SPORTS
Zetlin: UW outdated, change needed
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Derek Zetlin:
- Buckeye backs live up to hype (October 6, 2008)
- Clay learning offense, carries increase (October 6, 2008)
- Zetlin: Time to build with more Clay (October 1, 2008)
- UW letdown in Big House (September 29, 2008)
Related Stories:
- Alvarez readies for final Camp Randall experience (November 8, 2005)
- Big Ten teams preparing for rivalry week (November 16, 2005)
- Robinson remembered through foundation (August 30, 2001)
- Nittany Lions expect good fight from visiting Irish (September 6, 2007)
Share This:
by Derek Zetlin
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
As Bob Dylan would say, “The times, they are a changing.” We have iPhones, wireless internet, podcasts and DV-R.
Someone needs to remind the Wisconsin football coaching staff of that.
If there’s any team in college football that has an excuse to be old school, it’s Penn State. Why? Because its 81-year-old coach makes your grandfather look like he still needs a pacifier.
But the Nittany Lions are everything but old school. They run the “Spread HD” offense, part defenders like Moses did the Red Sea and allow junior quarterback Daryll Clark to run, pass and put crooked numbers up on the scoreboard.
The results: 6-0, 2-0 in the Big Ten and a No. 6 national ranking.
Here in Madison, the outcome has been a bit different, as the Badgers have dropped their first two conference games, erasing all hopes of a Jan. 1 Rose Bowl berth.
This summer, head coach Bret Bielema was certain that a pro-style offense featuring a fullback would give his team an advantage because so few defenses practice against anything like it. Wisconsin and Iowa are currently the only two Big Ten teams that do not run some form of the spread. The truth is, their decision makers are being stubborn and out-coached, their offenses are more outdated than Atari, and neither team has yet to win a conference game this season.
What was glaringly obvious in the Badgers’ last two affairs was that they lack playmakers at the quarterback and wide receiver positions. And it’s not just the starters, either. The whole depth chart at those positions lacks true big play ability.
Why, you ask? It’s simple. Why would top wide receiver and quarterback recruits — like a Terrelle Pryor, for example — want to play in this kind of offense? It’s built for offensive linemen, running backs and 1960s football.
Like it or not, new age college football is about spreading the field and airing it out, with more speed than Talladega. Instead, the UW offense is in neutral because it doesn’t have enough firepower to move the chains on a consistent basis.
If the Badgers want to compete with the NCAA elites, they need more talent at the skill positions. But the only way to accomplish that is to change the system.
In other words, Bielema needs a new blueprint if he wants long-term success in this conference.
In terms of the rest of this year, it’s easy to blame Allan Evridge for the 0-2 conference start; he touches the ball on every offensive play. But quite frankly, although he’s been mediocre at best, he’s played well enough to win at least one of the past two games. He didn’t drop half a dozen passes in Ann Arbor, and he wasn’t responsible for tackling Pryor and Beanie Wells Saturday night.
That said, it’s time to pull the plug on No. 4 anyway.
This is Bielema’s third season coaching the Badgers, and for the third straight campaign he’s started a different quarterback, all of whom have been seniors. This year it was Evridge’s turn after waiting patiently behind John Stocco and Tyler Donovan. Again, you can’t fault Evridge for the last two overall team performances; he was thrown into an unfair situation, his duty merely to lead a team after growing mold on the pine for two long years. Oh, and don’t lose because the bar of expectations is set higher than the top of Yao Ming’s door frame.
Quarterback is arguably the hardest position in all of sports to learn. Reading defenses, memorizing playbooks and leading an 11-player unit: all near-impossible feats to master, especially for someone with only a little more collegiate game experience than I have.
Does Evridge deserve another chance? Of course he does. Will he improve? No question. But when all chances of a legitimate bowl berth this season have flown out the window, there is no room for sympathy or emotions, and there’s only one goal: rebuild for next season.
So this Saturday No. 6 Penn State comes to town. Which UW quarterback gives the Badgers the best chance to win? Evridge, simply because a debut against Penn State on national TV is too much to ask of anyone else. But for what, a winter trip to Detroit, San Antonio or Orlando if they’re lucky? We’ve seen that for longer than any of us would like.
What Evridge could have used was some experience last season, after the Badgers dropped back-to-back games against Illinois and the same (only now they’re 10 times better) Nittany Lions they’ll see three days from now. But he sat behind Donovan all Outback Bowl-bound season, and now there’s a glazed doughnut in Wisconsin’s Big Ten win column.
Coincidence? Don’t think so.
Next season, Juice Williams will be back for the Illini, and Pryor, Clark and Steven Threet (Michigan) will all have a year under their respective belts when their teams hit the gridiron come fall. You think the Badgers stand a chance against any of them with a quarterback going through the same growing pains we’ve seen with Donovan and Evridge?
Unless Brett Favre comes back to the Dairy State dressed in cardinal and white, I wouldn’t bet on it.
You’ve got to feel bad for Allan because he was thrown into a near-impossible situation and was the product of significant injuries to his tight ends and poor play around him.
Nevertheless, the time has come to make the switch. Either that, or get used to offensive mediocrity a year from now, too.
Derek is a junior majoring in economics. Agree? Disagree? Agree to disagree? E-mail him at dzetlin@badgerherald.com.
Anonymous (October 8, 2008 @ 12:09pm):
"The whole depth chart at those positions lacks true big play ability. Why, you ask? It’s simple. Why would top wide receiver and quarterback recruits — like a Terrelle Pryor, for example — want to play in this kind of offense? It’s built for offensive linemen, running backs and 1960s football."
Then how do you explain how we got Lee Evans, or Chris Chambers? The offensive scheme is denfinitely not the problem. We've won with this offense before. The problem is mental focus...how else do you explain collapses in the last two games that we clearly could have won.
Anonymous (October 8, 2008 @ 3:05pm):
Run Run Pass Punt
Run Run Pass Punt
Run Run Pass Punt
The offensive "scheme" may not be the problem, but the play-calling and expertise of Chryst has gone so far down hill that we'll soon be under .500.
Anonymous (October 8, 2008 @ 5:59pm):
That was before the spread offense was anywhere near this pervasive.
Tim Feyereisen (October 8, 2008 @ 8:09pm):
Derek,
Moving to a spread offense would be a terrible idea.
Assuming the rest of college football continues the trend, high school recruits built for the spread will become spread out all over the country, and the recruiting base for spread systems will become watered down, while the recruiting base for a pro style offense will only become richer.
While a dual-threat quarterback is great in college you can count the number of super-bowl MVPs that are true dual threats. What does this mean? High profile drop back passing quarterbacks out of high school are running out of colleges to go to (see Mallett, Ryan). I think we will see in the next couple of years more and more high profile quarterbacks taking a serious look at Wisconsin. This trend has begun with Jon Budmayr.
This doesn't stop at quarterback though. Spread offenses require lighter more agile offensive linemen, and lighter quicker backs, in comparison to the Wisconsin and NFL idea of Big Uglies.
This doesn't undermine the fact that skill positions still need to be filled, such as wide receiver, and possibly a speed back.
With defenses finally catching up to the spread offense, and the recruiting base wearing thin, Wisconsin keeping the pro style, run it in your face offense might prove to be highly advantageous in their future recruiting endeavors.
Anonymous (October 8, 2008 @ 11:58pm):
Dustin Sherer: Change We Can Believe In.
YES WE CAN!
Anonymous (October 9, 2008 @ 12:17am):
Check the Herald archives -- Oct. 4, 2004
Anonymous (October 9, 2008 @ 12:33pm):
UW could have easily won the last two games. They were not any inferior to Michigan or even OSU. Badgers plays a very very physical brand of football, you can ask the buckeyes. However, they may need to diversify there offense a bit by adding a few different formations.
I agree with the QB scenario. A new QB every season is not helping UW.
Go Buckeyes
Anonymous (October 10, 2008 @ 10:48am):
UW doesnt need to go to a full blown spread but I think they need to use it enough to keep the other teams honest. Right now teams put 8-9 in the box and stuff the running of PJ "time my 40 with a sundial" Hill
Jim (October 11, 2008 @ 8:57am):
A spread without the personnel to run it is a horrible idea. Evridge is not the first one year starter to struggle but it seems to me that he is getting little help from his wideouts. Those guys have to make catches. Trust me when I say no one is taking Wisconsin lightly in State College, Pa.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
