HiAndTight

I watched this game on DVR and some of the calls were just comical. I'm not even talking about this one(which was bad) but there were calls both ways where there was just absolutely no contact and fouls were called. There was the one on Giannis, it might have been the 6th and he does not touch anyone and he gets hit. The one on Capella...he doesn't touch him. The missed travel by Middleton. The NBA refs usually aren't this bad. That was awful across the board.

No. He did not sign it yet when he could have- that's beyond comments. That's not why I went from 95 to 50/50 though, that's more about months going by and taking the emotion out of it. Realizing a superstar staying in Milwaukee has never been something to rely on. No, he couldn't have signed it yet. The earliest he could sign it is this next off-season. Hence Horst saying they PLAN on offering him the SuperMax and Giannis talking about what he'd do in the future. I don't fully understand the logic behind not allowing a player to sign whenever he wants, but he hasn't not signed it yet, he simply hasn't been able to. That said, if he eventually doesn't, the Bucks only extending him for four years instead of five will have been a mistake. I'd argue that not signing Brogdon to an extension could fall into the "not doing everything they can," category. The Bucks have put together a great team, but I do think Brogdon is the second most important player on this team. A long, physical PG who's a 90/50/40 shooter? Yeah, they recovered as well as we could have expected, but they could have gone into the tax and brought him back as well...and in a potential series with the Clippers, another ball handler vs that incredible perimeter defense they should have and another great shooter may end up being big. But again, I'm with you, lets just enjoy the season and the Milwaukee Bucks being one of the four main favorites to win a NBA title.

Just came out that he was misquoted, which is pretty much what I expected. Much ado about absolutely nothing. It's not even about this comment. It's obviously not an understatement to say that the future of this franchise lies in one players decision...one players future. Even him just saying I'm not talking about it and him putting conditions on it is concerning to me. I don't blame him, but I'm more cognizant of how lucky we are to be able to watch him right now and root for him for at least 80+ games this year and just hope the Bucks can perform well enough that he wants to stay.

I think the Packers are going to have a lot of empty seats at Lambeau if they happen to go through a prolonged drought after Rodgers retires. It's not easy to sell tickets to a lot of games now and they've got one of the greatest QB's to play. After a ~30 year run of HOF play at the QB position, if the Packers are picking in the top 10 in multiple years...things are gonna get ugly. I certainly wouldn't buy a Dog if I was LaFleur. But hopefully that's a long way off.

I always hated that "Packer people," nonsense. You're playing football, not running a car pool. I guess I do seem to remember fans being pretty critical of other players and getting on the Vikings for the boat thing years ago. Still...it doesn't seem as blatantly hypocritical as the Cards but I suppose if I were a Cards fan I probably wouldn't recognize that as well as others did.

It is mostly the Badgers abandoning the play action. I think this is a problem with the offensive line and their pass blocking not allowing enough time for the play action to work. Perfect example of this was the final 3rd down possession the Badgers had last week. They went with a pass play that was horribly called against a cover 2 defense which Illinois runs. The receiver didn't get deep enough into the cover 2 and it was picked off. If the Badgers instead would have ran play action on that play I think they hit for a big play and put the game out of reach. The Badgers were running play action earlier in the season but it looks like the offensive line is just not allowing for the play action to develop as the QB is getting rushed far to quickly for the play action play to work correctly. I hope this weekend they play some more play action as I believe the Badgers can exploit Ohio State stacking the line against JT. Play action can also open up the running game as the safeties won't be able to play up as much and the linebackers will have to stay back. The Badgers don't have to hit the deep ball to be successful they just need to be able to run the play action more. Even a gain of 10-15 yards on play action can start to move those safeties back and make the linebackers play less aggressively at the line. Don't think Illinois was in cover 2 on that play. Can't see the whole field, but it certainly didn't look like Cover 2.

No, that's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying I don't know. How does anyone judge one way or the other? Is it Randolph's fault that David Edwards didn't become the 1st round pick that he was projected to be at one point, or was he(Edwards) just not that good. You need a larger sample size than how he does with one unit. I didn't say they shouldn't make Bostad the OL coach, I just don't know how you assign blame. Unless you're with the program, I don't know how you say this position coach is better than another over a 3 year period where they have success..but now as much as you'd like. Also, is Bostad best as an OL coach? Same thing applies here. The LB'ers have done a great job this year. Maybe's just a great coach. Maybe having a former OL coach is helpful.

I'm not calling anyone a liar....but if you're a Bucks fan and you're not worried about anything Giannis says that isn't, "I'm definitely staying in Milwaukee," you're lying

The Hill contract wasn't good, neither was the Middleton contract, but you have to overpay sometimes. If Hill's as awful as he was in the regular season but as good as he was in the playoffs, he's worth it. I also think the "Giannis Wall," is exaggerated. Teams aren't game planning in the regular season like that and the only team that was really able to pull it off was Toronto and even then only after they put Kawhi on him. He'll Euro step around everyone but Philly and vs Philly, he'll just have to work harder to get points. At least in the East. The Clippers are the obvious favorites, but who knows how things will play out over the next ~95-100 games before we'd even get to them. I don't think you see the Bucks do anything different this year. It's just a matter of growth as a team and for Giannis personally. And even then, it's really about maintaining what they did in the regular season and then taking the next step in the post-season. And I certainly hope he's improved his shot. He was hitting 30 pct two years ago, so if he's back down to 25 this year....that's not a good sign. It's a sign that he's stagnating and I don't think he's there yet. Though probably more important than his 3 point shot is that 15-18 footer, or that runner so he doesn't have to finish through contact at the rim the majority of the time. If he can shoot 35 pct from 3...a attainable goal IMO and add that mid range game, he's going to be impossible for anyone to guard. And giving his shot, I don't see why he wouldn't continue to improve. As for Bender...I don't know what to expect. He'd probably take minutes from Ersan(likely to miss some games(Wilson) and that's about it at the 4. They're not real deep there, though obviously Giannis can and does play there. If he plays, it'll be because he's fitting in with the offense well and knocking down shots. I'm a huge fan of that signing. Very little risk in signing the 7 footer who can shoot and was drafted 4th just a couple years ago and is still just 21. What I've read about him is that he's a smart player, a really good passing big and he's got a soft touch. I don't think they're counting on him, but if he does produce, that'd be huge for the organization. I'm gonna miss Brogdon, but after coming to terms with that loss, I'm excited about this roster. I can't wait to see if Cam Reynolds can establish himself as a player in this league. He looked like he had the potential to be a late bloomer last year with the Wolves. Bender still has a ton of upside, Donte Divencenzo has had a great pre-season(or so I hear). DJ Wilson....there are a lot of young guys who are going to be in positions to thrive with Giannis, Middleton and Bledsoe taking up most of the attention. I think the Bucks finish with 62 wins, the #1 seed and the go to the Finals to face...hopefully ANYONE but the Clippers. If they play any team other than the Clipps, I think they'll win the title this year and Giannis will sign the Super Max.

I don't think they will be. I have a feeling he plays, and this game becomes one of those legendary games for a young QB. The type that people point to. Like Favre playing with that brutal ankle injury and absolutely carving up that Bears defense for 4 or 5 TD's. Or like when Favre played after his Dad died(though that wasn't so much great QB play as great WR'er play on most of those). Otherwise, if Mahomes doesn't play, I think Snapper was right about his take on this game. The Packers match up well with KC...they'd match up far better if they had Raven Greene back, but I can't fine anyone to give us any information on what his actual injury even was, but that's another story. The Packers should be able to put up 30 points on KC. Jones should be able to get going and get 100+ yards, our tackles should be able to shut down Clark and their pass rushers and the bulldozer Jenkins should be able to open some lanes. If no Mahomes, I think we win a 30-27 type game. If he plays, I think it'll be a 45-28 type game. I had the Packers at 4-3 here in a rather optimistic scenario after 7 games, and losing the next 2 heading into the season, so winning vs one of the two AFC favorites is just gravy at this point for me.

Yeah, it's pretty hard to argue that Bostad should be coaching the OL. I don't know if it's actually Rudolph or if it's the players as we just don't have a big enough sample size yet. You're talking about really this being the first group of players that Chryst has recruited and that's almost all his team. And like I said in another post, I just think the OL we've had the last few years have been overrated outside of Biadazz. And yes, I know that's not how his name is spelled. David Edwards was awful at tackle, Van Lannen is young and there's a good chance we have two new starters at tackle next year. So I don't have enough to go on to know if that change is really needed or if it's just the players. That's the thing with CFB and why these big programs who cycle through coaches are so stupid. It takes 4-5 years for you to really put your stamp on a program and make it yours. You come in and you're coaching players you didn't recruit, then when you start recruiting guys, it obviously takes a while. I will say this, I that '09 OL with Gordon had some games where they were not opening up lanes for him. That's why Gordon's the best back in Badger history in MY opinion. He was just so good at bouncing that outside when there was nothing there and hitting the HR. Taylor's great...in fact, I've started thinking the last few weeks, given how important it is for the Packers to have that consistent running game because so much of the offense operates off of that one zone stretch play, it'd be a good idea to make sure you've got a young stud and a two headed duo at RB. Jamal Williams is a nice back, but nothing special. He doesn't have great vision or great feet. He just hits the hole and runs hard. And that's fine in a power ISO scheme, but in the ZBS, you need guys who have great vision, who can find that cutback lane as that's what you're looking for. But I think next year if PC's offense isn't really humming with a Sr at QB, a veteran OL(or a young OL that had some guys beat out vets) and a really-really talented set of skill players on the outside, then I'll start to get concerned, but they just haven't had a very talented offense the last few years outside of Taylor. Hornibrook showed he had a ton of potential at times, but the fact that he was so often so bad tells you he just did not have any of the intangibles needed at that position. What is Bostad's current job? I forget why he left. Didn't he go to Tampa after he wasn't kept on by Anderson or something? I'm kinda embarrassed I don't even know what he's coaching or what he's doing right now. But I thought he was a bright up and coming coach. I'd think he's be the #2 voice on the offensive side of the ball or least influential with Randolph(of course I could just google his name and look it up). But I do kinda look at it like pitching and hitting coaches. You know sometimes when you've got a really good one(Derek Johnson) but it's not always easy to tell if the coach is doing poorly or if the players just aren't that good. That's where I am with Randolph. I just don't know....but again, wouldn't hurt to bring back one of the best coaches we've had in UW in the last 20 years to coach his natural position. Speaking of which, how much credit does Gary Anderson get for bringing Dave Aranda in here and changing our defensive scheme? One we've stuck with since he's left. He really transformed the Badgers defensively from a solid, bend but don't break type defense to a hair on fire, attacking, aggressive style that has been the Badgers calling card for a while now. Last I heard he was getting a record breaking contract from LSU, but I wonder if he gets a HC gig anywhere this year or in the near future. He's the type of guy I could see bringing in a big time offensive coordinator, being here for 4-5 years, maybe getting some top 10 recruiting classes and then bolting when Michigan offers to double his salary.

LB ??? I fully agree that next year's team could be better all things considered. We will essentially lose 4 or 5 impact players, which is a really small hit. I even made a post earlier in the thread about the lack of seniors this year. However, Orr and Baun are going to be tough to replace and presumably get better. Those are two really good football players and make up half of the LB core. I think it actually will be. Sandborn will be a JR and he's looking like he's going to be a dominant player. I think next year he takes a step to where Baun is right now. Chenel is an absolute beast and looks like he's going to be a stud vs the run and as a pass rusher. Cj Goetz is a guy that the staff is really high on from what I've heard. A guy who could play outside of play as a stack LB'er. Noah Burks has really flashed, and then they have some really-really talented guys like Jaylan Franklin, a converted TE who picked UW over Michigan, plus incoming freshmen Nick Herbig...who will probably only get spot PT, but is a borderline top 100 prospect. So I think they could be ever better, but it's College Football...you don't really know until they're out there. But one thing that's going to help them out a TON if Loudermilk is back, Rand is back, their entire DL is back and their secondary is back. If Rand can break out a little bit next year, they should be able to generate even more pressure with that DL and take some pressure off Sandborn and Chanel as the top edge rushers. I'm excited about that Franklin though. A 6'4 LB'er who may start out playing off the ball? He could make an enormous impact playing that hook zone with his athletic ability and his length. I don't know if that's definitely the plan for him, but I could see that being his best position.

Well...4.6 YPC by Taylor isn't up to his standards, but it should be good enough in a tight game. If he can do that vs OSU, I'll be happy. We just need Coan to play smart. But I agree with most of what you said. I just thought if you watched Illinios and you didn't know what they'd done vs the directional Michigan type schools, that looked like a good team. A ~8 win type team. One the Badgers should handle, but I was just really impressed with their athleticism and their gap integrity. They did not give up the big cutback lanes for the most part. As for the Pick...it was a pick, so you're right by default. I'm just saying that watching it, I thought he looked poised and he put enough touch on it to get it over the flat defender and get the 1st down. Chryst had faith in him to finish Illinois and he didn't get it done. But that was like the opposite of watching many of Favre plays where you're yelling, "no, no....YES!" I thought he'd made the best decision. Again, just the results prove I was objectively wrong. Finally, I'll say this, Twins keeps talking about Bostad on the OL. Maybe the OL group they've had just aren't that talented. Maybe we expect 3 star guys to become mid round picks in the NFL and I few get a few top recruits, we expect them to be dominant and that just hasn't worked out the last few years. It was especially evident with that Dieter/Dietzen/Edwards group that was hailed as the best OL UW had had for years(or would be) as they were all starting when they were young, but it became obvious...they're just overrated. Now the Badgers do have a chance to build some big time momentum with Mertz. If he can come in and develop into elite CFB QB and the Badgers start throwing the ball 30 times a game because they have that type of talent, I think that could lead to them attacking more talent and that could lead to the WR'ers coming. But I also thought that Bart Houston was going to help propel the Badgers when they signed him and he ended up going down with knee injuries. They've got some young guys on the OL and they've got a ton of talent in last years class and next years class. If they can build a truly dominant OL and Mertz can develop....maybe the get lucky and find themselves back in the hunt for a playoff.

This is the glaring exception. I do think though that the Packers liked to talk up their organization and the "Packer way," a bit too much around that 2010 SB win. But that doesn't even approach the Carpenter and his "what will I tell my kids," crap and then screaming and cussing players out while he's on the mound in the World Series. As for the Packers poor luck, they've also had some pretty incredible wins. That win to get over the hump vs the 49'ers in the 90's, the way for years they would win 5 out of 6 to make the playoffs and you just felt even if they were 2 back with 6 to go they were fine, the Seattle game when they were own 14 in the first couple minutes after two Ryan Grant fumbles and then ran them out. The Cowboys games where Dez was robbed of what was clearly a catch(though I'm 100 pct confident Rodgers woulda have taken the Packers back down to at least get in FG position) and then when Crosby hit a 56 and a 51 yard FG in the final 2:30 along with a historic play by Rodgers to get them there. The Hail Marry's vs Detroit and the two vs the Cardinals of Arizona. And the MLB Cards have had some clunkers. Matt Holliday anyone?

First of all....I got every reference but Thanos. I'm assuming he's some God of...War or something in Greek Mythology. The Patriots really are just on another level. I do think the idea that they can just throw anyone out there is a little overblown. One of the most underrated things about Belichick is his ability to identify the right guy to fit what he wants in a football player and then go out and get him. He'll do it with under the radar type guys in Welker and Edelmen, and he'll do it with marquee signings like Gilmore. How in the hell he can let Nate Solder and Trent Brown go in back to back years is beyond me, but that's what makes him great. Despite Isaiah Wynn missing all year, he knew he could step in and start at LT. That's just as important as his schematic advantages and his regimen. And I said this in another thread, but he exploits the market. When EVERY TEAM is going one way, he goes the other. He signs LeGarrette Blount for 2 million dollars, watches him pound the ball in for 18 TD's then moves on from him and just loads up on basically several really poor man Christian McCaffery's. What Badger fan thought that James White would amount to anything? Yet he's been a huge part of their success. Anyway, I'd say you're right in that the Packers most closely resemble the Cardinals EXCEPT that Baseball is a very different sport than Football. The Packers don't take themselves too seriously. They don't have their own standard that they play by and a different one that everyone else is supposed to play with. They are jubilant and celebrate and consistently good. That would be the biggest difference I would see. But if I was a Bears or Vikings fan, I'd probably have that same disdain. Especially a Bears fan as the Vikings have had their own success actually going through the Packers whereas the Bears have not. I think you're about 75 pct on to something here. There are a lot of similarities. The fan bases of both can be a little pretentious. They both ACT like they have this standard that players have to live up to when in reality, they just try not to pick guys who are going to act like clowns. They don't take many big risks, though they do occasionally sign a Colt Lyrela. The fanbases tout that high "character," that their players have....regardless if it's true or not and they're both older fan bases...though the Cards aren't nearly as old as the average fan at Lambeau. So...yeah, that was a random post and I have some words for you that wouldn't make it past the filter for making me come to the conclusion that the Packers and the Cardinals share SOME similarities.

Exactly how long do you think it'd take for a WR'er who's never played in a Shanahan system to come in to Green Bay, learn the system and then develop chemistry with Rodgers? Just getting a bit name guy in the middle of the season is almost certainly not going to help the Packers offense. The Packers next significant additions to their offense will be the draft most likely. I'd have brought Cobb back for 5 million dollars, but we didn't. Also, I don't really see a problem with the skill group we have. If Rodgers would trust them a bit more as he did last week, we'd be fine. He threw a couple of balls into tight window's and the Packers came up with them. I think the only difference is Rodgers is just starting to get this offense down and starting to trust some of his receivers a bit more. Exactly! I personally feel the current receiving room has as much talent and big play ability as it's had since 2011. The team has never had receivers with the type of size/speed combination that these guys currently bring to the table. We are a far cry from having to trot retreads or never-will-be's like Andrae Thurman, Jarrett Boykin, Ruvell Martin or Trevor Davis out there. I actually think Trevor Davis is a victim of Rodgers. I think he's a talented WR'er, but Rodgers just doesn't give guys the chance. Darius Shepard appears to be an elite route runner. But he threw one to him and he slipped and it was a 10 point swing. Because of that, I'd be surprised to see him get another chance. Janis is another guy. I remember Janis was in there on a play down inside the 5 and he ran a fade and Rodgers threw a quick out and that was pretty much it. Didn't matter that he was big and fast and obviously very good with the ball in his hands, he didn't trust him. But aside from that minor disagreement on Davis aside, if you include St. Brown in that group, I'd agree, they have the talent they need. I think they do need to pick up a Jennings/Driver-ish type receiver, someone who's good in the slot, a smooth route runner and good after the catch, but they can only do so much in one off-season. And if Rodgers is willing to continue to take those underneath routes like he did earlier in his career, I think we're going to see more of those big plays. I think teams have been creeping up on us...and the few times Rodgers had gone over the top the last couple years when dealing with injuries, he's been missing. For the record, if the Vikes would EVER contemplate a trade with us, I would give up a 1st for Diggs. I love watching him and his style of play. Beyond that, I guess I'd be looking at OJ Howard as a trade target? But I think you're looking at a 2nd rounder there also and that's pretty rich. I'm still of the opinion that the Packers need to add to the defensive side of the ball. Patrick Peterson....the Cards said they were trading him and they(various reporters) were talking about a 3rd/4th for him. They're giving up too much separation on these routes and Peterson is a stud corner. But mainly it's just because I think Rodgers is too fickle with his WR'ers and it's easier to fit in a defensive player mid-season than an offensive player. The one area that I think Favre was better, he could get by with lesser WR'ers because he didn't seem to care who he was throwing it to. Rodgers seems to be more demanding and far less forgiving. Bill Schroder never even approaches 1000 yards with Aaron Rodgers. In fact I think he probably doesn't end up matching Jeff Janis' production.

It's not even just the defense though, it's him picking Wes Welker, a nobody from the Dolphins and seeing how he's going to fit with the Pats. It's taking Troy Brown and moving him from WR to CB and winning a SB. It's just him being willing to take 10 shots hoping that a few really hit. He's constantly taking former 1st round picks, plugging them into certain packages and thriving. It's also him constantly rebuilding his offensive line with tackles and continually finding gems there. If you had someone who was in charge of all the personel moves and you were just losing Belichick, then I'd agree. But he's the guy who picked Jimmy G, who drafted Brisset, he's the guy calling the shots. He's the guy who spent bit money on Gilmore, maybe the best Corner in the NFL right now outside of Ramsey. Maybe they bring back Matt Patricia(the one coach who I think will really have success) and their coaching doesn't fall off, or maybe it's McDaniels. But you still need that guy who's able to look at the FA pile and identify the best bargains and how they'll fit and constantly stay one step ahead of the rest of the NFL. Brady ages, he starts to lose a little arm strength and he loads the roster with 9 Running backs who can catch the ball out of the backfield or run it. He can sign a RB for 2 million dollars, watch them score 18 TD's and then move on and do it with a 5th round pick. I hate the guy(in how you "hate" anyone in sports) but....damn, he's just amazing. He's Billy Beane but actually worth the hype, perfected and on an equal playing field...AND the best at coaching and he has the most disciplined team.

Is this serious? Are you just sharing your opinion and presenting it as fact? They're a good team, but how exactly are you determining that this I their best? They've probably played 6 teams that will end up drafting in the top 10 including probably the 4 worst teams in the NFL. Their opponents record laughable. They've beaten the Bills. That's the good team they've beat. They've got a really good defense and a marginal offense. This seems like a Skip Bayless comment. There's absolutely no way to compare this team to any of the other teams they've played. Not when the 2nd best team they've played is the New York Giants. I'm guessing this is about my comment. I thought I played the sarcasm on pretty thick there, but I'll try better next time. I was just commenting on the constant love letters McFarland was writing to the patriots during the game last night. It was pretty nauseating. Oh...my bad man. I didn't watch that game. It is almost comical how bad the Bills schedule has been. They've played the worst teams and they're already getting handed the Lombardi trophy. But as you can see by "Booger," which again, I think it's ridiculous a grown man takes pride in that nickname, the fawning over them is reaching a fevor pitch. Lets see what they do vs Lamar Jackson or Mahomes. As great as BB is, the Pats have had the benefit of playing in what's largely been a terrible division for nearly his entire tenure. Only the Jets have put together serious runs.

The Denver Broncos were not a "dumpster fire" franchise. They were a well run franchise who was in the Super Bowl not long after him and he's considered the best coach to come from that organization. I mean, hell, they've been given a chance everywhere. Is Kansas City a "dumpster fire" organization? They seem to be pretty well run. The Texans were a team loaded with talent and Bill O'Brien is doing some incredibly stupid things. They traded two firsts for a solid but not great LT and they traded away one of the top edge defenders in the NFL for a 3rd round pick, a 3rd round pick they just traded for a average Corner in Garrett Conley. Is Notre Dame a dumpster fire CFB program? That's just a ridiculous statement blaming the multitude of coaching failures on the franchises. If your argument is they have these great coaches who've been learning under BB, then why don't any of them translate that success when they leave? Why can't any of them turn around those moribund franchises while others come in after them and get them to the next level? And you're saying two totally different things. Nobody said they'd "call it a day" after Belichick and Brady are gone, we're saying those two(and I'd argue it's really Belichick) who's responsible. Yeah, they'll keep trying to win after they lose the greatest coach and most accomplished QB ever, but I guess I don't really get your argument. But to go back to your first question, YES, it absolutely should be reflective of Belichick when his top and most respected coordinators and personnel people go elsewhere and all fail miserably. It should show you just how great he is and how unlikely it is that they're even able to approximate that level of consistency after he's done.

I don't really agree that the Offense isn't going yet. I think the offense has been fine, we've just had a very inconsistent QB. That's everything. If you don't have a dependable QB, you're not going to have a dependable offense. But it's got nothing to do with scheme or anything the HC can do. The Badgers and Hornibrook were pretty good two years ago when they lost just one game by 6 points. The pound the ball...they've done that very well with Taylor. And they have recruited very well. They're in the midst of a recruiting "boon" relative to where they normally recruit. But I've been called a homer before by some on this board...and I think it might just come down to this, as much as I love UW, they just aren't ever going to be able to put the athletes on the field that the top tier teams will. Look at our recruiting classes. Our top DB's usually come out of Florida and we're certainly not getting the 4 and 5 star guys. We dip into New Jersey once in a while, but again, we're not getting the blue chip guys. We're recruiting mostly the mid-west and the talent just isn't there, and if it is, it's in the two biggest states, Penn and Ohio and one isn't really the mid-west, but both have blue chip programs there. So maybe people need to adjust expectations. If you expect the Badgers to be a dominant program....you're gonna be upset when they lose to Iowa or Northwestern and then have some really ugly losses like the BYU loss(which I actually agree was a worse loss than the Illinios loss, point spread aside). Again, short of a Phil Knight coming in and helping us build up top tier facilities and fund the program....we're pretty much bumping up against the ceiling this program has. What's more, given the choice between a Kirby Smart type coach...a guy who lets just assume he can bring the recruits he's gotten with him to Madison, we get him for...4-5 years. And if we do win a National Title or get into a few playoff's, he's going to be the guy who leaves for 'Bama when Saban leaves or he's the guy that A&M is going to pay 90 million to. The way the Badgers athletic department is set up, we're never paying a coach 9.3 million like Dabo is getting paid. We're maxing out around 3 million and if we do that, we're not paying our assistants as much. So not only do I think Chryst is a good coach, I wouldn't trade him for any other coach in the country. Not Saban who is near the end, not Dabo who's in a perfect place and who will probably leave for his Alma mater(Alabama) if he ever leaves. Not even Lincoln Riley as he's also a short term coach who will use Wisconsin as a stepping stone. I'll take my chances with 15 years of Paul Chryst and see if we can't put together one of those lucky years like we ALMOST did when JJ and Russ Wilson just missed each other. Or the chances we MIGHT have if Graham Mertz ends up being as good as expected. We're a consistent top 15 program with recruiting classes that usually rank on the high end at 35-ish and are often now in the top 40. Now we're looking at being ~20? Look back at Taylor. He wasn't even the highest rated Taylor in the Badgers class. AJ Taylor was a higher rated recruit and we only had to beat out Rutgers for Johnathon Taylor. So we do so much more with our talent than so many programs. Part of that is being in one of the weakest divisions in all of CFB's conferences, but...I'm not gonna apologize for that. The only way we consistently get into OSU territory is if we can start getting ESPN 300 skill players and put the type of speed on the field that OSU does AND keep doing everything else we do. And I just don't see top 10 corners consistently coming to UW or elite WR'ers. How many legit lock down corners have we had at UW? Fletcher and....Vincent? Nelson looked really good for a year, but we don't get many. We have young talent now, but I don't see future 1st rounders. Ohio State is pumping out guys like Humphrey, Conley, Lattimore and they're coming back and producing more 1st the next year. That Illinois loss hurt and stung. I love Wisconsin. It's been great for me. But on balance, I'm thrilled with where the program is and still excited about the rest of this season.

Does anyone give Illinois any credit for that game? They usually recruit pretty well. Watching that game, there was no doubt to me that UW was more talented, but also that Illinios was much-MUCH more talented that their record and performance to date suggested. That second half vs Michigan really propelled them to that UW win. I did not read the game thread, so I don't know what people were saying. I just remember watching Coan throw that last pass and when he let it go, I thought he made a great throw and floated that over that flat defender and the Illinois guy just made a play. But mainly I thought their defensive front looked good and that MLB'er looked like a stud. Anyway, I wouldn't put this up there for biggest upset, but what about the year Lee Evans had that ~80 yard TD catch late in the game to beat top ranked OSU? I think it was like 2002, 2003? That, the Purdue game where I wanna say it was Jamar Fletcher who forced a fumble vs that Drew Brees led Purdue team. Again, not an upset like the one we just suffered, but incredible wins.

I’m shocked at the spread. OSU by 14? No way. I don't know, what would you put it at? This OSU team looks better than past versions in my opinion. Fields is just a perfect CFB QB. He's like a Lamar Jackson...they've got a great running game, great players across the board. I think UW has a chance, but I don't think that's really an unfair line.

This is why I'm so excited about Tonyan and so disappointed he hasn't put it together with Rodgers yet. When you have a TE who can run away from LB'ers and just go up and block out safeties, you're forced to play with another good cover man on the field and that opens up the running game. That's the key component we're missing, not a big name WR'er. A TE who can open up the middle of the field. Jared Cook should still be a Packer, but he turned down more from GB than he ended up getting in Oakland. Now he's on probably the best team in the NFC. But even when Cook was here, he didn't really make an impact until the end of the season. So Tonyan still has a chance to get back and make a difference. Though the fact that they decided to bring Sternberger back from IR despite the fact that he'd shown very little this year makes me think that Tonyan has a more serious injury than just a hip flexor or something(though those are bad enough).

Exactly how long do you think it'd take for a WR'er who's never played in a Shanahan system to come in to Green Bay, learn the system and then develop chemistry with Rodgers? Just getting a bit name guy in the middle of the season is almost certainly not going to help the Packers offense. The Packers next significant additions to their offense will be the draft most likely. I'd have brought Cobb back for 5 million dollars, but we didn't. Also, I don't really see a problem with the skill group we have. If Rodgers would trust them a bit more as he did last week, we'd be fine. He threw a couple of balls into tight window's and the Packers came up with them. I think the only difference is Rodgers is just starting to get this offense down and starting to trust some of his receivers a bit more.

That actually seems worse, somehow. It seems like the people who dislike Chryst didn't like him being hired in the first place, and his fairly significant amount of success as a coach has done nothing to change that opinion, for some reason. I'm genuinely curious who "that guy," is that people think the Badgers could hire who could take us to the next level? I expected some overreaction to the loss, but I really didn't see this loss getting blamed on Chryst. I'd like to hear one single realistic name thrown out that. Who is the better coach the Badgers could get. Lincoln Riley isn't leaving Oklahoma to come to Madison. You MIGHT be able to steal a coordinator who's already recruiting elite talent from a school like Alabama, UGA, Clemson...and if they have the type of success Chryst has had, another school will hire them away in a few years(and they almost certainly won't be better than Chryst, just different.) The Badgers have the perfect coach for them in place right now. There is no coach who's going to elevate them to Alabama, UGA type status. A great year for us is when we're a top 20 recuirting class. That's just about the worst case scenario for most of the elite programs. And it's not because they just don't try. We don't have the same pool of talent to recruit from or the same money to spend.