Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I think that Badge and AC ought to dook it out.

Me to and you and I can go at in the undercard - winner gets the Beer.Or cheese curds

Duke it out in a parking lot, in Madison, next to a grill, with beers and maybe a nice flask.

Just go tailgate.

first one to down 12 sharkwaters wins

Maybe I'm seeing something interesting while watching highlights of UW's deep bomb TDs to Cephus this season. In all of these, Coan is getting hit or a hand in his face as he releases the ball. I'm curious how those plays would have turned out if tthe defensive talent were the same (USF/CMU level) everywhere but with one variable changed -- Michigan's CBs. Had the coverage caused Coan to hold on a fraction of a second longer, the deep dimension might be diminished from the offense, even against the CMU and USF level of pressure. Or maybe not. A thing to pay attention to either way.

To respond to this: no, I don't expect the Badgers to hang 61 or even 49 points on Michigan. I expect the Badgers' offense, including Coan, will not be as good against Michigan as it was against directional Michigan/Florida.

But as far as I can tell you're fixated on filling in the blank after he stopped talking.

Your fixation is in the deflection,why did MLIVE,Detroit News & Free Press all have this on their websites?It was RATHER quite direct/obvious,NO interpretation needed - if you can't HONESTLY interpret that interview then you're.............ON WISCONSIN

Ha, well yeah. But that wasn't anyone's point. I was specifically asking about the deep ball and whether we expect 1-3 long completions or possibly not even. I guess we need to further distinguish long by YAC and through the air and I mean the latter.

I'm honestly not sure how to respond to this. No, Coan won't be as good against Michigan as against the directional schools. How many completions will he hit? Not zero. Over 15 yards? I would be surprised if the answer were zero, but maybe Michigan is that good. It will still key off of the running game; that's how Wisconsin plays. If Taylor is gaining yards in chunks, Coan will hit some longer strikes. If he isn't, that's less likely.

To return to my theme, we just don't have enough data right now (at least for me) to have a good sense for how this goes. As the most obvious example, we were all ready to crown Maryland as a real threat after two huge wins, including against Syracuse. Now Syracuse looks bad, and with another loss to Temple, Maryland doesn't look much different from last season.

Wisconsin doesn't look the same against cupcakes as it did last season, nor does Michigan look the same against non-conference foes. Neither of those data points are enough right now to make me feel like I'm particularly informed about how this game will go. I would love to see all of the following: Wisconsin's offense is much different with a competent QB; Wisconsin's defense is much different with an actual depth chart that isn't just freshman and sophomores; Michigan's QB is a mess, who can't make reads; Michigan's offense keeps putting the ball on the turf; and Michigan's defense isn't as good up front as it was last season, allowing the Badgers more yards on the ground. All of those things would be consistent with what we've seen in the first two games for each team, and if all that were true in proportion to how these teams looked at this time last year, Wisconsin will win this game going away.

I very much doubt that.

My best guess is that Wisconsin wins this game 20-13, in a typical Alvarez-Era, Camp Randall, Wisconsin vs. Michigan football game. But that's what it is: a guess. A couple of turnovers and this game looks a lot different (in either direction).

I'm honestly not sure how to respond to this. No, Coan won't be as good against Michigan as against the directional schools. How many completions will he hit? Not zero. Over 15 yards? I would be surprised if the answer were zero, but maybe Michigan is that good. It will still key off of the running game; that's how Wisconsin plays. If Taylor is gaining yards in chunks, Coan will hit some longer strikes. If he isn't, that's less likely.

To return to my theme, we just don't have enough data right now (at least for me) to have a good sense for how this goes. As the most obvious example, we were all ready to crown Maryland as a real threat after two huge wins, including against Syracuse. Now Syracuse looks bad, and with another loss to Temple, Maryland doesn't look much different from last season.

Wisconsin doesn't look the same against cupcakes as it did last season, nor does Michigan look the same against non-conference foes. Neither of those data points are enough right now to make me feel like I'm particularly informed about how this game will go. I would love to see all of the following: Wisconsin's offense is much different with a competent QB; Wisconsin's defense is much different with an actual depth chart that isn't just freshman and sophomores; Michigan's QB is a mess, who can't make reads; Michigan's offense keeps putting the ball on the turf; and Michigan's defense isn't as good up front as it was last season, allowing the Badgers more yards on the ground. All of those things would be consistent with what we've seen in the first two games for each team, and if all that were true in proportion to how these teams looked at this time last year, Wisconsin will win this game going away.

I very much doubt that.

My best guess is that Wisconsin wins this game 20-13, in a typical Alvarez-Era, Camp Randall, Wisconsin vs. Michigan football game. But that's what it is: a guess. A couple of turnovers and this game looks a lot different (in either direction).

I didn't pick a number for "deep ball" because that's arbitrary, but the 35+ range is closer to what I meant than 15+. Let me know if you think the premise is wrong that if a team could theoretically remove the (very?) deep Cepheus passing game that it meaningfully hurts UW's balance?