All throughout preparation during Iowa week, the idea repeated ad nauseam was that the Big Ten is all about physical football. That one mysterious, flawed and essentially empty idea wove itself into a tapestry of non-answers about what Big Ten, and the Wisconsin-Iowa rivalry, really is at its core.
Defensive coordinator Dave Aranda, who needs to accept a head coaching position sometime soon, shed some light on what physicality actually means in the context of matchups with Iowa.
“It’s such a different game from when you’re defending spread teams and the ball’s going sideways ... if a grenade went off, all 22 guys are going down with some of the formations and alignments we’re going to take, and so it’s very much a different game,” Aranda said at practice last week.
That seems fair enough. Wisconsin and Iowa aren’t really capable of running spread offenses because of their skill position limitations, so it only makes sense to stick to the Pro-I style of offense that feels archaic in the context of how teams that win national championships operate. It’s strange and somewhat backwards, but that’s simply how the recruiting and coaching brain trusts have shaken out over the past decade.
The danger of using terms like “physicality” and “smashmouth football,” however, lies within the results of the Badgers’ 10-6 snoozer of a loss to the Hawkeyes. People can look at the game and say it’s just another typical Big Ten football showing, but in reality, simplifying it to such a generalized nugget is harmful to the conference and the two teams trapped inside Camp Randall last Saturday.
No matter how you cut it, if Wisconsin ran the spread, the triple-option, the Marc Trestman horizontal passing/West Coast offense hybrid (read: don’t throw the ball more than 5 yards in the air) or my own customized playbook from Madden 2008 (everyone runs a drag on every single play), the Badgers’ offensive performance was abysmal. And using the “physicality of the game,” which is code for running a pro-style offense, as a label for Wisconsin’s performance gives it too much credit.
UW’s 4.44 yards per play was in line with the 4.47 yards per play it managed against Alabama Sept. 5. The catch is that Wisconsin ran 12 more plays Saturday than it did in the season opener, and its 4-of-14 conversion rate on third down was the worst it’s had all season.
Although Wisconsin’s and Iowa’s average starting field position ended up exactly even, it’s alarming that in the second quarter, the only quarter Iowa scored, its average starting field position on its four drives was the Wisconsin 45-yard line. Rafael Gaglianone’s missed field goal, a Joel Stave interception, a Stave fumble and yet another wobbly punt off the foot of Drew Meyer practically welcomed the Hawkeyes to score at will.
As things stand, Wisconsin has the ninth-best rushing offense and sixth-best passing offense in the Big Ten. There’s no real strength or go-to option on offense, no play that’s an automatic 4 yards and no mismatch at any position on any given play.
It’s becoming clearer how much of a luxury Wisconsin’s historically competent running game has been, especially with Melvin Gordon at the helm. Handing it to Gordon was a ticket to an easy few yards whenever the Badgers needed it. His exhausting consistency and big-play potential was enough to hide a passing game that clearly will never evolve into a strong point as long as the current personnel are in Madison.
Wisconsin is hardly the only team in the Big Ten West with this problem, and, as always, the race to play against Michigan State or Ohio State in the conference championship is still wide open. It is, after all, a physical conference.
