7/11 Update: Today we look at the defensive and special teams game grades from the Rose Bowl.
DL: B
Overall a solid game, especially as the game progressed. The Badgers played their usual 8 to 10 defensive linemen and it really paid off late in the game as McNown was continually hurried in the 4th quarter. For the game, of 45 passing plays, the Badgers put on excellent pressue on 16 plays and decent pressure on another 15. McNown was visibly upset when he just didn't have time to step up into the pocket.
Against the run, UCLA had some fair success with quick bursts right up the middle (as their TD run displayed) but considering the respect the defense needed to give to the arial attack, they did a reasonable job of controlling the run (although Doering had a lot to do with that....more in a bit).
Individually, a number of different players had their moments. Tom Burke was solid, though did not thoroughly dominate the game as he has others. Still, he continually was able to shed his blocker and supply pursuit to the ball. He only registered one sack, but was a constant presence.
Wendell Bryant displayed his vast physical skills supplying great interior pass rush and penetration. I felt his best play other than the game saving sack may have been when he read the WR screen and hit Farmer (??) after a limited gain. You just don't see too many tackles with that kind of awareness and mobility.
Ross Kolodziej also played well later in the game with a few nice pressures, though he was in the middle on a couple of the interior runs that broke for 8-10 yards.
Finally, Jake Sprague also was able to get consistent penetration in his limited amount of plays.
LB: C+
The biggest problem the LBers as a whole had was keeping up with the elusive and quick UCLA tailbacks. They were continually a step slow in pass coverage and missed a few tackles due to being a step behind (witness the flair to the TB that went for the long TD after Thompson missed the tackle). Ghidorzi as always worked his tail off but also was about 3 steps behind the back in pass coverage.
Still, they did provide a few big plays when needed as Adamov had a nice sack, Thompson had a big hit in the backfield, and Ghidorzi recovered the fumble on the two yard line.
I don't know that the LBers played poorly necessarily, but rather it was just a very tough team for them to match-up with.
DB: B-
It was a mixed bad for the Badger secondary and as such, I had a hard time figuring out what this grade should be. Let's take the positive first.
In general, the CBs had pretty decent coverage overall. Quite a few of McNown's troubles stemmed from the excellent coverage downfield. I only counted about 4 plays where the coverage was downright poor and another 10 or so where it was fair. When the other team throws the ball 40+ times, those aren't bad numbers.
Fletcher made perhaps the play of the game with his pick and score of McNown's wounded duck.
In run support, both Fletcher and Echols were pretty solid, but the real star in this regard was Jason Doering. On numerous occasions, he made TD-saving tackles about 10 yards beyond the line of scrimmage. I counted at least 3 times that shoddy tackling would have meant trouble.
On the negative side, Leonard Taylor had a miserable game. He blew coverage on the flea-flicker, missed a few tackles, and much like the linebackers, was periodically a step slow dropping into his zone.
Fletcher was beaten for the deep slant to Farmer for the TD and was also beaten on a post route that might have gone for a TD if the ball was thrown properly. He was also whistled twice for pass interference (though once saved a TD).
Special Teams: C
Not quite as special as we were used to seeing, though nothing especially bad or anything.
Pisetsky's kicks were generally unreturnable, though one did go out of bounds giving the Bruins good field position.
Davenport was perfect as per usual.
Stemke had somewhat of an off day. A few of his punts were decent, though a couple were also returnable. On this day, he was simply an adequate punter, nothing more.
Nick Davis provided one pretty good return where he was able to turn the corner, yet generally was not a factor.
The coverage units, specifically the punt coverage unit, did surrender a few moderate returns for UCLA, though did not get burned or anything.
Let me repeat...not a bad day...but just not really great either.
7/10 Update: Yes, it is FINALLY here....the Rose Bowl game grades. What's a 6 month wait among friends?
Today we will take a look at the offense with the defense and special teams coming tomorrow.
OFFENSE
QB: A-
I actually thought that Mike Samuel was the key to the Badger victory with his key third down short passing game along with a few key runs sprinkled in.
Throwing the ball, Samuel was very accurate with his short throws, throwing 6 of 7 right on the mark, many while evading pressure or on the run. Virtually all of these completions went for first downs. Samuel was very patient in letting the plays develop, leading to some wide open fullbacks and tightends underneath once the defense had been cleared out.
His medium and long balls were not as successful, with only 4 of his 10 right on the mark, although only 2 of the 10 were considered poor. He hit Davis on a beautiful toss while he was well covered on a deep slant and the Chambers drop was a terrific throw. When the throws were bad, they were so bad as to avoid the turnover (which is kind of a strange way to look at it but it seemed to work for Mike).
In the running game, he made a couple of nice cuts on the option plays including a key third down run with about 4 minutes to go in the game where there wasn't much of a seam. He did pitch late once to Dayne but it didn't cost the Badgers anything. He was also effective on a QB draw which went for solid yardage.
On the downside, he did fumble a snap late in the game allowing UCLA to get back in the game, a fumble that looked like his fault.
RB: A+
Ron Dayne was simply tremendous, displaying an awesome mix of power, instincts, moves, and breakaway speed. Dayne was explosive to the line and continuously moved the pile. Yet, his footwork was excellent and he was patient enough to let the play and the blocking develop. All of his TD runs were very impressive runs.
Eddie Faulkner, despite being tentative early, provided a good breather for Dayne with a couple good aggressive runs as the game progressed.
Cecil Martin was his usual steady self with numerous devastating lead blocks to go with a couple of catches out of the backfield.
Chad Kuhns also got into the action with a dynamite lead block which led to a huge play, hopefully foreshadowing things to come.
OL: A-
While Dayne certainly made them look good, it was a solid overall game for the line. UCLA had some success with flooding the line of scrimmage late in the game, but only after the damage had been done as the hogs up front were able to open some big holes.
There were not a huge amount of plays in which the linemen simply blew the Bruins off the line, but they consistenly locked up their men and prevented them from pursuing, letting Dayne pick his holes. Overall, the run plays were adequately blocked about 90% of the time which is a good percentage.
In pass coverage, it was hard to give too much of a grade since the Badgers ran so many short pass plays, but overall the protection was excellent. The only play in which the Bruin front blew up the line was when the Badgers emptied the backfield and UCLA had an all out blitz called, leaving the OL basically helpless.
Specifically, Bill Ferrario had in my estimation the best game, especially on the move.
Gibson also was his usual dominant self on the right side getting consistent movement from his opponent.
My favorite block came from Casey Rabach (on Dayne's short TD run where he delayed in the backfield and squirted out of the crowd) who pulled and sealed off about 2 and a half guys, dispensing them one after the other.
WR: C
The WR did not play an integral part in the game and of course had one glaring bad play (the Chambers drop).
Nick Davis was the receiving star (if you want to call it that) with a few nice hands catches. While he did not get huge separation, he did show a nice subtle burst to get just enough to allow Samuel to squeeze the ball in. It should be interesting to see how he continues to develop his receiving skills this year.
Chambers had a quite game although he did contribute a few nice run blocks on the corner and did run hard after the catch when he had the chance.
Merritt....well.....tyical Merritt. I will leave it at that. The kid is an effort kid, but simply isn't a Big Ten quality starter in my opinion.
TE: B
Childress rotated the TEs quite freely and they did a solid job. They caught the ball when they had to and did not blow any noticeable blocking assignments which was a pleasant change from a large portion of the season.
1/2 Update: What a game! What a season! Wisconsin fans have a lot to be proud of. I know that I was a very optimistic fan beginning the year, predicting a 9-2 finish, but this team has exceeded even my own lofty expectations. What is even better, is that they did it through hard work and dedication, winning games through execution, solid tackling, lack of penalities and mistakes, and overall toughness. Admirable indeed.
Before we look at how my keys to the game transpired, let me just say I have never been happier to be dead wrong in my prediction. Some may have seen some number crunching I did, which predicted a 37-27 Badger victory. I should have stuck with it, but being the superstitious one I am, I figured I had to predict the worst if I really wanted the best. As I said...DEAD WRONG BABY!!!!!
Badgermaniac's Keys to the Rose Bowl
1. Turnovers
Wisconsin only won the turnover battle 2 to 1, but those 2 were absolutely critical. Fletcher's pick for a touchdown, and the fumble recovery inside the 5 were THE key plays in the game.
2. Tom Burke and John Favret vs. Kris Farris and Brian Polak
Another vital key for the Badgers was their constant pressure on McNown. Although they registered "only" 3 sacks, McNown rarely felt comfortable in the pocket when it became clear that Farris and Polak could not handle the rush from outside. What was an added bonus was the inside push generated by the defensive tackles.
3. Chris Chambers
Chambers was not really a key, though without the drop, he could have been.
4. Mike Grieb vs. Donnell Thompson and Bob Adamov
I had the right idea here, but just didn't articulate it very well. I was concerned with the Wisconsin's LB ability to stay with their men in pass coverage. I only listed Grieb (who was not a factor), but I also meant/should have mentioned the UCLA running backs. This was one area where I thought the Wisconsin defense did struggle. McNown hit the backs crossing out of the backfied on a number of key plays.
5. First quarter
The Wiscosnin defense did surrender some big plays early as they adapted to the UCLA scheme, but the Wisconsin offense countered by jamming the ball right down the Bruin throats, setting the tone for the rest of the game.
6. Dayne's health
What a warrior! It was clear he was not 100% and that the coaches were trying to pace him (imagine if he had been healthy enough for 40 carries!!!). Yet, his mobility, power, and vision were exceptional. Once again, he was not caught from behind either.
PREDICTION
As I mentioned, I should have stuck with what my numbers were telling me. Let's look at each "mini-prediction".
"I think the Badgers will surprise the pundits with how well they are able to defense the Bruins at times."
Mission accomplished.
"It will be frustrating for Badger fans at times as McNown slowly picks his spots and prolongs drives. However, a few early drives will result in field goals instead of TDs."
McNown was certainly able to move the chains, but instead of FGs, they capped off their drives with big play TDs.
"Meanwhile, UCLA will stack the line and keep Dayne in check, keeping their defense off the field early."
Ummmmmm.....NO! I think Samuel's surprising effectiveness kept those safeties back more than expected.
"UCLA will get at least one big play though..."
They got more than one.
"UCLA will then take adantage of a key Badger fumble (Samuel) deep in Badger territory to go up 20-7 at haltime."
Well, Sammy did have a key fumble, but the defense answered. I totally underestimated the Badgers ability to move the ball.
"McNown will shake off his early frustrations and put up a long drive, capped off by a nice fade pass to Farmer in the endzone."
It wasn't a fade, but it WAS a nice throw and catch.
"Final: UCLA 38, Wiscosin 24."
Sorry folks, but I couldn't go through the season perfect.
"Wisconsin will be even in the turnover battle, 2-2."
Close...Wisconsin 2-1.
For a nice national write up that captures a lot of the character of this team, check out CBS Sportsline.
Finally, for the LA perspective on the "Second Coming" of Badger fans, check out the LA Times.
1/1 Update: Here are Badgermaniac's Keys to the Rose Bowl
1. Turnovers
Wisconsin is number one in the country in turnover margin, which has been a vital aspect of their success. However, UCLA has been number 2. Yet, due to their offensive firepower, UCLA is not as reliant on this facet of the game as Wisconsin is. I think the Badgers will need to be a +3 or better to win.
2. Tom Burke and John Favret vs. Kris Fariss and Brian Polak
The UCLA has surrendered only 10 sacks all season, while Tom Burke led the nation in sacks with 21. Something has to give. The Badgers will flip flop Burke from side to side depending on the spot of the ball, so he will be matched up with both UCLA tackles. Polak is the weaker of the two, yet only surrendered 1 sack all season. However, has UCLA played a tandem as solid as Burke and Favret? It is unrealistic to think that the Badgers will generate constant heat on McNown, but they cannot let him sit back and pick the DBs apart. McNown is also very nifty in the pocket, not at all unlike Drew Brees, so disciplined pass rushing will be required as opposed to an all out jail break type rush. I wouldn't be surprised to see a fair amount of blitzing from Adamov and Ghidorzi.
3. Chris Chambers
Although the UCLA defense is not as bad as people portray it to be, the corners have been woeful at times. Chris Chambers (and obviously Mike Samuel) need to come up with at least 3 big plays. UCLA shut down Ricky Williams early in the year when Texas was unable to pass. I also believe they will contain Dayne if Chambers and Samuel are not able to effectively strech the defense.
4. Mike Grieb vs. Donnell Thompson and Bob Adamov
Mike Grieb was the All-Pac 10 TE. While Thompson and Adamov have been decent in coverage this year, they both tend to play soft and allow the underneath patterns. Since it is likely that Cosgrove will play a bend but don't break type defense similar to what they played against Purdue, it is vital that our LB's play well in pass coverage, so that McNown is not able to hit Grieb consistently on third down, thereby prolonging drives.
5. First quarter
Not being overwhelmed in the first quarter will go a long way towards determining the outcome of this game. UCLA can be very intimidating when all weapons are firing. Can Wisconsin play with controlled confidence early? Avoiding the huge plays early in the game until the defense adjust to UCLA's overall scheme is key. By the same token, the Badgers can raise their intensity to another level if they get some key plays early themselves. Taking advantage of turnovers or big special teams plays can propel this team to great heights. If the score is tied after one quarter, it will bode well for Wisconsin.
6. Dayne's health
There are still some rumblings about Dayne being nicked up from the Penn State game. He must be near full strength if the Badgers are to win.
PREDICTION
I think the Badgers will surprise the pundits with how well they are able to defense the Bruins at times. It will be frustrating for Badger fans at times as McNown slowly picks his spots and prolongs drives. However, a few early drives will result in field goals instead of TDs. Meanwhile, UCLA will stack the line and keep Dayne in check, keeping their defense off the field early. Wisconsin WILL get a big fumble recovery though and turn that into 6 to hang in the game. UCLA will get at least one big play though, perhaps a long DeShaun Foster run to go up 13-7 into the second quarter. UCLA will then take adantage of a key Badger fumble (Samuel) deep in Badger territory to go up 20-7 at haltime. In the second half, Wisconsin will put together it's first sustained drive of the game to get the score back within reach at 20-14, followed by a Davenport FG to make it 20-17. However, as the Badger fans go crazy, McNown will shake off his early frustrations and put up a long drive, capped off by a nice fade pass to Farmer in the endzone to go back up 27-17. As Wisconsin becomes a bit desperate, UCLA closes the screws on the Badgers, getting another FG to really gain command at 30-17, followed by a quick strike TD when the Badger defense gambles, UCLA 37-17. Wisconsin will score late, but simply will not be enough. Final: UCLA 38, Wiscosin 24. Wisconsin will be even in the turnover battle, 2-2.
12/13 Update: For the first time this season, the Badgers will not be the computer favorite in a football game. According to the computer, UCLA is a 7.5 point favorite with a 62% chance of winning. Projected score: UCLA 31 Wisconsin 24.
Other Big Ten bowl games (with projected scores):
Kansas State 37 Purdue 20
Ohio State 23 Texas A&M 22
Arkansas 24 Michigan 22
Penn State 31 Kentucky 26
12/28 Update:
As the Rose Bowl game approaches, here is how the teams compare in the national rankings:
Passing Offense: Wisconsin 107, UCLA 16
Rushing Offense: Wisconsin 20, UCLA 29
Scoring Offense: Wisconsin 27, UCLA 5
Total Offense: Wisconsin 90, UCLA 9
Rushing Defense: Wisconsin 3, UCLA 70
Passing Defense: Wisconsin 6, UCLA 51
Total Defense: Wisconsin 4, UCLA 99
Scoring Defense: Wisconsin 1, UCLA 65
Turnover Margin: Wisconsin 1, UCLA 2
Individually:
Cade McNown is 13th in passing yards, 10th in efficiency, and 12th in total offense.
Ron Dayne is 13th in rushing and 32nd in all-purpose offense.
Danny Farmer is 17th in receiving yards.
Jamar Flethcer is 1st in interceptions.
Ryan Roques and Larry Atkins are 37th in interceptions. Roques is 14th in punt returns.
Kevin Stemke is 10th in punting.
Chris Sailer is 17th in scoring and 7th in kicking.
Matt Davenport is 27th in scoring and 14th in kicking.
Nick Davis is 3rd in punt returns and 47th in kick returns.
12/22 Update: For a pretty nice Rose Bowl page, with lots of your standard story lines, check out CBS Sportsline.
12/6 Update: It is official. The Badgers will take on UCLA once again in the Rose Bowl.
My initial reaction upon getting UCLA was twofold.
I was somewhat disappointed from the standpoint of I don't think UCLA fans bring a lot to the table in terms of excitement. They have never struck me as inspired rabid followers of the team. I think they take the Rose Bowl for granted anyway, let alone this year when it is clearly a consolation prize for them.
Rather, I would have preferred to go against the Arizona Wildcats, a school much in the same boat as Wisconsin, one that truly respects the tradition of the Rose Bowl (seeing as how they have never gone).
My second reaction was how in the world we can even contain such an explosive offense. Clearly, this will be the biggest defensive test any Badger team has undergone in recent history.
Upon thinking about it however, short of Florida State or somebody like that, I think Wisconsin has as good a shot as anyone to contain (note I didn't say stop) the Bruin offensive juggernaut.
Consider:
1.) Wisconsin will play a severe case of bend but don't break defense. This is something they do quite often and generally do very well (see Purdue game this year or Rose Bowl in '94). This should contain the UCLA big plays that they have thrived on. Alvarez is a bright guy who knows that if he plays aggressively, he is dead. He won't let his pride stop him from doing the right thing.
2.) If the bend but don't break defense does work, there is still the issue of stopping the Bruins eventually (after all that bending). This all comes down to turnovers. Wisconsin ranks among the elite in the country in TO margin.
3.) Wisconsin has the ends in Burke and Favret to hassle McNown. McNown is very nifty in the pocket though, so the pressure will need to come from the inside as well from Kolodziej, Mahlik, and Bryant.
4.) Wisconsin's secondary is pretty deep with Boese, King, and Myers. So, the 4 receiver sets won't be all that difficult for them to match up with.
5.) Wisconsin can stop the run without committing 7 or 8 guys to the line, thereby leaving them exposed to the pass. Hopefully, this will make UCLA one dimensional (though they still have some quality backs back there...this one will be tough).
Now, realize that when I say this, I still expect UCLA to put up a minimum of 30+ points, so these comments are all relative. Wisconsin is going to need to score some serious points in this game, and get at least 4 turnovers from UCLA to win IMO.
Return to Game Previews/Evaluations Page
Return to Badgermaniac's Badger News and Views Page
� 1997 [email protected]
Get your own Free Home Page