Michigan @ Wisconsin, Noon, 11/18, Fox/Stream FoxGo

[Jeff Buchanan]

.....Horrendously wrong? What's the support for that?

#1 S&P+ Defense:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadef

From SB Nation:

The Badgers are efficient. They prevent big plays. If you get the ball in the red zone, they?re probably holding you to a field goal. They are good against the run and tremendous against the pass. There is almost no discernible weakness, on paper.

I think it's fair to wonder if Wisconsin's defense is as good as ours was before it was tested. Which doesn't suggest we're gonna go in there and beat them, but I think the defense should play a good offense before we conclude that. (Not saying Michigan's is that offense, mind you...)

You can beat Wisky by playing great D and M can do this better than anyone else the Badgers have faced. So there is that. Wisconsin commits a lot of turnovers. Hornibrook has 12 interceptions and Taylor coughs it up a bit more that Cryst would probably like. Turnovers on a short filed would be nice. M needs them and a couple of big plays to score the upset. M is not going to beat the Badger straight up.

Do it sparingly but hit the fucking deep ball. Wisconsin's DBs are coached to be very physical and will dare officials to call a PI. If they don't, they'll keep on being handsy. I'd work this a bit. Get the PIs and if the refs aren't calling them when they should, Harbaugh should risk a sideline penalty and raise a shit storm.

You can move the chains but it sometimes take four downs to do it. Do it.

[hack]

OK but my point is that they've played nobody. Their defense looks the same as ours pre-Penn State. There's a limit to what's predictable based on current observation. What you're saying is that we should assume they are as good as their numbers even though they've played nobody. I don't see why.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Wisky's SOS is not much different than M's. The "playing nobody" meme just doesn't wash with me as a means of evaluating Wisconsin. I think I wrote a few post up in this thread that Wisconsin's resume as presented by a combo of S&P+ (which factors in win margin) and SOS ranks 7th, while M ranks 22nd.

Win margin is meaningful in this context. Wisconsin, mostly on the back's of it's defense, had win margins > than M's and M's had two losses.

I can kinda see an eyeball test making these teams comparable - not great to poor O, decent to elite D -, you know, feelings ball. But in terms of all the standard and some non-standard measurables, M does not compare well.

The eyeball test also tells me Wisconsin's LBs and Ss are better than M's - a lot better and I think that is going to be a contributing factor in the loss that I'm predicting for Michigan.

M's going to need a lot of breaks and a 2+ turnover margin to have a chance. They also cannot afford to commit stupid penalties or have a rash of PI and holding calls when Wisconsin isn't getting called for the same infractions. I hate it that that has become a thing in the BT but it has. There are just too many non-calls and or/wrong calls getting caught on good video then displayed to the world of armchair referees for the assertion that BT refereeing is less than optimal to be dismissed off hand.

[hack]

OK, again, the point I'm making isn't that M is as good, or that M can win. Those are separate questions. My point is that Wisconsin hasn't played anybody yet, so any degree of certainty that their defense is as good as its numbers isn't warranted. It could be; it could not be. We just don't know. Iowa made a cameo in the Top 25, whereas Michigan has played two teams that have been in the poll the whole season. Iowa's performance is a clear exhibit of the limited usefullness of fancystats.

I think at this point it's important to establish a difference between the dreaded "feelingsball" and the allowable "eyeball test". I'm eyeball-testing what you are saying about SOS and it's not passing.

[Jeff Buchanan]

....... My point is that Wisconsin hasn't played anybody yet, so any degree of certainty that their defense is as good as its numbers isn't warranted. It could be; it could not be. We just don't know.

I agree Advanced Stats are not definitive and shouldn't be understood as a means by which absolute conclusions can be drawn.

But they are useful in comparing teams in terms of their predictive value. They also have their flaws as evidenced by osu's experience at Kinnick and M's experience at home with MSU.

Bottom line is: that's why the games are played.

[Cody_Russell]

Go Blue! Hope we get to see a lot of (healthy?) Higdon today. My prediction is something similar to the 14-7 game last season. Stop the run, make Hornibrook beat ya, and do not turn it over on offense.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Right now it's 32 degrees in Madison with light fog and mist. Winds at 12mph out of the SW. There could be a short blast of snow before 11am that will accumulate then melt as the snow turns back to rain. A cold front will pass through South Central Wisconsin around kick-off with rain ending and rapidly clearing skys. Most of the game should be rain free but it's going to be windy. Temps will remain in the low 30s. Winds will switch to the North at 15-20 with gusts to 30

[froot loops]

This is going to have to be a program victory. Wisconsin is really good.

[Jeff Buchanan]

If it's a win, and I think that's a long shot, it will be Harbaugh's first signature win. He has yet to deliver one of those.

[whodean]

Peters inaccurate again on that first drive

[WM Wolverine]

He was denied one of those last season by an awful spot.

[WM Wolverine]

Solomon starting as true freshman.

[BadWolf]

Good stop.

[Cody_Russell]

“Commercial free break... presented by Target.”

[Tom W]

Fox should just give up on this CFB thing.