from the most die-hard on message boards, this rivalry will quickly become fully-ingrained. I do speak with Iowa fans; some high school friends went there. As mentioned, Madison isn't very far. They, of course, don't speak for the entirety of Iowa's fan base, but there is a feeling of a rivalry. Might stem from the history etched in Nebraska and the fact that both programs were built on similar principles. Do Huskers fans dismiss Iowa based on their places in history?

Wouldn't go so far to say that Nebraska is any type of "afterthought" to Wisconsin, but the two programs do not have much history before 2011. They and the fan bases are still becoming familiar with one another. Although Wisconsin and Minnesota has been one-sided (Badgers have won 13 in a row and 20 of the last 22), this is a long-standing rivalry that extends beyond football. The big one is reciprocity of tuition, meaning you see a lot of HS students from both states crossing borders. Outside of that, there is a large-contingent of Wisconsin alumni scattered throughout the Twin Cities and a number of towns/cities in Wisconsin are closer to Minneapolis than Madison/Milwaukee. Really, for Wisconsin/Minnesota, the rivalry is personal and extends well beyond football, basketball and hockey.

Greg Gard isn't wrong... Everything that Wisconsin has excelled at in 20+ games (not committing fouls, limiting turnovers, hitting a high-percentage of two-pointers, defensive rebounding) unraveled last night in a gym that is not an easy place to win. He's right; it doesn't get much worse and the Badgers still won.

To me, it's all about their defense. It's been elite the last few years. But now that they've lost Aranda and Wilcox back to back (and promoted a position coach to DC)I'm curious to see if there's drop off. Its all about their front 7 to me. Gives them the right to be early favorites. The do lose a sneaky bit of talent on offense. Ramczyk- An all American, Clement, Ogunbowale- Who killed us last year and was the type of back that gave us fits. Do return Fumagalli and Hornibrook(Not really scared of him though.) Yeah, that's the thing. The Badgers lose a ton of talent on offense--pretty much their whole O-line. And on D, which was their strength last year, they have a new coordinator. Okay, sure we have a new DC as well. But for us it's an upgrade. For Wisconsin it's an unknown: First time DC who has exactly one year of position coaching under his belt. One year! Wisconsin beat us by 6 points last October up in Camp Randall. This year it will be different. I think we'll beat them when they come to Lincoln. I'd put NU at the #3 spot in that Power Ranking, with Wisconsin just behind us. /jmho What do you mean Wisconsin loses their whole OL? Ryan Ramcyzk is an All-American and a hit to the OL, but the other four are back. Wisconsin's defense has been a Top-25 mainstay for almost an entire decade and it has been an elite unit for the last four seasons. Hell, a previously-fired DC parlayed this position into a Pac-12 HC job in a calendar year! I do not think there is any doubt that Wisconsin has the best LB unit, again, in the B1G. Opposition forgets that Chris Orr went down the first play in 2016 and Jack Cichy, playing as well as any LB in the country, tore his pectoral and was out of the year, too. Cichy, having experience playing OLB, and combining him with T.J. Edwards, Chris Orr, and Garret Dooley, is a scary, scary front-seven. Wisconsin returns eight defensively. Returning 15 starters from an 11-win team, Wisconsin currently does not play second-fiddle to anyone in the B1G West.

Wisconsin losing Dave Aranda will be a hit, for sure. It would be foolish to think Wisconsin replicates the success they had over the last three seasons with him heading the defense. Quite frankly, it was an elite unit. That being said, Wisconsin has always had a good, disciplined defense. In the four years prior to Aranda's arrival, Wisconsin had a Top-25 defense each season. Just twice in the last ten seasons has Wisconsin had a defense rank outside the Top-25. In that same time, there hasn't been a defense outside the Top-40. Wisconsin will, no doubt, still be "adjusting to the change," but there is no new scheme. I envision a solid defense with one of the best, most experienced front-sevens in the country. It will be interesting to see who steps up with Sojourn Shelton in the secondary, but his other running-mate at CB, Derrick Tindal, has no shortage of experience (he's started multiple games in his career and was Wisconsin's nickel-back). The big question will be the center-fielders, as it looks like Wisconsin will be starting the highly-touted sophomore, Arrington Farrar, and D'Cota Dixon.

Wisconsin recruiting is fine. They consistently rank outside the Top-30, if not Top-40. It is what it always has been, and has seen an uptick under Paul Chryst. Tom Savage threw nearly 400 passes in 2013 with a very talented Tyler Boyd at WR. Why not take advantage of that? In 2014, with a much-improved James Conner (RB) and OL, Pittsburgh ran the ball over 60% of the time. Again, Paul Chryst adapts to the talent around him. He has done it his entire coaching career, from Oregon State, to Wisconsin, to Pittsburgh. Joel Stave set school records in pass attempts/completions in 2015 because Corey Clement was sidelined. His backups? A converted defensive back, a converted linebacker, and a freshman (RS). It's no wonder why Wisconsin threw the ball so much! Many teams, including most of the best teams, are able to feature quarterbacks who throw 30 or more attempts a game while still maintaining a robust rushing attack. As I recall, Melvin Gordon ran wild in a season where Stave and McEvoy still passed plenty. Combined, those two didn't come close to 30+ attempts/game during the 2014 season.

Paul Chryst's record was a mediocre 19-19 at Pittsburgh. He is 29-22 (.568) overall. Context is required when going through his time at Pitt. The morale surrounding that program was a mess when he became head coach. Dave Wannstedt resigned in December 2010, was succeeded by Mike Haywood that same month, who was fired two weeks later after a domestic abuse charge. In came Todd Graham, who also had a highly-publicized departure less than a year after taking the job. Three coaches in less than a calendar year is quite the hit. In any case, playing to your strengths is not always going to result in a great W/L record. James Conner was primarily recruited as an LB, for example. He had one-full season of experience playing RB at the HS level, but Pitt allowed him the opportunity to come in and try-out RB (which turned out to be a great move!). Not having much else on the roster, Pitt throws an incredibly inexperienced rusher into the fire with a struggling OL. During that season, Chryst had a QB in Tom Savage that won the Rutgers starting job as a true freshman + a highly-touted WR in Tyler Boyd. Not being able to lean on a very inexperienced (quite literally) running game that season, Chryst turned to a relatively experienced QB and a very-talented WR. All this being said, I still cannot agree that Chryst will tune Wisconsin into a pass-oriented offense. 2015 was quite the exception due to Corey Clement going down. Chryst had three RB's that included, Dare Ogunbowale (converted DB), Taiwan Deal (RS Freshman), and Alec Ingold (converted LB). That's tough-sledding. It resulted in Chryst having to lean heavily on his experienced, three-year starting QB (Joel Stave) and a two-year starting WR (Alex Erickson). Outside of 2015, Paul Chryst headed offenses at Wisconsin that featured quarterbacks like Russell Wilson... and still ran the ball 60%+ of the time!

There are quite a few factors that go into each signing class. Wisconsin suffers little attrition, is well-known for awarding scholarships to walk-ons, a larger number of freshmen take a redshirt year, and the program never over-signs. This skews those senior numbers quite a bit, and it can result in smaller class sizes --- take this recruiting cycle, for example. The "total signees during the past few years" has not resulted in a diluted on-field product.

Wisconsin recruiting is fine. They consistently rank outside the Top-30, if not Top-40. It is what it always has been, and has seen an uptick under Paul Chryst. Tom Savage threw nearly 400 passes in 2013 with a very talented Tyler Boyd at WR. Why not take advantage of that? In 2014, with a much-improved James Conner (RB) and OL, Pittsburgh ran the ball over 60% of the time. Again, Paul Chryst adapts to the talent around him. He has done it his entire coaching career, from Oregon State, to Wisconsin, to Pittsburgh. Joel Stave set school records in pass attempts/completions in 2015 because Corey Clement was sidelined. His backups? A converted defensive back, a converted linebacker, and a freshman (RS). It's no wonder why Wisconsin threw the ball so much!

On top of BadgerNation and Buckyville, another active board is The Camp (247).

Overrated excuse, imo. It makes a lot of difference at QB. It makes almost no difference at most other spots. Running backs and receivers can play in any system. You might have linemen that are better run blockers or pass blockers but they still have to do both. Defensive linemen still rush the passer. Linebackers still have to tackle. DBs still have to cover. The techniques may change. And they may be asked to do different things. But other than QB, you're really not recruiting a different type of player for any other position. You're after the best talent and teaching them how you want to do things. This is mostly true, yet my point stands based off the following: QB play is where your chance of winning games centers around. Our current QB struggled in the his 1st year in this system. The WR targets he has make up fo a lot of his shortcomings, but he is still a square peg in a round hole. It's not his fault either and I expect him to make the most of his final year but a square peg can only do so much to fill a circular hole. That and, ya know our line play is a bit of a mystery heading into the season. Not that that's specifically a talent issue though, on defense talent is huge but experience is thinner. I pretty much agree with this. But it's quite a ways from what you posted the first time. We still have a talent advantage on basically everyone we play. Doesn't matter what system they were recruited for, they're still better than the guy across from them. Plus, how may of the guys on other teams are playing with guys their coaches didn't recruit? It didn't seem to hurt Wisconsin, Illinois and Purdue against us last year. I can't really speak for Illinois/Purdue, but one thing Wisconsin seems to do pretty well is stick with a team identity from coach to coach. You know what you're going to get with Wisconsin and that's strong linemen, a heavy focus on the running game and opportunistic passing. Nebraska hasn't had that identity luxury from coach to coach which, in my opinion, can make it difficult to maintain consistency. I think best case scenario is 10 wins this year. I don't know think we have the right formula for anything more. I think six or less wins would certainly be a disappointment and an unacceptable season. This team is capable of winning at least 8 games even with talent losses they've sustained. I think we will see a change in offense to a more passing oriented scheme at Wisconsin, and that will benefit NU greatly during the next few years. I think you may be right about Wisconsin and IMO it would be a big mistake. I think Cryst does like to sling the ball around though. Wisconsin's identity is what makes them successful. They arn't flashy on the surface, but winning 10 games most years is alwyas flashy. Some seem to forget that Paul Chryst is as familiar with the foundation of Wisconsin football as anyone not named Barry Alvarez. He was an Offensive Coordinator at Wisconsin for several seasons before taking the head job at Pitt. He orchestrated tremendous rushing attacks with the likes of Brian Calhoun, PJ Hill, John Clay, James White, and Montee Ball. Not sure what makes your fan base think Wisconsin becomes a pass-oriented scheme...? Paul Chryst has always adapted to the talent available. In 2015, with Corey Clement sidelined and a converted defensive back and Freshman (RS) at running back, we saw more usage (single-season school record in pass attempts and completions) out of a competent, though below-average Joel Stave. In 2010, with a game-manager in Scott Tolzien, Chryst had two RB's that rushed for 1,000+ yards and another that was four yards short of. In 2011, with a generational-talent like Russell Wilson at QB, Wisconsin still only passed about 38% of the time. Again, with a head coach that has a better understanding of how Wisconsin football was built than just about anyone not named Barry Alvarez, I highly doubt you'll see a fundamental change in offensive philosophy.

Wisconsin has a coaching staff in place that is largely familiar with the university. There are over a dozen on staff that can call themselves UW-Madison alumni. The Head Coach, Paul Chryst, grew up in Madison, went to college in Madison, and is now in his second-stint as a member of the coaching staff. He is as familiar as anyone with the stringent admission standards for athletes, the foundation of Wisconsin football (largely reflective of Nebraska), and the culture of the city/university. This has resulted in a 2016 class that is Wisconsin's highest-ranked class ever, according to 247. The 2017 class is starting off beautifully, too. With limited spots, however, the current ranking (No. 21 nationally) may not reflect NSD ranking. I don't think it is fair to say that Wisconsin has "fallen far," especially with an uptick in recruiting under the new staff.