- Messages
- 5,850
- Reaction score
- 5,172
2024 Badger Football Thread
- Thread starter Mark87
- Start date
- Messages
- 3,802
- Reaction score
- 3,188
Thankfully....
- Messages
- 18,060
- Reaction score
- 6,114
Well ugly win. Badgers played down to their opponent. Not the first time we have seen this. Fickell can not be happy with what he saw tonight and will have to be hard on his kids knowing that they can't play this way again and expect to win.
- Messages
- 7,424
- Reaction score
- 6,244
Interesting game. Amazing ball control for the Badgers. Lots of plays on drives, but couldn't punch it in for TDs way too often.
Did they dominate? I don't think so. They had a more efficient passing game, and got yardage in bigger chunks than the Badgers on the ground and air, even though the totals were higher for the Badgers.
There has to be a lot more to the play book than what we saw out there last night. A lot more. If this is what they've got in total, and the limit as to what they can do with the air raid offense, it's going to be a long season, and a lot of people questioning the caliber of the personnel the Badgers have on the field, and some of the coaching concepts.
But, I personally don't believe they opened up much of the playbook. I think we're going to be seeing a lot more of it in game #3, when the Badgers host Alabama. That's when they're going to have to put the hammer down.
Did they dominate? I don't think so. They had a more efficient passing game, and got yardage in bigger chunks than the Badgers on the ground and air, even though the totals were higher for the Badgers.
There has to be a lot more to the play book than what we saw out there last night. A lot more. If this is what they've got in total, and the limit as to what they can do with the air raid offense, it's going to be a long season, and a lot of people questioning the caliber of the personnel the Badgers have on the field, and some of the coaching concepts.
But, I personally don't believe they opened up much of the playbook. I think we're going to be seeing a lot more of it in game #3, when the Badgers host Alabama. That's when they're going to have to put the hammer down.
I'm a little worried that this is all they've got. It's pretty much what we saw for all of last year. They have trouble running the ball into heavy boxes. Van Dyke was supposed to be more of a downfield threat as a passer, but I don't know that he threw more than 15yds downfield all night. This is starting to feel like a Longo issue . . . we'll see over the next few games.
Also a little worried about their run defense. Again, same problem as last year. If they don't improve, there are some better teams that are going to put up 200+ yard rushing days. YPA wasn't bad, but there were too many "easy" runs that teams like 'Bama and Oregon will turn into 20+ yd chunk plays.
First off I now know that 99.9% of people including most here don't understand the Air Raid offense and or Longo's version of it, the fact they stayed in 12 most of the night is staying vanilla early and not showing your hand. They used 20% of the playbook last night..maybe. The drops didn't help the passing game so thats an issue.
Defense is interesting, they have to do a better job on the DL because they got manhandled a lot. I thought schematically it was solid, a ton of 4-2-5 and more straight-up 4-3 looks.
Fairly typical game 1. Let's see how they look next week before losing it
Defense is interesting, they have to do a better job on the DL because they got manhandled a lot. I thought schematically it was solid, a ton of 4-2-5 and more straight-up 4-3 looks.
Fairly typical game 1. Let's see how they look next week before losing it
No one was open on the deep routes
- Messages
- 32
- Reaction score
- 35
Game 1 the good:
1. CB’s look solid not much to complain about here. Maybe a bit to physical at times.
2. Walker and Mellusi looked really good in the run game.
3. Offensive line didn’t commit dumb penalties and didn’t look over matched like last year.
4. Van Dyke looks mobile enough to run the offense.
the bad:
1. Receivers dropping very easy passes.
2. D-line is still getting pushed around.
3. Defensive play calling. They were caught a few times blitzing in the wrong direction leaving a WR wide open.
4. Poor tackling and gap integrity.
5. Special teams looks to be a problem this year.
the ugly:
1. Offensive play calling was too conservative. Very little motion and not much creativity other than on the 2-pt conversion.
2. Offensive line still not getting to that second level on run plays.
3. Route running was very questionable at times by the WR’s.
4. Couldn’t get the TE involved enough.
5. Western Michigan’s OL got to the 2nd level too many times.
1. CB’s look solid not much to complain about here. Maybe a bit to physical at times.
2. Walker and Mellusi looked really good in the run game.
3. Offensive line didn’t commit dumb penalties and didn’t look over matched like last year.
4. Van Dyke looks mobile enough to run the offense.
the bad:
1. Receivers dropping very easy passes.
2. D-line is still getting pushed around.
3. Defensive play calling. They were caught a few times blitzing in the wrong direction leaving a WR wide open.
4. Poor tackling and gap integrity.
5. Special teams looks to be a problem this year.
the ugly:
1. Offensive play calling was too conservative. Very little motion and not much creativity other than on the 2-pt conversion.
2. Offensive line still not getting to that second level on run plays.
3. Route running was very questionable at times by the WR’s.
4. Couldn’t get the TE involved enough.
5. Western Michigan’s OL got to the 2nd level too many times.