BG - Wisconsin game thread

[Flipper]

I don't think anyone has said we don't need a great defense because we'll score a ton...that's a gross misrepresentation. The approach they are taking is to concede yards in short chunks, but prevent big plays...force the other teams offense to take what you give them and execute perfectly to do so. This approach worked against VMI and IU...the IU game was close because we didn't find the end zone until the second half. That was due..in part...to our QB missing guys completely or failing to hit them in stride. In the second half, Knapke found his rhythm and the offense clicked.

We are not going to be a good football team if the QB doesn't make his throws and the defense doesn't tackle. Of course that's true of about 99% of the college football universe...

[ikenyon]

I don't think anyone has said we don't need a great defense because we'll score a ton...that's a gross misrepresentation. The approach they are taking is to concede yards in short chunks, but prevent big plays...force the other teams offense to take what you give them and execute perfectly to do so. This approach worked against VMI and IU...the IU game was close because we didn't find the end zone until the second half. That was due..in part...to our QB missing guys completely or failing to hit them in stride. In the second half, Knapke found his rhythm and the offense clicked.

We are not going to be a good football team if the QB doesn't make his throws and the defense doesn't tackle. Of course that's true of about 99% of the college football universe...

That approach didn't work against Indiana and it's not a recipe for a winning football team.

I feel like people don't realize how lucky BG was to win the Indiana game. Tevin Coleman's fluke fumble, the tipped pass completion, etc. -- lots of lucky breaks to win a game by 3 points at home. BG gave up 582 yards of offense, 42 points, and barely, just barely won that game with a few lucky breaks. The indiana game was not a success.

[ikenyon]

Of those 5, only 2 played today.

And I don't think anybody makes tackling a priority in practice. Do college teams even do it? Nfl teams sure don't. Taking angles in practice is awesome against bg, but wisconsins athletes were in a different level even than indiana.

The defense sucked today, no argument there. But this overwhelming notion that Babers and company came in here and wrecked the 85 bears is getting old and just sounds like bitching for the sake of bitching. He'll we even have people now saying they didn't even enjoy the iu game which was probably one of the most exciting victories we've had in the last decade.

I don't know what the hell people want or expect. Dave clawson would probably be 2-2 right now as well.

They don't?

http://www.seahawks.com/videos-photos/v ... 558292b1a6" target="_blank

[Mr_Sweets]

Someone get that video to the BG staff Most Rikki Tik!

[mscarn]

Forget the defensive scheme, the offensive scheme, the execution, the play-calling, the injuries, the quality of the opposition, the tackling, the pursuit angles, the merits and drawbacks of up-tempo offenses, the evolution of college football, the ability of teams from outside the P5 conferences to compete, the comments to the media, the nature of being a fan, the schemes of past coaching regimes and everything else. Let's focus on what's really important.

How did the uniforms look?

[bgbill]

Let's focus on what's really important. How did the uniforms look?

generic

[Flipper]

WTF? Of course "that approach " worked against IU...they were something like 3/12 on third downs and 1/4 on 4th. We gave up too many big plays in the second half...because we didn't tackle well. We could have andprobably should have put up 60 against IU because we left two or three TD 's on the field in the first half because our QB misfired

This "we were lucky to win because they screwed up " bit is the biggest crock of s**t imaginable . We forced a fumble ..it's called making a play. It's how you win games

[ikenyon]

WTF? Of course "that approach " worked against IU...they were something like 3/12 on third downs and 1/4 on 4th. We gave up too many big plays in the second half...because we didn't tackle well. We could have andprobably should have put up 60 against IU because we left two or three TD 's on the field in the first half because our QB misfired

This "we were lucky to win because they screwed up " bit is the biggest crock of s**t imaginable . We forced a fumble ..it's called making a play. It's how you win games

If you think giving up 580 yards and 42 points at home is a success, I can't help you. Bowling Green was forced to score on every offensive drive in the second half to win that game because the defense played so poorly. When you put up 571 yards and 45 points, you should be winning games decidedly, not squeaking by with a last second TD. That game was a total defensive failure.

Indiana averaged 8.5 ypa and 6.4 ypc. The reason Indiana's 3rd and 4th down conversion rates were so low were because Indiana kept shooting themselves in the foot (11 penalties, 143 yards) and that put themselves into 3rd and long situations.

[Schadenfreude]

This team will NOT win more than four games this year and will lose to Toledo for the fifth straight time.

I'm uneasy about what we saw Saturday and I am beginning to wonder if Babers is in over his head, but this is taking things way too far.

Just four games? No freaking way.

[Falcon Commander]

Of those 5, only 2 played today.

And I don't think anybody makes tackling a priority in practice. Do college teams even do it? Nfl teams sure don't. Taking angles in practice is awesome against bg, but wisconsins athletes were in a different level even than indiana.

The defense sucked today, no argument there. But this overwhelming notion that Babers and company came in here and wrecked the 85 bears is getting old and just sounds like bitching for the sake of bitching. He'll we even have people now saying they didn't even enjoy the iu game which was probably one of the most exciting victories we've had in the last decade.

I don't know what the hell people want or expect. Dave clawson would probably be 2-2 right now as well.

They don't?

http://www.seahawks.com/videos-photos/v ... 558292b1a6" target="_blank

maybe only Super Bowl Champions teach and practice Tackling

[hammb]

WTF? Of course "that approach " worked against IU...they were something like 3/12 on third downs and 1/4 on 4th. We gave up too many big plays in the second half...because we didn't tackle well. We could have andprobably should have put up 60 against IU because we left two or three TD 's on the field in the first half because our QB misfired

This "we were lucky to win because they screwed up " bit is the biggest crock of s**t imaginable . We forced a fumble ..it's called making a play. It's how you win games

If you think giving up 580 yards and 42 points at home is a success, I can't help you. Bowling Green was forced to score on every offensive drive in the second half to win that game because the defense played so poorly. When you put up 571 yards and 45 points, you should be winning games decidedly, not squeaking by with a last second TD. That game was a total defensive failure.

Indiana averaged 8.5 ypa and 6.4 ypc. The reason Indiana's 3rd and 4th down conversion rates were so low were because Indiana kept shooting themselves in the foot (11 penalties, 143 yards) and that put themselves into 3rd and long situations.

Semantics.

Flip (nor I) have said the defense is playing well.

The contention is that I think the defense is playing shitty because they're missing tackles and guys need to play better. Others here are arguing the defense would be all world still if Clawson were here and is only playing poorly because the new system sucks.

I think the scheme can work just fine if we find some guys to actually start executing. And I don't care how good the defense was last year (which is arguable, IMO), the guys aren't playing well this year, PERIOD.

And to flip's point, the scheme worked exactly as it should have in the IU game. Bend, but don't break. Had they executed it and NOT broken, those 3rd & 4th down stats show how it could have worked. Unfortunately, again, the team couldn't tackle and there were a ton of HUGE plays against us. I don't care what scheme you run if you can't freaking tackle you're gonna get lit up. That's on the players.

[hammb]

Of those 5, only 2 played today.

And I don't think anybody makes tackling a priority in practice. Do college teams even do it? Nfl teams sure don't. Taking angles in practice is awesome against bg, but wisconsins athletes were in a different level even than indiana.

The defense sucked today, no argument there. But this overwhelming notion that Babers and company came in here and wrecked the 85 bears is getting old and just sounds like bitching for the sake of bitching. He'll we even have people now saying they didn't even enjoy the iu game which was probably one of the most exciting victories we've had in the last decade.

I don't know what the hell people want or expect. Dave clawson would probably be 2-2 right now as well.

They don't?

http://www.seahawks.com/videos-photos/v ... 558292b1a6" target="_blank

Kudos to Pete Carrol for making tackling a priority without actually tackling.

What I meant by NFL teams don't do it, is they're not allowed to really have actual Tackling in practice, and I don't think most college teams do much live tackling in practice either. Kudos to Pete Carroll for developing some good tackling drills that you can do when you don't have players in pads...clearly it's worked as Seattle is a pretty damned good tackling team.

[Flipper]

Yes..they system worked against IU..did it work perfectly? No..because we missed opportunities on offense in the first half and missed assignments in the second half that turned short yardage plays into easy TD's. That IS NOT A SYSTEM ISSUE. It is an EXECUTION ISSUE.

I've been on this board from day one..over 10 years..and with the possible exception of Urban meyer, who few people criticized (largely because he wasn't Gar y Backney and we actually won a few) I don't think we've had a smart coach. At least the people here haven't thought so...

[kdog27]

"Others here are arguing the defense would be all world still if Clawson were here and is only playing poorly because the new system sucks. "

Sorry for the amateur quote job, phone is not cooperating. Anyway, I don't think anyone here has been saying that. I think a lot of people here know we had a great defense for stopping crappy MAC defenses and bigger schools could often expose it. That said, they were only exposed one time last year. Hell they shutout Mississippi State in the second half last year, a team with a ridiculously athletic QB. Other than the Indiana game, our three other losses were a combined ten points. A good balance of offense and defense either won or kept us in 13 out of 14 games.

Did we rollout the same defense to start this year? Certainly not. Still there was reasonable expectations that the 5-6 returning starters coupled with a few others that have seen a lot of playing time would be decent. I realize that there are now injuries everywhere but they went out on the field 100% healthy and let WKU put on a clinic. We have played 4 games and two of these teams had records days offensively. And both called off the dogs! 2-2 or not, there is a big problem there.

Look man, usually I think you're pretty spot on about college and the NFL, but I'm having a tough time wrapping my head around what I have seen out of the offense and defense. Did you watch the last 6 or so games last year? After the first half of the UT game we weren't winning games with classic Clawson ball. It was a kickass offense that was scoring from anywhere on the field that won those games. We were blowing teams out, not winning 21-13 bore fests. I'll take that offense over this one. I can see the advantages of it, I definitely do. When it works it is great but the problem is when it doesn't you just put your already gassed defense back on the field and 40 seconds is gone off the game clock. Yeah he can have the attitude that the offense should score every time they have the ball. That's all great to say but not realistic whether we're in the fourth game of this offense or the 40th. Sometimes the offense needs to win games, sometimes the defense needs to win game, sometimes it's special teams and more often than not it's a combination of all three that matter.

I don't know what I'm even trying to get at. I know you don't like what you saw Saturday any more than me. I guess you can see the light at the end of the tunnel and I'm just not seeing it.

[Siborg]

That was difficult to watch this weekend but we are still 2-2 and have 8 MAC games coming up. I hope a few guys can come back from injury and the inexperienced players get better fast. I'd hate to see BG be party to opponents' record books this year like being the first on campus victory over a D1A opponent for UMass or break Miami's 20+ game losting streak.

As decent as Knapke looked in the second half aghainst IU, he really struggled this weekend. Receivers were open all over the place but he could not seem to get any kind of rythm going. And when he scrambles, he really makes me appreciate Johnson's ability to throw on the run. Oh well, not all his fault and I think he will get better since its only his 3rd start. Remember Johnson did not look all that great in his first 3 games last year either. Tulsa gave us that game, Kent turned out to be a bad team and then we were thumped by IU and yet we finished strong.

This was a bad team effort other than maybe the punter. This was both the best running team we will face and the best defense we will face all year by far. That does not excuse the scale of the destruction we saw but it might mean we will not see the like again.

On a positive note......I didn't notice any injuries in this game, hopefully that turns out to be true.