10/14 Update: Here are my positional grades for the Purdue game.
QB: C
Play it again Sam (no pun intended). In many ways, his performance was very marginal at best, yet he provided key plays at key moments that contributed directly to the victory.
Today, let's start with the good. Samuel made excellent decisions in the running of the option, showing much improved quickness to the hole than he had last week. He made a number of decicive cuts including two that went for touchdowns.
He did fumble once when he failed to secure the ball in traffic, perhaps costing the team points at the conclusion of the first half.
In terms of throwing the ball, to be fair to Samuel, the protection was so poor at times, very few QBs could have been consistently effective. However, many of his throws were tentative and off the mark.
Mike's strength, the short balls, were even a problem for him on Saturday. Although none of his 6 balls were terrible throws, only 2 of them were good throws. He was low on two of the completions and very high on the incompletion to Davis on the slant pass.
His medium and deep throws were all poor throws, the two deep passes to Chambers were both underthrown, while the mid range toss to Sigmund was overthrown.
Samuel also had trouble finding receivers once forced out of the pocket. On at least two scrambles, receivers were open down the field, but Samuel had resigned himself to running. He was very reluctant to risk an error (which can be good or bad of course).
Bottom line though, he did make some big big plays which is why I was rather kind with the overall grade.
RB: B
Not much to run behind. Not terribly impressive, but no major weaknesses.
Dayne was solid with little to run behnind. He was assertive in hitting the holes, though he did not gain as many yards after contact as you would like (despite what BadgerPlus says). He also missed a couple of cuts that might have popped a few plays open. His straight ahead running is just fine, but his cutting just isn't there at the moment possibly due to the ankle. Replays from Saturday caught him wincing a few times after plays in which he had to make a cut. Still, this was an improvement over previous games where he was limping noticably.
Dayne has been a solid back, vital to the Badgers success. Specacular no, but still pretty darn good. Hopefully the line will get its act together and provide some help for Ron.
Once again, he showed nice hands on a tough to handle pitch. He has always appeared to have pretty good feel for catching the ball and I would like to see this element of the Badger gameplan expanded. They did run one screen (called back by two penalties) and it worked fairly well. However, they never went back to it.
Cecil Martin provided superb lead blocks on a number of key plays. Twice on big runs (one on Samuel's TD), it was Martin that delivered the key block. Solid as always.
WR: C-
Virtually no production whatsoever, though it wasn't all their fault. As mentioned earlier, they did not receive the ball a number of times when they in fact were open down the field. Chris Chambers in particular was open on the second deep ball.
However, once again, they were having trouble gaining separation despite predominantly single coverage.
Chambers did make a pretty good grab of the onside kick, a take for granted play which conceivably could have made things interesting.
Once again, there were no drops (given the number of throws, there had better not have been).
TE: F
Awful. I know Retzlaff was playing hurt for some of the game, but he was dreadful both before and after the injury.
Retlaff was pushed into run plays, blowing up the plays at least 3 times and badly missed pass blocks while trying to chip the end, causing sacks twice.
There were numerous plays where a big play was there if only he could have been even marginally effective.
At this point, Dague just isn't athletic enough to handle the really good athletes coming off the corners. It is very very apparent what the coaches were talking about when they said his blocking technique needs work.
If he is grading out the best of the TEs, I shudder to think what Grams and Sigmund have looked like, though it appears they may get their shot with Retzlaff probably out this week.
Retzlaff/Sigmund (forgot which it was...I think Retzlaff) did make a nice shoestring catch running about a 6-7 yard crossing route.
OL: D
Well, Aaron Gibson played pretty well. Rob Roell was adequate playing for Rabach. Costa and McIntosh were awful. Ferrario was very marginal.
In the running game, it wasn't that they were getting blown off the line or that they were allowing penetration (only 5 plays were graded out as awful run blocking). However, the vast majority of run plays simply did not get any push. With teams run blitzing to the hilt, I realize their job is tougher than some OLs face. But the fact is that run blocking is supposed to be their bread and butter and they just aren't blowing our socks off at the moment as a unit.
Aaron Gibson has been the exception. Once again, virtually all of Wisconsin's big run plays were behind the rump of big Aaron. He was effective sealing the corner when asked and provided multiple devastating run blocks, often driving the end or LB completely out of the play.
McIntosh was not heard from much in the running attack, as most running plays went between the guards or right.
Rob Roell was satisfactory. He make a couple of nice block 5 yards downfield and got a good push on Dayne's dive and Samuel's sneak. He was called for one block in the back however.
Ferrario played ok. He did have trouble on a cut block on one play, causing penetration and did fall start on the first possession.
Costa was pretty bad in the run game. He failed to get any substantial movement on his designated man at least 4 or 5 times from what I counted.
Once again, the drive blocking did get better as the defense wore down late in the game.
However, the pass blocking was good compared to the pass blocking abomination. Purdue's early success getting to Samuel completely served to take the passing game away from the Badgers. As the game wore on, the protection was better, but pass drops were limited to 3 steps with Samuel given time for 1 or 2 reads tops.
Chris McIntosh was the prime offender here, completely blowing two early block of Rosie Colvin, once surrendering the outside corner, and once allowing Colvin to slip inside on his way to Samuel.
Gibson was reasonably effective in his "make them go around me while I push them way outside approach", though against Purdue's converted linebackers, he was periodically a step slow to the corner.
Costa made a bad read on a blitz, allowing some pressure up the middle early in the game, though most of the pressure came from the corners of the pocket.
All in all, Samuel was only secure in the pocket only about a third of the time and that is NOT acceptable.
DL: B
After watching the tape, not too bad. Initially, I like most thought how could a team not get one official sack (Burke should have been credited with one on the grounding call) when the opposition throws 83 times.
However, while the pass rush was not great, much of this of course is attributable to some pocket magic by Drew Brees, his quick release, and the quick hitting Purdue passing attack, not to mention the "bend but don't break" Badger defensive philospy.
In the running game, the Badgers came up huge on two fourth down calls and generally contained the run, if not shutting it down completely. The DL was only effecively blocked on 4 run plays all day so I consider that successful.
Tom Burke was the sole pass rushing threat for most of the day, coming close to sacks on a number of occasions only to see Brees unload as he arrived. He was also held numerous times (as the commentators pointed out) but did not get any calls.
On most plays, Brees was able to throw when and where he chose. Pressure up the middle was especially lacking. The interior held up well against the run the few times Purdue chose to run at them, although the tackles were blocked effectively when the play went wide.
Favret showed some good penetration and pursuit at times (obviously his strength) and made the key 4th down stops, but was not a factor pass rushing.
Overall, they contained the run (which was key) and didn't allow any big scrambles. They could have gotten to Brees at least a few times, though given the lack of blitz help, cannot be chastized too hard.
LB: B-
The Badger spent much of the evening dropping into coverage, of which they did an adequate job.
The primary coverage man for the Badgers among linebackers, Bob Adamov was a very busy man. Generally his coverage was ok, although he was a step on two slow at times getting into the correct zone. His lack of a step against the wide open attack also caused him to miss a few tackles, or more specifically arrive too late to make the play.
Adamov also dropped an INT in the endzone, though it would have been a pretty nice grab.
Donnel Thompson, due to the style of play was not heard from ro most of the game/
Chris Ghidorzi showed great reactions on his INT, which came off of a deflected ball. He also ran to the ball well on the limited number of running plays.
DB: B
Busy busy busy. The Badger defensive scheme was to avoid the big play, making Purdue make the mistakes and then jumping on them. This is what the Badger DBs did. There were no major breakdowns in coverage which is pretty darn good considering the offense they were playing. When the field got short, the coverage got tight. Completed passes in and around the red zone were more a tribute to the skill of Brees rather than any poor coverage.
Echols and Fletcher were each solid thoughout, each contributing spectacular interceptions at clutch moments. These kids can flat out play. Echols also provided super deep coverage on the one true deep ball that Brees threw.
Jason Doering was also an enforcer in the middle, providing at least 4 big hits following catches or near catches by Boiler receivers. If he doesn't make a receiver think before laying out in the middle of the field, then nothing will.
All in all, the DBs tackled very securely as well as I counted only one missed tackle by a DB (Fletcher).
The DBs have come of age.
Special Teams: B
Nothing spectacular again in terms of returns as Purdue chose to kick away from Davis on kickoffs and well, they just didn't punt the ball that much for Davis to be a factor on punt returns.
I thought the key aspect of the special teams was the super punting by Kevin Stemke. His punts were very high, often keeping the Badgers in business in terms of field position.
Coverage was generally good (only one decent Purdue punt return). Boese made a nice shoestring tackle following one punt.
Davenport...money.
10/12 Update: Here are how my keys to the game panned out:
1. First Quarter
Mission accomplished. They indeed got off to a super start in the one place it counts, the scoreboard despite generating little offense. This lead certainly allowed them to play a little softer on defense in order to prevent the big plays.
2. Rushing Dominance
Well, it didn't really happen due to the poor play up front by the OL.
While they were not dominant, they did win the time of possession battle despite 100 or so Purdue plays and once again, they were able to run the ball late in the game when they needed to.
Mike Samuel provided a big lift on the ground.
Dominance? No. But reasonably effective when it mattered most.
3. Chris Janek, Ross Kolodziej, Eric Mahlik, Brandon Williams, and Wendell Bryant
Purdue's rushing attack was minimal, though I feel it may have been more due to Purdue deficiencies than exceptionally strong play by the tackles.
I have not watched the tape yet but overall, the tackles did what they needed to.
4. Secondary confidence
Super. They made plays despite gaudy numbers. These corners have shown poise beyond their years during their short Badger careers.
Echols' and Fletcher's interceptions were both things of beauty.
Only one pass over 20 yards and that was some play by Brees.
5. Turnovers/Intangibles
The story of the game. 5 turnovers did in the Boilers.
I thought the stadium climate (ie. the fans) helped the Badger defense hang in the game while the offense was sputtering. PREDICTION: Not too bad. I was wrong on the offense providing some pop, yet they did score when they had the opportunities. 31 points is a total I will take any day of the week (especially Saturdays).
I was also right in my guess that a DB would make a big interception in the second half and that Dayne would pound the ball late.
My predicted big play to Chambers never materialized.
I had the Badger point total pegged (minus an insurance FG) and nailed the fact that Purdue would get a consolation TD late. My call was 34-28. Actual score 31-24. I will take it.
10/9 Update: Here are Badgermaniac's Keys to the Game for tomorrow's game with Purdue.
1. First Quarter
I think it is vital that the Badgers get off to a good start against the Boilers, or at least NOT get off to a poor start.
Obviously there is the Badger's ability (or lack thereof) to play catchup ball. This is a given with most Badger games though.
Last year, Purdue had 21 points on the board before the Badgers even had a first down and Joe Tiller and company has continued their quick strike assault this year. The Badgers must hang in there against a potential early rush. Wisconsin has shown the ability to play a solid second half and the ability to wear an opponent down. However, they must still be in the game to do this.
Last, I feel it is important that the Badger crowd stay in the game and show their wild and crazy side. If Purdue were to get up big early, how well the crowd would debate given many Badger fan's skeptical nature, would be debatable.
2. Rushing Dominance
Most presume that the Badgers will win the ground attack war (while Purdue will win the air battle). However, it is important that the Badgers not only win the ground war, but completely dominate it.
The Badgers rank 23rd in the country in rushing offense while Purdue ranks 67th in rush defense. However, the Badgers have still not unleased what might be considered a dominating running performance.
The Badger offensive line must for the first time this season really set the tempo and take advantage of a medicre Purdue run defense. 200+ yards will the yardstick I will use to measure the Badger success. They have shown flashes, but the consistency must be sustained throughout the game.
This will also serve to keep Drew Brees and company off the field.
3. Chris Janek, Ross Kolodziej, Eric Mahlik, Brandon Williams, and Wendell Bryant
On the other side of the ball, the key to the Purdue attack last year was their rushing attack. With a spread field, they managed to thin out the defensive front and attack the defense right up the middle. The Badgers were shredded last year for 200+ yards on only 25 carries against Purdue.
Wisconsin must shut down the Purdue rushing attack without compromising their passing defense. As the Boilers like to run between the tackles, it is imperative that the Wisconsin DTs have a strong game (which they did not against Indiana). Running wide on the Badgers with Burke and Favret will be tough. How well Purdue does against the tackles is the big question.
4. Secondary confidence
Whether you believe that Drew Brees is a dominant QB, or whether you believe that it is simply Joe Tiller's offensive scheme (or a combination of both), the fact remains that Purdue can throw the ball. Regardless of the defensive schemes or cover abilities, they will have their moments.
To this point, Mike Echols, Jamar Fletcher, Joey Boese, Dontae King and the rest of the secondary has not faced adversity yet. They have not given up a long touchdown. They have not yet gotten burned on a key third and long with the game on the line. How they react under these circumstances will go a long way towards deciding this game.
The DBs will be forced to play multiple defensive sets, securely tackle, and be able to rebound after being beat. If they are unable to display the confidence to pull this off, it will be a long day for the Badgers.
5. Turnovers/Intangibles
As in all games, especially ones that are expected to be hotly contested, turnovers matter and matter big. Saturday will be no exception.
However, the Badgers can bring other intangibles to the table that could factor into the equation. Playing at night on homecoming against a team that humiliated them last year. Playing in front of 78,000 red clad crazies. The belief that they are in fact a team of destiny.
Purdue is good, but the talent still is even with perhaps an edge to Wisconsin overall. However, these intangibles can prove to be the edge the Badgers need.
PREDICTION: This game scares me to death, not because of any special talent on the Purdue team, but rather because of the Tiller scheme. The Badgers simply do not matchup well with Purdue in their style of play. However, I think this is the week the defense proves it is legit and the offense gets off the defenses back and supplies some pop.
I think Purdue will jump out early 7-0 or so, and will continue to lead about 21-17 at the half. However, as the game progresses, the Badgers will gain confidence and will begin to rattle Brees with one of the DBs making a big interception. Dayne will start pounding away and Samuel will make a big throw to Chambers to put the Badgers ahead, 31-21. The Boilers will refuse to die and put up a score late in the fourth before the Badgers ice it with a Matt Davenport FG. Final score 34-28 Badgers.
Badgers optimist? Yes I am, but I have seen too many big games in Camp Randall to think they won't be ready. GO BADGERS!!
10/8 Update: In the NCAA stats:
Total Offense: WI 60, PUR 18
Total Defense: WI 5, PUR 69
Scoring Offense: WI 16, PUR 26
Scoring Defense: WI 3, PUR 38
Rushing Offense: WI 23, PUR 82
Rushing Defense: WI 7, PUR 67
Passing Offense: WI 92, PUR 7
Passing Defense: WI 27, PUR 77
Turnover Margin: WI 8, PUR 74
Drew Brees is ranks #12 in passing efficiency (Note that in the Big Ten stats, Mike Samuel is ranked number 3 behind Brees and Germaine. However, he doesn't appear among the NCAA leaders. I assume he doesn't have enough attempts) and #5 in total offense.
Ron Dayne is ranked #10 in rushing and #40 in All-Purpose yards.
Isaac Jones is ranked #46 in catches per game.
Matt Davenport is #34 in scoring and #18 in FG/game.
Kevin Stemke is #47 in punting.
Danny Rodgers is #50 in punting.
Nick Davis is #7 in punt returns and #43 in kick returns.
Cliff Jackson is #17 in kick returns.
Michael Hawthorne is #19 in interceptions.
10/8 Update: The power poll computer results are in. It predicts a Badger victory by a score of 31-20. Wisconsin is favored by 11 points according to the computer with a 64% chance of winning.
Return to Game Previews/Evaluations Page
Return to Badgermaniac's Badger News and Views Page
� 1997 [email protected]
Get your own Free Home Page