It’s hard to fathom that the Badgers (0-1 Big Ten, 3-2 overall) could be this weak at football’s most important position, yet here they are, sitting with a disappointing record largely because of inept quarterback play from redshirt juniors Tanner McEvoy and Joel Stave.
Inconsistency under center is certainly not the sole reason for Wisconsin’s slow start. The defense has missed its share of tackles, the offensive line has occasionally had issues opening up running lanes and Alex Erickson and Sam Arneson have been the only reliable receivers at all this season.
But quarterbacks are under a perpetual microscope, and the Badgers’ weaknesses in the passing game have been the team’s most glaring issue all year. With seven games left in the regular season, it’s time to examine possible short-term adjustments as Wisconsin tries to salvage 2014.
Expectations needed to be tempered to begin the year, as McEvoy was a converted safety seeing his first action at quarterback since 2012 when he was in junior college. McEvoy deservedly had a longer leash after his horrible debut against LSU, and he followed that up with a fantastic outing against Western Illinois.
At that point, the passing game seemed to have stabilized. But McEvoy’s performance quickly went south. Even in wins over Bowling Green and South Florida, he was shaky, combining to go 20-of-34 for 272 yards with two touchdowns and one interception.
His numbers in the box score may have been OK, but McEvoy failed the eye test. He missed wide-open receivers, short-armed his throws and had choppy footwork in the pocket. After the South Florida win, head coach Gary Andersen said he did not feel comfortable with his passing attack, a statement that foreshadowed the week to come.
McEvoy lasted four scoreless drives against Northwestern before he was taken out. Those drives resulted in three punts and an interception, and McEvoy was just 4-of-10 for 24 yards.
Ideally, Stave would have come in, performed capably and given the Badgers a solution to the unreliable passing game that had plagued the offense to that point. But in his first action since the Capital One Bowl against South Carolina, Stave was equally as bad as McEvoy, tossing three picks while going 8-19 for 114 yards and a touchdown.
This was the first week Stave was available to play as he worked through psychological issues that prevented him from making simple throws. Andersen said before the game he expected Stave to play if the situation called for it.
Because of that, it’s hard to say McEvoy was benched in the traditional sense of the term. Even before the season began, Andersen said he wanted to incorporate both McEvoy and Stave into the offense.
“We’ve got two quarterbacks that I think are going to help this football team throughout the year,” Andersen said in a preseason press conference. “Whoever takes the first snap doesn’t necessarily say he’s going to be the guy for the whole season.”
We’ll never know if the original two-quarterback plan indicated a lack of comfort using just one player full-time or if Andersen truly felt this was the best strategy for the offense. The Badgers were certainly not ready for its implementation against Northwestern, however.
There was plenty to second-guess regarding offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig’s playcalling, especially when a running quarterback like McEvoy rushed just once on a tuck-and-run scramble. The offense suddenly departed from creative wrinkles like the jet sweep and read option, forcing McEvoy to be something he wasn’t.
Though the Badgers are 0-1 in the Big Ten, they’re still in a position to win the West division thanks to a weak conference. Because of this, Wisconsin must play the quarterbacks that give it the best chance to win, rather than try unproven Bart Houston or true freshman D.J. Gillins.
The depth chart for this weekend’s game against Illinois lists McEvoy or Stave as the starter. The Badgers can be successful using a two-quarterback system, but must utilize the strengths of both players.
McEvoy needs to be used as a read-option quarterback who primarily hands the ball off or keeps it himself. Wisconsin cannot afford to pigeonhole him into a pocket passer role.
Meanwhile, Stave, with his powerful arm, needs to threaten the defense vertically, something he showed in spurts last year. Theoretically, Wisconsin could also occasionally use both quarterbacks simultaneously, though this is not a sustainable, full-time approach.
To avoid predictability, the Badgers can still run jet sweeps with Stave under center like they successfully did last season. Likewise, play action could become a strength with McEvoy if he sets it up with a few option plays and handoffs to Melvin Gordon or Corey Clement.
But if Wisconsin loses another game or two, there’s no reason to not play Houston or Gillins, if he doesn’t redshirt. Until then, however, this is what the Badgers have. Wisconsin won’t overpower defenses with McEvoy and Stave, but getting creative and using them both is currently the best option.
