Wisconsin

[ramblinwreck1378]

I saw an interesting tweet last night that broke down the rosters of each team in the top 6 in terms of how many 4 and 5 stars they had. The list is as follows:

1. Clemson - 40
2. Auburn - 45
3. Oklahoma - 37
4. Wisconsin - 6
5. Alabama - 69
6. Georgia - 54

Obviously, the one that sticks out is Wisconsin with 6 (0 5* and 6 4*). So my question is this: what is Wisconsin doing that allows them to compete regularly with top tier programs with supposedly inferior talent? Don't say that their schedule this year was weak, because that's a cop out argument - anyone who goes undefeated in the regular season is a legit football program, even UCF. Also they were 10-3 last year and 11-3 the year before that, so this is sustained success.

Are their coaches that much better than ours? The talent piece of the equation is completely removed here - I thought this was interesting and was curious to get others' thoughts.

 

[Enuratique]

I dunno man, if either Wisconsin or UCF played our schedule, I doubt either would end up undefeated.

 

[jeffgt14]

If you take a look at which positions Wisconsin’s 4 star recruits are you’ll why they are successful (on top of good coaching too).

 

[melloace]

According to Sagarin Wisconsin has played the 61st hardest schedule compared to our 8th. I could very easily see Tech this year going 9-3 or so with their schedule. The rest is luck and we didn't have any with tipped passes, field goals that hit both uprights and go in, ect.

 

[RyanS12]

I dunno man, if either Wisconsin or UCF played our schedule, I doubt either would end up undefeated.

This^^^^

 

[GT_05]

I dunno man, if either Wisconsin or UCF played our schedule, I doubt either would end up undefeated.

Two loss minimum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RyanS12]

And **** UCF. They need an * next to there
11-0 record. No one talks about how Frost ducked us. Maybe they would’ve beat us but they sure as hell didn’t want to play us to find out.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

I saw an interesting tweet last night that broke down the rosters of each team in the top 6 in terms of how many 4 and 5 stars they had. The list is as follows:

1. Clemson - 40
2. Auburn - 45
3. Oklahoma - 37
4. Wisconsin - 6
5. Alabama - 69
6. Georgia - 54

Obviously, the one that sticks out is Wisconsin with 6 (0 5* and 6 4*). So my question is this: what is Wisconsin doing that allows them to compete regularly with top tier programs with supposedly inferior talent? Don't say that their schedule this year was weak, because that's a cop out argument - anyone who goes undefeated in the regular season is a legit football program, even UCF. Also they were 10-3 last year and 11-3 the year before that, so this is sustained success.

Are their coaches that much better than ours? The talent piece of the equation is completely removed here - I thought this was interesting and was curious to get others' thoughts.

I am going to add another column for strength of schedule:

1. Clemson - 40 - 11
2. Auburn - 45 - 15
3. Oklahoma - 37 - 36
4. Wisconsin - 6 - 61
5. Alabama - 69 - 54
6. Georgia - 54 - 48

For the record, GT had the 8th toughest SoS this year.

http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

 

[grandpa jacket]

And **** UCF. They need an * next to there
11-0 record. No one talks about how Frost ducked us. Maybe they would’ve beat us but they sure as hell didn’t want to play us to find out.

We better be glad we didnt play that game

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

We better be glad we didnt play that game

I don't think we would have lost that game if played then. UCF has the worst schedule of any team in the top 25 (83), and of the 38 teams ahead of us in the Sagarin rankings, only Memphis (84) has a SoS worse than UCF.

 

[Jacketman1]

We better be glad we didnt play that game

Yeah, I think we would've lost. Memphis would beat us too, their offense is crazy good.

 

[GT_05]

I saw an interesting tweet last night that broke down the rosters of each team in the top 6 in terms of how many 4 and 5 stars they had. The list is as follows:

1. Clemson - 40
2. Auburn - 45
3. Oklahoma - 37
4. Wisconsin - 6
5. Alabama - 69
6. Georgia - 54

Obviously, the one that sticks out is Wisconsin with 6 (0 5* and 6 4*). So my question is this: what is Wisconsin doing that allows them to compete regularly with top tier programs with supposedly inferior talent? Don't say that their schedule this year was weak, because that's a cop out argument - anyone who goes undefeated in the regular season is a legit football program, even UCF. Also they were 10-3 last year and 11-3 the year before that, so this is sustained success.

Are their coaches that much better than ours? The talent piece of the equation is completely removed here - I thought this was interesting and was curious to get others' thoughts.

I feel like we probably had a similar number of 4 and 5 star players in 2014 and we should’ve been undefeated during the regular season. Our two regular season losses were by a combined 11 points. We beat Clemson, UGA, and Miami that year but lost to Duke and UNC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[smathis30]

They are the most prestigious school in their division? Minnesota and Nebraska have potential but haven't been relevant in 20 years. Nowadays your schools success is relative to how you are in your division and Wisconsin is the best in theirs and we are likely the 3rd (unc gives a run for the money with being the top program in their state in 4th)

 

[melloace]

Depends on which GT showed up. It was early in the year where it seemed like the team was still pushing and tackling well. They only beat Navy 31-21 with Navys QB going out of the game when the game was tied 14 all

 

[RedPete]

Re: Wisconsin. Furthermore they’ve been through two head coaching changes since Bielema left in 2012


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RonJohn]

I am going to add another column for strength of schedule:

1. Clemson - 40 - 11
2. Auburn - 45 - 15
3. Oklahoma - 37 - 36
4. Wisconsin - 6 - 61
5. Alabama - 69 - 54
6. Georgia - 54 - 48

While we are at it, let's add athletic budget:
`
1. Clemson - 40 - 11 -$105 million
2. Auburn - 45 - 15 - $140 million
3. Oklahoma - 37 - 36 - $150 million
4. Wisconsin - 6 - 61 - $133 million
5. Alabama - 69 - 54 - $164 million
6. Georgia - 54 - 48 - $124 million

And GT's is $76 million. GT could do a lot more with an additional $57 million per year.

 

[ramblinwreck1378]

I think some of you are missing my point in that they don't have as much talent as the factories but still compete year in and year out. They're 79-27 in the last 10 years - that's upper echelon type stuff. How do we elevate our program to that level?

Now - those of your talking about strength of schedule, I think they go 9-2 at a minimum against our schedule this year with losses to Clem and probably Georgia, putting them in the ACCCG. 9-2 is still a heck of a lot better than 5-6, so even though they aren't defeated, there's still a big gap in performance.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I bet they have there share of underrated guys (2’s that play like 4’s).

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I think some of you are missing my point in that they don't have as much talent as the factories but still compete year in and year out. They're 79-27 in the last 10 years - that's upper echelon type stuff. How do we elevate our program to that level?

Now - those of your talking about strength of schedule, I think they go 9-2 at a minimum against our schedule this year with losses to Clem and probably Georgia, putting them in the ACCCG. 9-2 is still a heck of a lot better than 5-6, so even though they aren't defeated, there's still a big gap in performance.

Talent is a heckuva lot more than stars attached to names on sheet of paper.

 

[Jacket in Dairyland]

I can speak with some knowledge of Wisconsin Athletics, at least football and basketball. IMO, both sports do an OUTSTANDING job of evaluating talent. They get a TON of help from high school coaches around the state in drawing attention to their better players. In football, especially HUGE OL, they have been recruiting to their system for a long time. And a lot of those guys go to the NFL. Running back and LB are similar. In most cases, they know EXACTLY what they are looking for and they are successful at getting it, regardless of stars. In addition, they have fantastic teachers and MOTIVATORS as assistant coaches. Of course, they have NO in-state competition for top players. Minnesota is mediocre, as is Illinois. Iowa is some competition. Full stadiums, rabid fans that travel very well. Living here for 27 years, it's contagious. ALL the public colleges are, for instance UW-Sheboygan, Green Bay, etc., so even they feel a part of it too. They are my 2nd favorite team ( my spouse and father in law are UW grads) but it's been tough not to move them to number one, this year.