Badger Bits: A brief look ahead
If you're still recovering from Monday night, you're probably not alone. It will probably be a long time before most Badger fans forget Wisconsin's second straight Rose Bowl loss, but one easy way might be a solid 2012 campaign.
As Jeff Potrykus points out, the Badgers will have a lot of work to do if they wish to put together a team capable of winning a third straight Big Ten championship. Wisconsin will have to find replacements for seven offensive starters (assuming Peter Konz and Montee Ball will forgo their last year of eligibility), five defensive starters and both kicking specialists. They'll also at least two offensive assistant coaches, including a coordinator.
That said, there is still reason to believe the Badgers could make it back to Pasadena for a third consecutive season. Most importantly, the Big Ten Leaders Division will be significantly weaker in 2012 than it was this season. Ohio State can't compete in postseason games. Penn State will be picking up the pieces after the program was rocked by a horrific sexual abuse scandal. Illinois, Purdue and Indiana are all at various states of rebuilding as well.
While it's going to be tough to replace the offensive production of Russell Wilson, Montee Ball and Nick Toon, Wisconsin's defense should be stronger in 2012. Each of the five positions in transition will likely be filled by players with significant experience: Dezmen Southward at safety, David Gilbert at defensive end, Ethan Armstrong at outside linbacker, Beau Allen at defensive tackle and Devin Smith at cornerback. They'll also get all-Big Ten performers Mike Taylor and Chris Borland back.
It's tough to imagine Wisconsin being as good next year, but in a weaker Big Ten with a (hopefully) better defense, it might not matter.
Links
We expected a shootout. Oregon and Wisconsin delivered.
I wrote last week that Wisconsin needed to avoid giving up big plays to beat Oregon. They didn't.
Los Angeles Times columnist Bill Dwyre wonders how Wisconsin fans will remember this game. I'm not sure how I'll remember it myself.
ESPN's Brian Bennet says Wisconsin's defense needs to improve. As Bennet writes, the Badgers gave up nearly 10 yards per play. So yes, yes it does.
Los Angeles Daily News columnist provides some insight on the last play of the game.
I really don't like this column from Yahoo's Steve Henson, but maybe I'm just bitter.
Bruce Feldman: "Oregon football now is a legit powerhouse." I wonder if he would have said the same had Wisconsin won.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I would be surprised if Bucky didn't make it to the CCG...
…I would also be surprised in they won their 3rd conference title, but making it a 1 game issue does help.
It helps PSU has tSUN and Nebraska out of division, while Wiscy had NW and Iowa.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
I think you're thinking of 2013
The Badgers have MSU and Nebby out of division in 2012.
Bucky's 5th Quarter The best site for Badger news on the web!
If it made sense, it wouldn't be the BCS.
by John Veldhuis on Jan 4, 2012 11:50 AM CST up reply actions
Thanks - I did look up the wrong year.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
I think you are looking at 2013...
We have @NEB, MSU, and MINN out of division in 2012.
Legitimacy through bowl win...
Overrated. We won three Rose Bowls in 10 years. Was Wisconsin considered a legitimate elite team? No. Would winning on Monday have made Wisconsin a legitimate elite team? Not really. It would have put a nice feather in our cap, and would have helped in recruiting. But we’d still be facing the same problems next season with coaching turnover and the lack of a starting QB. And we wouldn’t suddenly be stealing 5-star recruits from Michigan and Ohio State (much less Alabama or USC).
Meanwhile, Oregon has been to three straight BCS games, including one for the MNC. They will almost surely be back in a BCS game next season. They are elite, and would still be even if they had lost the game.
The sun doesn’t rise and set based on the outcome of one game at the end of the season. To be honest, I think last season was the best year since 1993 in terms of building legitimacy for Wisconsin even though we lost the bowl. I’m not saying bowls don’t matter, but this constantly-repeated idea that you need to win the bowl game to be legitimate is bullshit.
Well put
and we all know that bowl performance means very little for the next season when you are losing significant pieces of your team in the offseason. However, there is something to be said for how bowl performance impacts recruiting, which in turn has its own impact on the long-term status of one’s program.
I agree with you – “Post-Bowl Legitimacy” is over in a matter of weeks once everyone starts to really focus on recruiting classes and and “next year”. I’d argue that winning the first annual B1G CCG and going to (& losing) two straight Rose Bowls makes for more of an elite program than say…TCU’s winning the RB in 2010…or Michigan’s BCS win this year. Even with as much national (ESPN) coverage as the Badger state has gotten in the last 12 months, it’s certainly a long road to becoming recognized as an elite household brand.
by IrishBrewerBadger on Jan 4, 2012 2:00 PM CST up reply actions
True, but a key difference between UW and UO is that UO has at least played for all the tortilla chips.
"Lying is like 95% of what I do."
-Sterling Archer, Codename: Duchess
by Bob Genghiskhan on Jan 4, 2012 2:57 PM CST up reply actions

by 


























