JosephC

QB-Billy Edwards, expected to get a medical redshirt for this past year, is now in the portal.

Running back coach Devon Spalding is leaving Wisconsin and heading to Michigan State to coach under Pat Fitzgerald.

Justin Fields got a 2 year, 40 million dollar deal. He crapped out with the Bears, but then went to Pittsburgh and had a 4-2 record as a starter and a QB rating of 93.3. Despite his first round pedigree, his extensive starting experience, and a decent showing in his last year before the contract...he could still only get 2 years, 40 million dollars. I would think that would be the upside for Willis. Someone could take him on as a short-term bandage and give him that type of deal. But I still think the vast majority of the league sees him as a backup, and he will probably get a backup type deal, which still could be pretty considerable (maybe 1 year for 8.5 million, or two years for 15 million?). Unfortunately, anyway you look at it, it will be enough to price him out of Green Bay.

Gary is the prime example of a guy who plays when he wants to play. He's as good as he wants to be. He's had that reputation ever since his sophomore year at Michigan. He has two years left on his deal, but will know that he would be an easy, no-brainer cut after 2026 with a cap number of 31 million (in 2027) and a savings of 22.5 million if he is released. In other words, I would expect a very motivated and a very good Gary in 2026 as he will be playing for his next contract. Unfortunately, if you give him another big contract after 2026, it's almost a guarantee that 2026 will be the last great year he will have. BTW, if the Packers do a full restructure on him after this season, which I would expect, the cap number in 2027 balloons to 40 million, but the Packers would still get the same 22.5 million in savings if he is released after 2026. Largely based on Parsons injury, I think probably the best course of action is to do the restructure on Gary for 2026, and then release/trade him after the year is done and take the 18 million dollar cap hit in 2027. Walking away from him leaves too much up in the air at the position with Parsons likely to miss a good chunk of the season. And like I said earlier, based on the contract situation, I think chances are pretty high that we see the best out of Gary in 2026. But I wouldn't be all that shocked if they walked away from him after this season either. They are defintely not in dire straits cap-wise, but there will still be some decisions to be made after Jenkins is released. I think they should keep him and just eat the 18 million in cap space in 2027, but if they part ways with him after this year, they will likely be able to spread out the hit, resulting in about 8.5 million of dead cap space in 2026 and 2027.

Just catching up with the pros. Think of all the taxpayer money they have swindled from the public with the aid of half-idiot/half-corrupt politicians for decades now. As we've seen first-hand here in Wisconsin, those big buildings don't raise even close to enough tax revenue to "pay for themselves." What is the sales tax for the people in Milwaukee county again? I remember Scooter and Terrible Tom hand-in-hand telling us what a great deal this was and how the deer district was going to fix all financial woes, cure cancer and solve world hunger. I think the 1+ billion dollars that Wisconsin has thrown into Miller Park could have been spent better elsewhere. Like, just about anything since MLB can pay single employees 70 million dollars a year. But back to your point, I completely agree that anyone who throws 290 million into an athletic department is a moron. But at the same time, is anybody who supports the Brewers/Bucks/Packers getting a whole bunch of free public money any less a moron?

TE-Tucker Ashcraft in the portal. The Badgers still have Grant Stec and a total of 6 scholarship tight ends on the roster, so this one doesn't seem to hurt as much as other recent losses. Pretty obvious at this point that a lot of current players see the Fickell-led Badgers as a sinking ship and want to get the heck outta here. Ashcraft getting big offers from other schools? Really? And Stec/Ashcraft, Ashcraft/Stec appeared to be far and away TE1a and TE1b, there will be more than enough playing for two, so I can't see Ashcraft needing to leave because he wasn't going to get on the field. And while a lot of names have been floating around the rumor mill, I think we have out first real credible report of a player that may end up at Wisconsin. Alabama-Birmingham WR-Iverson Hooks. 5-10, 175 that plays out of the slot and has the speed to impact the deep middle of the field. Did almost nothing his first three years, and then had 87 catches, 1065 yards, 10 touchdown season in 2025. 247sports does not have an updated grade on him yet, so no idea how the experts think he stacks up with the rest of the transfer WR group.

If bigger school are going to focus on the portal and poaching players off other rosters, then it really doesn't make sense that 247 has USC, Alabama, Oregon, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Georgia, Tennessee, Texas, Texas A&M, Miami (Fl) as the top 10 high school recruiting classes. The big dogs still see value in high school recruiting, and likely view it as the foundation for the program.

RB-Dilin Jones and WR-Eugene Hilton in the transfer portal. They are now down to 3 scholarship running backs (1 true freshman) and 4 scholarship wide receivers (2 true freshman). McIntosh better have some big money ready to fill these holes, I wish I had confidence that Fickell and staff will do a good job in identifying enough talent to avoid a complete disaster, but after last year, I can't say that I do. They have also hired a new cornerbacks coach, and the old cornerbacks coach has been given a new role of "secondary coach." So they have a cornerbacks coach, a safeties coach and a secondary coach. I looked up if they were still limited to 12 "gameday" coaches, and it looks like that rule was eliminated a year ago, so nobody has to get fired to fit all these secondary coaches onto the staff.

As you said, Lions are probably just average and now even worse as they've mailed it in. Brosmer had 51 yards passing, minus 48 yards in sacks, so the Vikings had 3 yards passing in this game and the Lions still lose. That is terrible.

Two months ago, I would have said cutting Jacobs really isn't on the radar. But now I look at the roster, and with LT, C, NT, CB, CB, LB (assuming Walker gone, which it seems like the odds are better than 50/50 now) all looking like significant need areas, I don't think anything is off the table. If you still like Morgan as a LT, subtracting Walker, Jenkins, Rhyan from the offensive line, and then conceding that a player like Jacob Monk is probably not an NFL-quality player, and a second offensive lineman is a major, major need in addition to center no matter how you look at it. If they had 9 draft picks and a first rounder, it would probably be a safe bet that they would be drafting 3 offensive linemen. The once 30 million in cap carryover largely vanished after the Parsons trade, so the cap carryover will probably be something like 5 million. When adding in the rookie cap numbers and enough minimum salaries to get to the roster minimum, they are about 0.5 million over the cap. So right now, it looks like they would project to be about 4.5 million under the cap. Elgton Jenkins gets cut, that frees up 20 million. Rashan Gary gets a full restructure, that takes his cap number from (roughly) 28.0 million down to 18.9 million, so 9.1 million in saving there. At one time I thought the 4.5 million under the cap + 20 million + 9.1 million = 33.6 million...that would be enough (even though I would like that number to be more in the 40-45 range ideally). But now looking at the list of needs and no first round pick, I think there is likely more moves than just Jenkins and Gary and it will be interesting to see what those are. My guess is that Jacobs and Nate Hobbs would be the next two in line.

Historically, the smaller bowl games have been money losers for teams because the payouts do not offset the travel expenses. Schools have still done it for lots of reasons. A reward for the players. Donors like bowl games. Extra practices which have been considered a big deal by pretty much all coaches. But with the opportunity to throw money at future players, are teams really going to be willing to lose money on going to a bowl game? This doesn't apply to Notre Dame, as they were a top 10 team so they would have been going to a very good bowl with a nice payout. But do I believe Kansas State bailed on a bowl game because of a coaching change? I don't know. Obviously there are many, many coaching changes every year, and generally teams don't withdraw from bowl games because of that. It does seem like a second tournament would be a logical outcome, as just the factor of "win and play another game" would raise the stakes and keep many more fans interested. I don't think there needs to be any type of incentive, like the winner getting an automatic bid into next year's big tournament, to raise the interest level. Just the fact that there is a bracket, which American sports fans have a very weird infatuation with, would be enough to significantly increase interest.

I'm not suggesting the Packers totally give up on Morgan. But after a promising pre-season, I don't think there is anyway that the team can pencil him in as a starter for any OL spot in 2026. Even with this problem, I still don't think they will bring Rasheed Walker back. Add LT to the list of PRIMARY needs, along with C, NT, CB (maybe times two with this one) and LB if Quay Walker also leaves (which seems more and more likely as days pass without an extension getting done).

Finally, a pretty good looking QB in the portal that should be in Wisconsin's money range. TCU's Josh Hoover, who was a top 10 QB prospect coming out of high school. Listed as 6-2, 200. Redshirted in 2022, started 6 games in 2023 and has been the team's starting QB the last two years. 31 career starts, 9600+ passing yards, 65% completion percentage, 71/33 TD/INT. No rushing statistics worth mentioning. Nothing spectacular about him, he's just a good, experienced player. One year of eligibility left, which IMO is a positive as he wouldn't spook Carter Smith into the portal next year. 247 has put a 0.93 grade on him. In 2025, that would put him in the #4-#6 range on the QB list. In 2024, #5-#6. But with Sorsby, Lagway, Raiola and Leavitt (reported) already in, there already 4 players that seem solidly ahead of Hoover, so I think he'll probably end up in the #7-#10 range in this class when all the names are in (time will tell on that). In 2023, the Badgers brought in Mordecai (0.91 grade) who 247 had as the #7 QB. If the Badgers are going to spend more money, Hoover seems like a realistic target.

First portal guy that has caught my attention as a "realistic" get for the Badgers is Kansas State WR-Jayce Brown. 6-0, 179...isn't the biggest or fastest, but has a knack for making plays downfield. Has started 28 games and only has one year of eligibility left. 27 catches, 437 receiving yards, 3 TDs as a true freshman in 2023, 47-823-5 in 2024 and 41-712-5 in 2025. Career 17.1 average yards per catch. Seems like what the Badgers would be looking for - a productive, experienced guy who can contribute immediately, but is not a physically high-end guy and that will push his price-tag into a reasonable area for Wisconsin.

Don't call them the Ditkas, they will win if they are the Ditkas. Packers 73 - The Mike McCaskeys 9 (see 1994)

I don't think you needed to put this in blue. Only a matter of time until a high pick NFL bust who was a great college player comes back and says, (1) it shouldn't matter if I was paid as a professional player as I am no longer associated with a professional league, (2) eligibility limits are illegal, arbitrary eligibility rules hurt earning potential of individuals, if I am enrolled and taking classes, I am a student and should be able to play on the football team. We've already seen this with "community college years" shouldn't count. If that is the case, why should there be any limit on how many years a player can play?

McRoy was a very highly thought of prospect out of high school. Had a redshirt season at Oregon and then transferred to Arkansas where he played in 6 games and started 1. It sounds like he has been pretty shaky in what game action he has seen, both in the running game and the passing game. A high upside guy that just hasn't been a very good player so far. As you said, Grimes redshirted and then only played in 1 game against Wagner. Rivals had him as a TE coming out of high school. I'm not sure if he'd command much, if any NIL money at all. Under the old 85 scholarship limit, I would rather the Badgers just completely pass. But with the way things are now, it's not like the Badgers are going to be pushing a great player off the roster if they add Grimes. 247 has credited McRoy with a 0.85 grade on the transfer portal page, and that is pretty unimpressive for a guy who was so highly regarded out of high school. Their year-to-year grading scale might still be pretty fluid as we are in a new age of transfers, but in 2025 the 0.88 players ended at #347 overall and in 2025 the 0.88 players ended at #501 overall, so with a grade of 0.85, it's questionable if McRoy is even considered a top 500 player in the portal after all the names are entered in. There are already 122 players in this class that 247 have graded 0.86 and up, and that's only a fraction of all the players that will eventually be in the portal. Based on the talk in Madison, it sure sounds like the Badgers are pursuing a "high school recruit, draft and development" strategy on the offensive line. The fact that they only landed one OL high schooler has almost guaranteed that they will pick up at least 2 offensive linemen in the transfer portal. However, I'd guess that all the offensive portal guys this year that will be targeted with be players with some significant college playing time experience. With the easy schedule next year, Fickell and the rest of the coaching staff likely will not survive another pathetic performance, so I would think they would be looking for PROVEN college performers. They might like McRoy's upside, but based on what I've read, neither McRoy or Grimes seem to fit the bill as a PROVEN college performer.

It's pretty amazing how "short" the NFL passing game has become, and yet the league cannot seem to find QBs that can make pretty simple throws. Looking at the highlights of that Colts game, I see one pass to the tight end 11 yards down the field, one pass to the tight end 12 yards down the field, one back shoulder throw to a wide receiver 16 yards down the field, and one other down the field throw to a wide receiver that was a bad overthrow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7o2S7zgHF0 The rest is the typical boring NFL short passing game, totally built around the concept of "this 5 yard pass will turn into a 10 yard pass because the first guy will miss the tackle about 90% of the time." Looking at those highlights...swing pass to WR, numerous dump offs to RB, little 5 yard square in, little 5 yard crossing route. And yet we need a "big time" QB to come in and run this crap. Rivers finished that game with 27 attempts and 120 yards. Maybe the will open up that offense in a couple weeks, but considering Rivers can't move at all, I kind of doubt that they will.

As you said, Mets are planning to use Polanco at 1B. So he's the likely short-term replacement for Alonso. In comparison to Alonso, yes, he bring some defensive versatility. In a pinch, he could be bounced to 2B or 3B and provide below average defense. There is nothing you can do with Alonso except have him play 1B (where by DRS, his -9 was the worst in baseball last year among qualifying 1B) or DH.

I guess I don't see how Polanco is a ridiculous overpay. You guys have lost all perspective on Met dollars versus Brewer dollars. The Mets have been running a 320 million dollar payroll. So 20 million per year is roughly 6.25% of their payroll. If running a Brewers payroll of 110 million, the equivalent financial obligation for the Brewers would be a 2 year, 13.75 million dollar contract. I doubt too many Brewer fans would be complaining about that type of a deal since Polanco had a .800+ OPS last year, gives some defensive versatility, is an average to above-average baserunner and projects to be a 1.9 WAR player next year by Steamer. Now back to the reason I came to this thread in the first place, have the Dodgers signed Kyle Tucker yet? That was going to be my post until I saw the Polanco stuff. If anything, I think Stearns may have screwed up this off-season, not by swapping Polanco for Alonso, not by swapping Williams for Diaz...but by making these cost-cutting moves to allow him to sign Tucker. I have this feeling that the Dodgers are just going to throw the 3 year, 180 million dollar deal out there and just destroy the hopes of all non-Dodger fans out there.

I just picked one group out of the hat. The entire offense sucked. I've seen Wisconsin offenses led by Alex Hornibrook, who was awful, average more than 30 points per game in Big 10 play. I've seen Wisconsin offenses led by Joel Stave average more than 24 points per game in Big 10 play. Chryst's offensive lines weren't nearly as bad as some people would want to make out now. But OK, let's play that game. Chyrst's offensive lines sucked and his offensive line coach was horrible. In Chryst's last full season at Wisconsin, with that terrible offensive line, the team scored 27 points per game in Big 10 play. The year before that was the messed up COVID year, and even with a crappy three game stretch where the offense looked awful, they still played 6 Big 10 games and averaged 22 points. Year before that, 29 points per game against Big 10 competition. The Badgers scored 9 points per game in Big 10 games last year. The last time the Badgers scored that few points per game versus the Big 10 was 1988. Last time they were under that number was 1968. And just think how the rule changes over the years have favored offense. The 2025 Badger offense was pitiful and the only way you get to depths like that is if the entire unit was crap. 2025 stats: Vinny Anthony II + Trech Kekahuna + Chris Brooks Jr. + Jayden Ballard = 75 catches, 876 yards, 3 touchdowns Skyler Bell (UConn) = 101 catches, 1278 yards, 13 touchdowns

The talk/rumor from the alums today was that the powers-that-be were not happy about any aspect of the offensive line. They thought this year's play was poor, the development that the players had shown was poor, and the recruiting at the position was poor. I honestly don't know how Blazek is singled out and how...just to pick one...the wide receiver coach still has a job? I think the same can be said about the entire offense, it's not like one bad group turns the entire unit into a 9-points per game in conference play big black hole of nothingness. Rumors are that one or two coaches may still be fired, but it's unlikely to be any more than that.

I see the Journal-Sentinel is reporting that offensive line coach AJ Blazek was fired earlier today. I didn't see this news on any of the Madison sites (WJS or local TV stations). I was a huge fan of the Blazek hire, but from everything I was told that group was extremely "soft" and not even close to the standards that we've seen from sub-par offensive lines of the past. It was time for him to go. The new offensive line coach is Eric Mateos, who has been at Arkansas the last two years. He had previously worked with Grimes at both Baylor and BYU. https://arkansasrazorbacks.com/coache/eric-mateos/ Hopefully a couple more of those offensive coaches are under the microscope.

Looks like a bunch of Michigan assistants just became available. Maybe it's time for the Pickell to do some shopping and get some upgrades.