2023 Wisconsin Season Thread

[847badgerfan]

Slightly above average is bad. 

[bayareabadger]

Slightly above average is bad.

This is not correct. Slightly above average is slightly above average. And if it was bad, it’s not because they were in third and long too much. 

Wisconsin‘s offense was bad at a great many things. But not really this one.

[FearlessF]

Brian Ferentz brought the average down

[847badgerfan]

This is not correct. Slightly above average is slightly above average. And if it was bad, it’s not because they were in third and long too much.

Wisconsin‘s offense was bad at a great many things. But not really this one.

A is great.

B is OK.

C is failure.

[FearlessF]

I agree that #50 in the nation is bad
Also #7 in the B1G is bad

perhaps good for Rutgers, but bad for programs with expectations

[Cincydawg]

UW was bad on 3rd downs because it was almost always 3rd and long.

Now it's gonna be 3rd and Longo.

Midpack is "bad" if your aim is to be "elite" or even "very good" overall.  It's relative.  

College Football Stats - College FB Team Third Down Conversion Percentage | TeamRankings.com

USC is second, which is not a shock, Washington is first, which kind of us, UGA was third, which coupled with the defense is very good.  Wisconsin at 40% is a bit more than 10% under the leaders (who were over 50%).  GaTech was the worst P5 (!) at 33%.  

[bayareabadger]

I agree that #50 in the nation is bad
Also #7 in the B1G is bad

perhaps good for Rutgers, but bad for programs with expectations

Is fifth in the big ten "bad"?

[bayareabadger]

Midpack is "bad" if your aim is to be "elite" or even "very good" overall.  It's relative. 

College Football Stats - College FB Team Third Down Conversion Percentage | TeamRankings.com

USC is second, which is not a shock, Washington is first, which kind of us, UGA was third, which coupled with the defense is very good.  Wisconsin at 40% is a bit more than 10% under the leaders (who were over 50%).  GaTech was the worst P5 (!) at 33%. 

My relativity is: This team was overall bad at offense, and the third down area was "relatively" fine compared to what was around it.

Like, was it super? Nope. Was worse than what I expected given the overall offense product, nope. 

[847badgerfan]

The only reason 3rd down looks better is Braelon Allen's ability to carry 2 tacklers with him for another yard or two. That's it.

[Cincydawg]

It's an area that needs improvement to be competitive in the upper reaches of CFB.

[bayareabadger]

A is great.

B is OK.

C is failure.

I think this was how we got grade inflation.

I'm not saying this was some monumental great outcome, only that in aggregate it was beside the point given the context. UW was a BAD passing team. UW was a slightly above average rushing team, which is flat bad, considering the talent and O-line pedigree. These are spots to focus on. 

The fact Graham Mertz was slightly below average on third and long, that's actually pretty surprising. He didn't look nearly that good (The fact UW was ever so slightly better on 3rd and short than third and long, that is a failure well below a C)

[bayareabadger]

The only reason 3rd down looks better is Braelon Allen's ability to carry 2 tacklers with him for another yard or two. That's it.

Wisconsin was 63rd on converting third and shorts.

So I'm reading that Braelon Allen is bad at that, per the standard here. 

[Cincydawg]

And Mertz now is the likely started at UF?

[bayareabadger]

And Mertz now is the likely started at UF?

Yep. One of two things will happen.

1. He will finally deliver on his talent in a fresh situation. 
2. Unhappiness