A Post from the Future

Through a quirk in the space-time continuum, this post appeared in my drafts folder this morning. It is dated October 28, 2020. 

Update: Further quirks in the space-time continuum seem to be correcting this post as the universe works its way along. As we all know, the arc of the basketball universe is long, but it bends toward Bo Ryan.

Badger fans are chattering with excitement about how the team's stacked recruiting class gives Bo Ryan's Badgers a legitimate chance to close out his Hall of Fame career with yet another trip to the Final Four. But every now again someone throws cold water on this chatter with the supposed truism: Bo Ryan doesn't start freshman, so as good as the Badgers may be don't count on any immediate contribution from the Big Three. The response is always the same: what about Alando Tucker, Devin Harris, Josh Gasser, and George Marshall—all of whom started most every game as true freshmen? 

Of course, these four were special players. After all, it was the backcourt of Gasser and Traevon Jackson Marshall that led Wisconsin to its first second Final Four national championship since 1947 and then to the Undefeated Season back to the Final Four again the following year. But they do prove that Bo Ryan starts freshmen when freshmen are the best players available

Still, we sometimes forget the unusual circumstances that led to these young men starting as freshman. All the way back in 2012, I explained the unusual circumstances that allowed Tucker, Harris, and Gasser to start a lot of games as freshman underclassmen. And although we all remember that Marshall Jackson started at point guard for four three years, we sometimes forget the tragedy that allowed this to happen: Josh Gasser's knee injury right before Marshall's redshirt freshman Jackson's sophomore season began.

So Bo Ryan does start freshmen, but history shows that it takes unusual circumstances for it to actually happen. It remains to be seen how unusual this upcoming 2020-21 season will be.

Body Blows

It's a tough day to be a Badger fan.

The football team lost in gut-wrenching fashion, as usual.

The basketball team lost starting point guard Josh Gasser for the season to a torn ACL.

Silver lining: At least we found out that Stave is way, way better than O'Brien.

UPDATE:

Broken collarbone for Stave, surgery needed—out for the season.

Praise for the Frontcourt

Continuing my hard-hitting series of posts on the merits of various meaningless preseason lists, the news today is that Rob Dauster at NBC Sports has come out with a list of the Top 15 frontcourts in college basketball this year. Wisconsin is ranked seventh, and Dauster has this to say:

We know about the kind of player that Jared Berggren is offensively, as he averaged 10.5 points and shot 37.2% from three last season. But Berggren was also one of the most underrated defensive centers in the country a year ago. When combined with Mike Bruesewitz and Ryan Evans, the Badgers have a chance to be as good defensively as they have up front in a long time. And that’s before you mention Sam Dekker, a top 20 recruit whose versatility is perfect for Bo Ryan’s swing offense.

(This comes on the heels of another post by Dauster the other day in which he preemptively chastised himself for not putting Wisconsin in his pre-season top 25.)

The funny thing about this high-ranking, of course, is that according to Jeff Goodman, Gary Parrish, and the other geniuses over at cbssports.com, Wisconsin has no good players in its frontcourt—not even one of the best fifty in the country. As an experiment, I decided to see how the other teams on Dauster's list of Top 15 frontcourts fared on the cbssports.com list of the Top 50 big men.

Rank	Team	Top 50 Guys
1	Kentucky	3
2	Indiana	2
3	UNLV	3
4	Louisville	2
5	NC State	2
6	Tennessee	2
7	Wisconsin	ZERO
8	Florida	2
9	Missouri	2
10	Kansas	1
11	Baylor	1
12	Creighton	1
13	Duke	1
14	Syracuse	1
15	Miami	1

As you can see, Wisconsin is the only team among the "good frontcourt" teams that has no heralded players in its frontcourt. Indeed, every team ahead of Wisconsin has at least two Top 50 players, and so do the two teams ranked immediately behind it.

How can this be? It could be that Dauster is just a Wisconsin fanboy. But, as mentioned above, he idiotically failed to rank Wisconsin in his preseason Top 25, so that's probably not it. Still, Dauster could be overrating Wisconsin's frontcourt. But I don't think he is. Three returning starters from a Sweet 16 team plus a five-star recruit would get any team on this list.

I think it comes down to defense. When sportswriters are evaluating players for these kinds of list, they have a really difficult time taking defensive abilities into account. For one thing, there are not very many defensive stats. Basically, there are only steals and blocks. As fate would have it, Bo Ryan's defensive system deemphasizes both steals and blocks. So if the Badgers have a great defender in the frontcourt (and they do, actually) it would be hard to tell by looking at the stats.

On the other hand, as a team, Wisconsin gets a lot of credit for its defense. Indeed, it sometimes gets too much credit because its slow tempo decreases overall score which leads many to believe Wisconsin's defense is better than it really is. For example, two years ago Wisconsin had a mediocre defense in efficiency terms (56th in the country, according to kenpom.com), but it allowed only 58.6 points per game, which ranked eighth in the country.

The point is, when people think about Wisconsin's front court as a unit, they think about how difficult it is going to be score on. But when they think about those individual players, they don't think about defense because we laymen don't really understand defense except in terms of steals and blocks, which Wisconsin tends not to create.

Now, with this analysis in mind, go back and read Dauster's snippet about Wisconsin's frontcourt. It's pretty much all about defense.

predictions

I have always fancied myself a pretty good gambler. Most of my success has come from games where I actually have some control over the outcome like card games. I'm going to start posting my gambling predictions for Badger games and see how I do. If I find I am making good picks I may have to make a career change. I'll more likely find that I have saved myself a lot of money by posting instead of betting.
This weeks line as of today http://www.vegas.com/gaming/sportsline_ncaaf.html
has the Badgers as 6 1/2 point favorites, and the over under at 41.
In a quick look over the other games I did not see an over under lower than this game in any other contest this weekend. This makes sense as these teams both have solid defenses, young quarterbacks, and offensive lines that have had mixed success and multiple injuries.
6 1/2 seems too high for a game expected to be so low scoring. I like UW to win in a close game, but I'm taking MSU and the points vs the spread.
I am taking the over for points. I expect a low scoring game, but 41 is just so low I can't take the under.
Feel free to post your own predictions.

Another list, another dis

Following up on their list of the 100 best players in college basketball overall, the writers at cbssports.com have come out with a list of the top 50 big men.

Again, no Badgers.

In my post about the top-100 snub, I nominated Jared Berggren as the Badger who should have made an appearance. So it shouldn't surprise you that that I think he should be on this list as well. As I said in my other post:

There should be a Badger on this list, and it should be Berggren, the fifth-year senior. He is athletic and talented (he was a four-star, top-100 recruit out of high school). He can score and he can defend (he led the Badgers in both steal and block percentage last year). Last we saw, Berggren was dominating against Syracuse. Like many defensively active big men, his big weakness is foul trouble, but with three seniors in the frontcourt, plus sophomore Big Frank Kaminsky and stud freshman Sam Dekker, Wisconsin should be able to protect Berggren very well on the defensive end.

It's also interesting to note Berggren's performances last year against the number one player on this list, Cody Zeller of Indiana. Zeller deserves to be the number one player, but Berggren more than held his own in their two match-ups last year. In the first game (a UW win at the Kohl Center), Berggren had five steals and held Zeller to just 7 points on two-of-seven shooting. In the second game (a win in the Big Ten Tournament), Berggren scored 16, ably matching Zeller's 17 so that Rob Wilson could steal the show with a career-defining 30-point outburst.

Well put!

At least one writer appears to agree with me. Mike DeCourcey of The Sporting News just tweeted, out of the blue:

Jared Berggren is best returning defensive big man in college basketball. Period. (That includes A. Oriakhi, returning in different place).
— Michael DeCourcy (@tsnmike) October 24, 2012

Very high praise, there.

Don't get me wrong—I don't get worked up about these lists. But there is definitely a pattern of under-appreciation for the talent that Bo Ryan puts on the floor, and it's worth calling out.

Finally, another entry in the no-surprise department: the Big Ten beat writers recently picked Wisconsin to finish 5th in the Big Ten, even though they have never finished lower than 4th in the Bo Ryan era. What do you think, Adam: is this the year Bo Ryan finally flops?

ADDED:

Here's a great post on Berggren's worthiness based on his play last year.

Final Straw, probably not

I saw this blog post on ESPN that Saul Smith, Minnesota assistant coach and son of head coach Tubby Smith, was arrested for DUI. I am not one to jump on a person for making a mistake like getting a DUI. Many people make that error, and pay for it as I'm sure Saul will. What I do jump on people for is making that mistake more than once. This is where Minnesota basketball comes in because kids in this program, and now coaches just can't stay clear of trouble.

I don't know why this team keeps finding trouble. Is this just bad luck? Is Minnesota taking on players with character issues because they can't recruit good players without them? Does there come a time when Tubby just runs out of good will with the community?

Tubby has hardly been a dynamo at Minnesota, but he has 4 20+ win seasons 2 NCAA and 2 NIT tourney appearances in 5 years. That is probably all that will matter.

Of all the great things about Bo Ryan, and all the winning, it was very telling when 2 players got into trouble and were removed. One of which was a highly regarded recruit. I don't know of any other Bo Ryan kids getting into trouble. Maybe UW just has better luck?

2nd Biggest game of the year

Sorry Badger fans, the 2nd biggest game doesn't involve Bucky. Next weekends Nebraska vs Michigan game will likely determine Bucky's opponent in the Big Ten Championship game.
Minnesota is out.
MSU lost today, so the best they can do is 5-3 if they win out 4-0. Michigan owns the head to head tie breaker, so they would need to go 1-3 in their last 4 for MSU to pull ahead, baring a 3 way tie at 5-3 that leaves MSU winning a tiebreaker. Don't worry too much, MSU is out.
Iowa is down 24-0 to PSU right now, and the coach just called me because he thought I may still have a year of college eligibility left, and they really need a running back.
Northwestern is the same. They aren't eliminated yet, but they aren't going to the Championship.
Should be a fun game to watch. Best part is, I know UW has about a 50-50 shot against either team.
3rd straight Rose Bowl here we come.

Does Bo Ryan Start Freshmen?

The Badgers basketball team returns five upperclassmen this year, including four of last year's starters (who, along with Ben Brust, together accounted for 70% of the minutes played on last year's Sweet 16 squad).

In addition, this year's Badgers are expected to feature two new faces: redshirt freshman George Marshall and freshman Sam Dekker. One of the most interesting questions coming into the season is how much playing time these two freshman will actually get, given Bo Ryan's historical preference for playing upperclassmen.

The question got a little bit less interesting last week, when Mike Bruesewitz tore up his shin, putting him on the shelf for 4-6 weeks. Now it is very likely that Dekker will get significant minutes, at least while Bruiser is on the mend.

Still, I wanted to discuss the premise above, namely the idea that Bo Ryan doesn't like to play freshman. Is it true? I would say that it is not true that Bo Ryan is biased against underclassmen. Rather, I think that Bo Ryan is great coach who tends to make his players better. So it is hard for a raw freshman to beat out a Bo-seasoned junior or senior. Also, Ryan clearly does not tolerate defensive lapses. To a large degree, team defense in basketball is a mental game, and freshman are much more prone to mental lapses (just because they haven't had time to learn that part of the game, particularly because team defense is not taught well in high school or AAU ball).

There are two primary objections to the notion that Bo doesn't start freshman: Alando Tucker and Devin Harris. Obviously, these are two of the greatest Badgers ever, so if anything this just shows that Bo knows talent when he sees it. But it's also important to remember that those early Ryan teams had almost no upperclassman to choose from. Let's go to the history books.

When Alando started as a true freshman in 2002-03, the Badgers roster had just one senior (Kirk Penney) and ten freshmen and sophomores. With just one upperclassman in the frontcourt (junior Dave Mader) it was mathematically impossible for Bo not to start underclassmen that year. So Wilkinson (soph.) and Tucker (fr.) started almost every game.

The year before, when Harris started as a freshman, was similar. Bo's first team had just two seniors (Travon Davis and Charlie Wills) and one junior (Penney). Those three upperclassmen started every game. The other starts went to Mader (soph.) and Harris.

Once Bo got his program rolling and established balance in the classes, it became much more unusual to see freshmen and sophomores getting significant minutes, much less starting. Starting in 06-07, the Badgers have always returned at least four (usually five) upperclassmen penciled in as starters. In this era, Gasser is the only player to start and log heavy minutes as a freshman, when he played about 70% of available minutes, and this was mainly due to (1) Wilson's injury and failure to develop, and (2) total lack of depth at guard that year. (Krabby and Jordan Taylor are the only other players to log any significant minutes as freshmen: Krabby played 40% (no starts) in 05-06 and Taylor played 32% (no starts) in 08-09.)

So we can see that it takes something unusual for a freshman to get major minutes. It remains to be seen how unusual this season turns out to be.

Biggest Game of the Year

With dreams of greatness after 2 consecutive Rose Bowls, the Badgers looked like a team with a season full of big games ahead of them 6 weeks ago. After a 4-2 start, there is really only one big game on the schedule, and it is this weeks matchup at Purdue. With Illinois and Indiana off to horrid 0-2 starts in conference play, and OSU and PSU barred from the post season, there is only one team that can challenge UW for a spot in the Big Ten Championship Game, Purdue.
After UW, Purdue plays at OSU finishing a brutal stretch that started with a whooping by Michigan last week. After that, the remaining 5 games are winnable. Not that they will win all 5, but they can probably pull off 3 wins. A win vs UW could get them to 4 wins in conference, plus a head to head tie breaker. That would leave UW needing a 5-3 conference record to make the championship, with 2 losses already and 5 games to go including MSU and OSU. Conversely a UW win leaves Purdue at 0-2, and a likely loss at OSU would make them 0-3. Assuming UW can get to 4 wins, Purdue would have to win out to get to the title game, not likely.
Some may say who cares if UW gets to the title game if they're 4-4. I certainly care. Here are my reasons why.
This is a young team that should keep getting better. They have only 2 seniors on offense.
The Big Ten is balanced, which is a nice way of saying weak. The Badger's opponent in the championship could be Nebraska, Michigan, MSU, Northwestern, or Iowa. A UW win against any of those teams on a neutral site is not unreasonable. A 3rd consecutive Rose Bowl is a 3rd consecutive Rose Bowl no matter how they get there.
More football is always better. There are only 12 Saturdays of Badger football each year (plus a bowl game of course). One more week of football is a gift that should be enjoyed.

Wisconsin Basketball Team Has No Good Players

At least according to CBS Sports, which lists no Badgers among the top 100 players in college basketball this year.

On one hand, this makes me happy. One of the pleasures of following Bo Ryan's teams is how they fly under the radar with "no talent" and just win. And no one could argue that Wisconsin is returning a "star" player this year. They return four starters in Gasser (7.6 ppg), Berggren (10.5), Evans (11.0), and Bruesewitz (5.6), but none are coming off monster years.

On the other hand, however, this is kind of silly. The Badgers' raw numbers are deflated by their slow tempo, and this list reflect a clear bias towards raw counting stats. Plus, they've got Jordan Taylor's 15 points per game to distribute. It's reasonable to suspect that either Berggren or Evans, if not both, will average 15 ppg game this year, and that at least one of them will be second team all Big-Ten. In other words, it's unreasonable that there are 14 players from the Big Ten but no Badgers on this list.

There should be a Badger on this list, and it should be Berggren, the fifth-year senior. He is athletic and talented (he was a four-star, top-100 recruit out of high school). He can score and he can defend (he led the Badgers in both steal and block percentage last year). Last we saw, Berggren was dominating against Syracuse. Like many defensively active big men, his big weakness is foul trouble, but with three seniors in the frontcourt, plus sophomore Big Frank Kaminsky and stud freshman Sam Dekker, Wisconsin should be able to protect Berggren very well on the defensive end.

It's also interesting to note Berggren's performances last year against the number one player on this list, Cody Zeller of Indiana. Zeller deserves to be the number one player, but Berggren more than held his own in their two match-ups last year. In the first game (a UW win at the Kohl Center), Berggren had five steals and held Zeller to just 7 points on two-of-seven shooting. In the second game (a win in the Big Ten Tournament), Berggren scored 16, ably matching Zeller's 17 so that Rob Wilson could steal the show with a career-defining 30-point outburst.

To put things in perspective, there are (by my count) 63 teams with a player on this list. Is it really plausible that 63 different teams have a player that is better than every player on Wisconsin, which returns four starters from a Sweet 16 team? Unbelievably, there are two Drexel players on this list. Drexel went to the NIT last year. Even worse, there are two Gophers on this list (Trevor Mbakwe and Rodney Williams). Mbakwe certainly is a beast who deserves to be high on the list, and Williams is a great athlete, but I wouldn't trade Jared Berggren for Rodney Williams.

One thing we can agree on:

Curt Phillips should not be starting.

Do not subscribe to ESPN Insider!

In a recent "rumors" piece beyond the ESPN Insider paywall, someone suggested that the player to replace Jordan Taylor at point guard for Wisconsin may be ...

RYAN EVANS:

There are three options for Ryan and his staff. The unconventional option would be to use Ryan Evans at the 1. The 6-foot-6 Evans handled the second-most possessions for the Badgers last season (24.1 percent) and was sure-handed with the basketball, committing a turnover on just 14.7 percent of his possessions. Evans presents a size mismatch with opposing Big Ten guards, and though his assist rate is just average, Evans was never forced into a playmaking role with Taylor in the lineup. Ryan could decide to go with a smaller lineup that pares Evans with a handful of guards.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


I know this not because I'm an ESPN Insider, but because the piece was excerpted at a message board I frequent.

Which will happen first, Adam: Ryan Evans at PG for Wisconsin, or robot players in the NFL?


You might be wondering who the other two options are. According to the Insider, the "most straight-forward option" is Ben Brust. Yes, Mr. Brust, well known for his right-handed layups from the left side of the hoop. (In other words, he cannot dribble with his left hand.) The other option mentioned is Josh Gasser.

Now, Josh Gasser might be the Badgers' starting point guard. That's possible. But there is actually only one other possibility: redshirt freshman George Marshall.

No chance

Bucks opened training camp today, to little fanfare. I understand the Bucks will never be more than a 3rd place finisher in WI, a football state, and Milwaukee, a baseball town. They play in a conference where there is no chance they will make a finals. For the forseeable future they will be at best a 2nd round playoff out to a Miami team that has 3 players that are better than any player on the Bucks roster. Still, I love basketball.
Watching the Bucks is like being a fan of Princeton Basketball. You know the team is never going to win it all, your just hoping they play well and play some good, tough, entertaining basketball. They hopefully win enough games to play games that matter at the end of the year, which allows you to enjoy the drama that those games bring.
This years Buck's team should be interesting. There are really only 2 starting spots locked down in Jennings and Ellis. If you follow the money (and most NBA owners make sure their coaches do), then the other likely starters are Ilyasova, Dalembert, and Mbah A Moute. Even if those 3 don't start they will play a lot. The question will be how does the rest of this team shake out.
As this article points out http://www.jsonline.com/sports/bucks/172391251.html the Bucks have a lot of size. 7 of the 15 roster spots are filled by players 6'10" or taller. This makes sense since they plan to start 2 small guards and will need plenty of shot blocking on the back end.
Lots of young talent on this team. It will be fun to see them develop. Even if they have no chance to win it all.

Stave

As you say, and I agree, neither O'Brien nor Stave is "good." Not, at least, in the sense that either of them is going to single-handedly win games. But Stave is better, overall, and he should continue to start.

First, some words in support of O'Brien. Clearly O'Brien's ability to perform was partly hindered by factors outside his control. Most notably: (1) extremely poor offensive line play; and (2) the injury to Abberderis. The line has been shored up somewhat, it seems. And Abberderis is back. As you predicted half-way through last season, the receiving corps other than Abberderis this year is abysmal. In Stave's first action during the second half of the Utah State game, two of the no-name receivers (one of whom is actually named "Doe") dropped passes on third down that killed drives. Although it's true the no-names did look better against Nebraska.

Actually, I don't think it's a coincidence that the no-name receivers are starting to look better with Stave throwing the ball. I think the receivers want to perform better for him. I sense that they feel he is the better quarterback.

This is pretty squishy, I know, but overall I like the way Stave carries himself. Even with far less experience he seems to have significantly more poise and pocket presence than O'Brien. He stands in and takes a hit. He delivers the ball to a spot where the receiver can make a play. You call these balls underthrown—but underthrown is better than overthrown in most cases because it at least gives the receiver a chance to make a play. The drop by Ball is a perfect example—yes he had to slow down a little, but the ball hit him the hands. The only way you screw that play up as a QB is by getting excited and throwing it too far. That Stave isn't doing that shows his poise.

Certainly there's nothing in his actual play that makes me think he's less talented that O'Brien. He's got a better arm. He is reasonably accurate. He's taller. He's faster. He has better hair.

Ultimately I agree that the reason Stave is starting is because O'Brien did not protect the football. O'Brien's fumble at the end of the first half of the Utah State game was egregious and inexcusable. It wasn't like he was blindsided—he was already in another players grasp, and he saw the second hit coming, yet still coughed up the ball. Against Utah State! That kind of nonsense was literally the only way Wisconsin could lose that game, and they almost did because of O'Brien's nonsense. He lost the right the start.

Finally, at least one sportswriter who watched the Badgers camp was of the opinion that Stave beat out O'Brien, and that Bielema "gifted" the starting job to him. That Bielema had a quick hook seems to bear this out. He went with O'Brien in a close battle because O'Brien had experience. I like to think that the decision was eating away at him because he knew it was wrong.

O'Brien

O'Brien did blow the bootleg on 4th down as confirmed in this article.

Given the tone of Canada in that article, I concede that O'Brien will not be starting any time soon. However that doesn't mean he shouldn't.

The article also says Canada had thought of using O'Brien in the 2 minute drill during the week because he was effective running it.

O'Brien was the better quarterback coming out of training camp, which is why he started the season.

O'Brien was not very effective in his few starts while UW struggled to run the ball. From the same article:

Stave, making his first road start in a tough environment, completed 9 of 14 passes for 161 yards in the first half. Also in the first half, Jared Abbrederis caught five passes for 107 yards and a touchdown, while Ball rushed for 59 yards and two TDs.

In the second half when the running game went south, so did Stave. 3-9 for 53 yards. No running game = no success for both guys.

Stave's biggest asset so far is not turning the ball over. That is no small thing in a UW offense.
On some level this is a gut reaction. Stave did connect on some long balls, but he didn't make very good throws on any of them. The one that Ball dropped was underthrown. O'Brien hardly got a chance to throw it deep, but looked better when he did. When O'Brien was throwing the ball around he at least looked at more than one receiver.

I don't mean to say that O'Brien is good. He is not. Neither one of these guys looks to be a guy who can lead this team to anything more than a 4-4 Big Ten record and a Big Ten Championship by default.

Let them score?

At the end of the Packers game yesterday as I saw the go ahead field goal go through the uprights for the Saints, I thought to myself, Good. I would rather see the packers get the ball and take it down the field to kick their own game winning field goal. There was plenty of time and the packers still had a time out.

The way the Packers run the ball, I figured they would be better off putting the ball in Rodgers hands and let him throw the ball to get them down the field. The Packers were pretty good running the ball yesterday, but over recent history they have not been very good. I was not very confident they would be able to get a first down on 3 run plays. As it turns out they threw the ball on 3rd down as they weren't very confident either.

When a holding penalty caused the Saints to retry the filed goal which was then missed, this question occurred to me:

Would a coach ever decline that holding penalty, and give another team the lead to get the ball back for his quarterback with time on the clock.

The answer seems obvious, and it is no. No coach would do that. I don't know if that means it is necessarily the wrong move. Or maybe it just isn't the right move yet. As the NFL gets more and more offense based, there may come a time when this move makes sense. Maybe the league just isn't there yet.

Remember in Arena football if the defense holds the opponent to a FG (anything less than a touchdown) it's a win for the defense.

This kind of outside the box thinking is what has landed me so many coaching jobs. I also am a firm believer that the NFL will get rid of human players and be played by robots within my lifetime.

O'Brien should start

I know Stave put up some numbers tonight, 211 yards and a TD.
O'Brien is better. He was better in the games he played.
Stave may have more long term potential being a freshman, but O'Brien is better and he should be the starter. More to come on this.

Hitler reacts to the NFL's statement on Fail Mary...

where's the action

Many interesting things in the UW football game this weekend other than the final score. One that stood out as I was watching the game and hearing everyone in the stands complain about it, was the lack of downfield passing attempts. There were only 2 attempts the entire game, both with good results. The 3rd and 22 conversion to Pedersen, and the touchdown to Abbrederis. This was no doubt by design as there was little to no pressure on O'Brien to make coaches worry about deep drop backs. (on a side note O'Brien was not convincing making fakes. Someone should sign him up for a theatre class so he can work on making those more realistic).
O'Brien had a great day going 19 of 23 for 219 yards and 2 touchdowns. He certainly executed the gameplan they had for him. He threw mostly quick passes out of spread formations. Of the 27 designed pass plays- only 6 were play action. Of those 6, 2 were short completions to the fullback Watt, 2 were intermediate throws to WRs, one was the one long pass to Abbrederis for the TD, and one was the lone sack of the game. The remaining 21 designed passes were mostly shotgun spread throws to short pass routes.
The question is why? The Badgers have embraced the passing game in recent years and the high percentage short throws especially. However they have still used play action a great deal to take advantage of the challenges their running game presents opposing defenses. If there was not a new offensive coordinator who came from spread roots, I probably would just blow this game off as an anomaly. Maybe they are just trying to keep what they can off film until next week when they have a much more difficult opponent.
I can't say I'm disappointed with all the spread  throws. I like the diversification of the offense. The high percentage throws mix right in with the power running, field position and clock dominating strategies of the recently successful Badger teams.
Every successful offense needs to create big plays. The Badgers have been able to create a lot of those running the football, which has allowed them to get more through play action. I'll be interested to see if this is just a one game anomaly, or the start of a trend.

Is Penn State the Tip of the Iceberg?

Pete Thamel at the New York Times has a revelatory story about Dan Dakich's stint as the head coach of West Virginia's men's basketball team. If you're like me, your first question is, "Dan Dakich was the coach of West Virginia's men's basketball team?" Yes, he was. But it is a bit like how Bobby Knight was once the coach of Wisconsin's basketball team—the marriage didn't last long. In Dakich's case, just eight days. But they were a tumultuous eight days, as Thamel reports:

Some of the most challenging items on Dakich’s list involved Jonathan Hargett, a top recruit from Richmond who had just completed his freshman season at West Virginia. 

Dakich said Hargett told him that he had been promised $20,000 a year for three years, and that he had not been paid the full amount.

So Dakich discovered that the WVU basketball team was not only promising to pay its players cash for playing, but that WVU didn't have the decency to actually come up with the money.

Dakich—whom I admire as a straight-talking (if sometimes dense) color guy on BTN broadcasts—went straight to the president of university, David Hardesty. Things, um, did not go well.

Dakich said he told Hardesty about Western Union receipts that seemed to show Hargett had received money in violation of N.C.A.A. rules. He also relayed Hargett’s comments that the university had not paid him money that had been promised to him.

Dakich recalls Hardesty telling him, “If you go any farther with this, we’ll destroy you.”

Hadesty calls Dachih's account "a gross exaggeration." Asked to clarify, Hardesty explained, "I didn't say I would destroy him. I said I would make his life such a living hell, that he would wish longingly for death. Come on, I was a university president, not a mob boss. I don't directly threaten to destroy people." To be clear, I made that last part up, but it is arguably less damning that what Hardesty actually said: "I did not intend to threaten him. At no time in this process did I do that. That would be so strange."

That would indeed be strange. It is hard not to note the lawyerly weasel words in Hardesty's explanation. (Sure enough, Hardesty is a law professor.) He does not say that he didn't threaten Dakich; he says he didn't "intend" to threaten him. Perhaps reasonable people can disagree about whether "we'll destroy you" is a threat or is so over the top that it can only be interpreted as an attempt at comedy. Either way, we can all agree that it was so, so very strange.