Pre-Snap Read: Michigan State vs. Wisconsin
By Jim Comparoni
Publisher, SpartanMag.com
East Lansing, Mich. - The good news is Wisconsin is not as good right now as Minnesota, Washington or Maryland were in September. The bad news is Michigan State hasn’t demonstrated anything to this point to convince us that the Spartans are better than the Badgers.
Michigan State will get a chance to show improvement on Saturday in a game that is pretty much a must-win situation if the Spartans want to earn a bowl bid.
A fifth loss wouldn’t mathematically eliminate Michigan State from the postseason, but a loss in this game would leave no one thinking the Spartans would be capable of getting four wins in their last five games.
The improvement and movement must start now.
Wisconsin is 3-3 with losses to Washington State (17-10), Ohio State (52-21) and Illinois (34-10).
After the loss to Illinois, Wisconsin fired head coach Paul Chryst.
The Badgers are a 6.5-point favorite coming to Spartan Stadium, the last I heard (I don’t follow point spreads).
It’s amazingly rare that a team would fire its coach and yet be favored for a road game against a conference opponent just two weeks later.
That’s how much the oddsmakers were impressed by Wisconsin’s 42-7 victory at Northwestern last week. And it’s a sign that Vegas has finally caught up to the woes Michigan State is experiencing after mis-handicapping the Spartans for four straight weeks.
FINAL ANALYSIS FIRST
Wisconsin has its crap together on defense quite a bit more than Michigan State. That could change this week. But, based on the body of work, the Badger defense is somewhat reliable, and MSU’s isn’t in the least. That right there gives Wisconsin a percentage points edge in this game.
Michigan State has a chance with its defensive front to lock horns successfully against an decent Wisconsin offensive line. However, in order to stop the Badger running attack, you need your linebackers and safeties to make quick reads and support the run on-time, in place and with physicality.
MSU’s linebackers have been mediocre in trying to stop the run between tackles. Cal Haladay has been okay. Ben VanSumeren is improving, but is less than okay between the tackles. He’s quite good on the perimeter.
At the safety position, I would be concerned about 5-foot-8, 180-pound Justin White butting heads with 6-foot-2, 235-pound RB Braelon Allen time after time in this game.
With Jaden Mangham having been knocked out of last week’s game due to a blow to the head, I have to believe, and hope, that he is being held out of this game. I have no reason to believe that Xavier Henderson will be back for this game.
Kendell Brooks and White played the rest of the game as the safety duo last week after Mangham went down.
Angelo Grose is still in the picture, of course. He moved to nickel back after the Minnesota game.
Grose has struggled in pass defense at safety for the past year and a half, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see him return to safety for this game. Michigan State needs run stoppers at safety.
True, Grose can be involved in stopping the run as a nickel back, but I think it’s possible Michigan State could go heavier at the nickel in this game with Aaron Brulé and move Grose back to safety. Just an educated hunch. But I’m usually wrong about personnel moves.
If Michigan State does go with Grose and Brulé in the starting lineup, and Grose manages to avoid being exposed in pass defense, then Michigan State may have the lead in their pants to contain the Wisconsin running game.
But this would necessitate Michigan State playing like they have yet to demonstrate they can. It’s possible.
If White is at safety, bless his heart, I don’t know what that says about MSU’s physical ability to stand up to Wisconsin for 50 snaps. Not that Wisconsin is brutally awesome in the running attack. But it’s just hard to play against this Badger team with mediocre linebackers and a 180-pound safety.
Michigan State should have the edge at quarterback. Payton Thorne has not had a good season. UW quarterback Graham Mertz is coming off a good game against Northwestern. But I would still favor Thorne to be the quarterback more capable of carrying his team through the air.
HOWEVER, Mertz and Thorne won’t be taking the same test in this game. Mertz gets to throw against a blind man’s bluff Michigan State pass defense. Thorne has to throw against a Wisconsin pass defense which isn’t great, but at least the Badgers have their crap together on defense, one through 11.
Is that enough to slide the QB edge back to Wisconsin? Probably, unless the Michigan State pass defense plays like we don’t know that it can (not that it has to, because this UW passing attack is merely mediocre.)
Wisconsin has a very good running back and a decent offensive line. That’s not enough to blast holes in a good defensive front that can choose to out-number you in the box. UW doesn’t have a good enough pass threat to make you stay deep, and the QB is not a threat to run. So that gives the defense reason to load the box and challenge Mr. Mertz to complete more than six or seven passes further than 15 yards downfield in a game.
I would expect Michigan State to play similar to the way it did against Minnesota, with a lot of single-safety deep stuff, with a safety often in or near the box. Michigan State needs to disguise this better than it did with the Gophers, however disguises aren’t as important against UW because UW doesn’t check with the sideline for play changes like Minnesota. Wisconsin will do some RPO, but they aren’t great at it.
Load the box, stop the run. Michigan State should be able to do that, but at what cost? Is UW capable of victimizing Michigan State with more open space downfield? That’s been the case with other opponents.
Wisconsin has a couple of decent receivers, including No. 13, Chimere Dike (6-1, 195, Jr.). He has 25 catches on the year. Dike (pronounced DEE-KAY) had a career day last week with 10 catches for 185 yard with 3 TDs. He’s not great, but he’s pretty good. It’s the job of MSU’s pass defense to not let this “pretty good” receiver look “pretty great,” like he did last week against a slow Northwestern pass defense.
Vegas has UW favored by 6.5, with an over-under of 47. That sounds like a 27-20 game.
Is Michigan State ready to load the box, stop the run, avoid busts in pass defense, close the separation gaps in the secondary, and hold Wisconsin to less than 27 points? You’ll find out when I find out. They can’t do it with the way they’ve been playing, and with mediocre linebacker play, a small safety and faulty pass defense. It’s possible that all of those areas could see their screws get tightened positively this week. I’m not one to bet on the rise like that. I usually go with the established body of work, and that favors Wisconsin at this point - even after firing its coach.
Can Michigan State get its offense chugging, and put up more than 20 points? That gets back to MSU’s problems sustaining drives. Without explosiveness in the pass game or run game, the Spartans need to move the chains and produce points with 10-play drives. That’s not MSU’s strong suit. On offense, Michigan State hasn’t really had a strong suit.
It’s possible that Michigan State could get more of a run game established in this game largely because the Spartans have a better chance of experiencing an early double-digit deficit, which hindered the plans against Washington and Minnesota, not to mention Ohio State.
Hang in this game, get involved in a back-and-forth rock fight, and yes the run game could become a positive factor for once. Former Badger Joe Berger is still MSU’s No. 1 tailback. He looked pretty good against MAC teams earlier in the year. He’s been spotty since then. We can guarantee we’ll see the absolute best version of Berger in this game. Of course UW will probably be primed to stop him as well, but I would think the motivational edge to Berger will be worth a few yards in this game.
MSU’s offensive line has been better than the run game stats would indicate for the past three games. Now, they need to prove it against a good, not great, Wisconsin defensive front.
Wisconsin led the nation in total defense last year. That stat was a bit misleading, with the Badgers playing in the weak Big Ten West against a lot of slow-playing, huddling offenses with snap counts being limited, among other things.
(Minnesota, Illinois and Iowa ranked No. 1, 3 and 9 in total defense right now. They’re good. But they aren’t THAT good. Pace of play, and the schedule, has a lot to do with it).
But Wisconsin’s defense last year was in fact good. Not No. 1 in the country good. But very good.
This year, they are down a notch.
Wisconsin is No. 26 in total defense so far this year and No. 37 in yards allowed per play.
(In yards allowed per play, Illinois is No. 1 in the nation and Iowa is No. 3. So I guess they’re good in that metric regardless of pace of play. I apologize.) [Minnesota vs Illinois on Saturday, by the way, is going to be a fascinating game, especially if Ibrahim plays for Minnesota.]
Anyway, Michigan State is No. 111 in yards allowed per play and No. 114 in total yards allowed, out of 131.
MSU’s offense had a decent flurry for a drive or three against Ohio State, and had a good first half against Maryland. They’re searching for a total game of consistency and execution. But that’s precisely the problem. Based on what we’ve seen, Michigan State will be riddled by an errant pass, a dropped pass, a penalty and won’t get any explosive plays in the meantime. So the 10-play drive isn’t happening, other than maybe once or twice a game. Until I see this trend change, I’m going to keep expecting it.
Wisconsin’s defense isn’t great, but it’s pretty good. And I don’t see them committing assignment busts or getting caved by blocking.
Illinois did a good job of gaining pre-snap advantages with tight end motions a few times, and Ohio State had success just being Ohio State.
But the main thing Illinois did well against Wisconsin was allow the defense to set the table for the offense. That’s complementary football. Illinois continually stifled UW on defense, got a couple of turnovers, cashed in on some run game, and it resulted in a 14-10 halftime lead ballooning to 34-10.
Overall, Wisconsin’s list of established strengths, although not a long one, is longer than MSU’s.
MSU’s list of question mark areas is just too long to trust right now. Until they get some or all of those things straightened out (defensive communication, pass defense, run game, consistent pass game, kicking game) it’s hard to pick them to win.
APPLES TO APPLES
* Michigan State has the better QB, in theory. Thorne set a school record for TD passes last year with 27. This year, with no Kenneth Walker III, he is seeing more pass defense traffic in the intermediate and deep routes. And he has had no run game to help him. And defensive failures have perpetually put him in double-digit scoreboard deficits.
But Thorne was missing receivers even back during games one and two when MSU’s problems were masked by MAC opposition.
Last week, once the game got out of hand for a fourth straight week, Thorne began holding onto the ball too long at times. He was the first to admit it.
His disposition seemed positive on Tuesday. He has hit the reset button and is eager to get better results this week. But it’s hard to find Jayden Reed open when defenses are skewing coverage to him, now that he’s healthy. Thorne needs other receivers to step up and needs tight ends to run the correct routes and catch the ball, and offensive coordinator Jay Johnson needs to find ways to scheme some receivers open.
Statistically, Mertz and Thorne are comparable, with a slight edge to Mertz this year. They are both completing 64 percent of their passes.
Mertz is averaging 216 pass yards per game, and Thorne 205.
Mertz is No. 4 in the Big Ten in pass efficiency rating at 163.5. Thorne is No. 10 at 130.2.
Mertz has a 13-to-5 TD to INT ratio. Thorne is 9-to-7.
Thorne lapped Mertz in those stats last year.
Mertz is coming off a good get-well game at Northwestern. He was 20 of 29 for 299 yards with 5 TDs. Yet he missed some open receivers.
But Mertz’s head is undoubtedly in a better place this week, after the victory against the Wildcats. That could change after a quarter or two this weekend. So I’ll stop typing or else I might end up giving this edge to Wisconsin.
Any chance we see Noah Kim? I'm guessing no, not yet, not unless things completely unravel.
* Wisconsin has the better RB in Braelon Allen.
Anyone remember when LJ Scott awoke and had a very good game against Ohio State back in 2016 when Ohio State was a National Championship contender and Michigan State was headed for a 3-9 season? Scott was a different player against his homestate Buckeyes on that day and really never played that well again.
I think there’s a chance we might see the best version of Berger this weekend.
But I still give the nod to Allen. He was amazing as a freshman, but has merely been good this year
* Wisconsin would have had the edge at tight end, but their top two are out with injuries. The third guy is better and more consistent than MSU’s guys. Maliq Carr and DJ Barker had ability and potential, but they’ve been under-achieving since the MAC portion of the season ended.
* I’ll give Wisconsin a slight edge on the offensive line. I still believe in the Michigan State offensive line, and I think this is the most underwhelming UW o-line since 1992. But Wisconsin had a get-well performance last week, rushing for 193 yards against Northwestern. That help heal the scars from being held to only 2 yards rushing against Illinois.
* I give Michigan State the edge at WR, although we need to see something from Keon Coleman. He’s been quiet.
Jayden Reed looked quick last week, back close to being his old self. But, like Courtney Hawkins said earlier this week, Reed and Thorne are adapting to opponents skewing more coverage toward Reed. That’s something Reed didn’t have to worry about last year.
In the meantime, Tre Mosley is a solid possession receiver, but he’s not scaring anyone. Coleman is the guy who needs to kick it in, and Thorne needs to find a level of trust in him.
Wisconsin’s Chimere Dike, going against this Michigan State pass defense, probably deserves to have the highest over-under catch figure heading into the game. His support staff in Skyler Bell and Dean Engram is not bad.
Slight edge to Michigan State in terms of personnel, but don’t be surprised if UW’s receivers out-produce MSU’s due to who the Badgers are throwing against.
* I give Michigan State an edge at defensive tackle. Wisconsin isn’t bad up front, but No. 95, Keeanu Benton, with down with an injury last week. He is expected to play this week, but I wonder what percentage he will be, if he does play. Meanwhile, Michigan State continues to be solid in there.
* Wisconsin doesn’t have true defensive ends. They play a true 3-4 base, and a 2-4 against passing personnel.
No. 19 Nick Herbig (6-2, 228) is a stand-up DE, or an OLB, or an “edge” or whatever you want to call it. He plays bigger than 228, and he plays quick. He defeats blocks. He is better as a d-end than anything Michigan State has, although I continue to have great respect for Jacoby Windmon. He keeps slugging.
With Jeff Pietrowski and Khris Bogle still out with injuries, MSU’s emergency-use defensive ends, Avery Dunn and Michael Fletcher, were functional last week. That’s progress. Dunn was not functional against Minnesota, which was basically the first game he had ever played. Brandon Wright was functional as well, and could be close to breaking through with a sack.
Overall edge to Wisconsin at the edge position.
* Edge to Wisconsin at the two inside linebacker positions. This edge is worth 50 yards in the ground game. Maybe a little more.
* Nickel is an x-factor. Wisconsin’s starter, Cedrick Dort, went down with a head injury last week. I’m guessing he will be out. I didn’t get a good read on his replacement.
Angelo Grose has played nickel for Michigan State for the past two games. Prior to that, Justin White played the position for a game and a half. Prior to that, Chester Kimbrough started at nickel for two-and-a-half games.
I wouldn’t be shocked if Michigan State went with Aaron Brulé at the nickel for this game, and I wouldn’t be shocked if he played well.
But this position is an x-factor. No idea what to expect. But whatever comes out of this position will be crucial.
* Edge to Wisconsin at cornerback.
* Edge to Wisconsin at the safety positions.
* Edge to Michigan State in punting. Edge to Wisconsin in place kicking.
THE WISCONSIN OFFENSE
The Badgers have an outsider first-year offensive Bobby Engram. There are still a lot of Badger staples in the offense, but Engram has brought some whacky use of the Wildcat, which hasn’t gone well in the games I’ve seen.
As for the run game, you’ll see the regular inside zone stuff with two tight ends.
You’ll see pin-and-pull gap plays with the center pulling along with one of the tackles. That play hasn’t been all that successful, even against Northwestern. There is something missing there.
I haven’t seen the sneak route to the TE like we used to see from Wisconsin a few years ago.
And I haven’t seen the max pro deep shots.
They continue to get offensive linemen out onto your linebackers. If they have two TEs in the game, that’s seven blocker. If you have a four-man front, they expect to get at least two of the extra blockers out into the laps of your linebackers right now, mauling you and tying you up. Your safeties MUST be able to get to the box quickly and hit that big running back. That’s a tough ask for White, if he’s going to start.
Illinois was able to play its base 3-4 and add a safety to the box for an eight man front against Wisconsin. Wisconsin didn’t have the passing attack to make them pay. And Mertz isn’t much of a threat to run with the ball. So playing with an extra man in the box, and not needing to account for the QB as a runner, makes it harder for Allen to get daylight. And that makes it harder for this mediocre o-line (by Wisconsin standards) to bash like a typical Wisconsin o-line.
* Illinois beat Wisconsin because Illinois had the better offensive line and the better defensive line. Point blank.
BADGER OFFENSE
* Second play of the game vs NW was a slant off an RPO. RPO is somewhat new for Wisconsin. Faked the run, drew the safety up to stop the run, threw the slant. I don’t remember RPO being part of the Wisconsin package in the past. They don’t do it as well as Minnesota.
* They will attempt a lot of the usual Wisconsin staples in the run game.
* They will pull the center and backside tackle (left or right tackle) for the stretch sweep.
* They will test your edges with outside zone and pin-and-pulls with the C and OT pulling.
* When they load up with two tight ends, they obviously have 7 blockers up front. They are expecting four of their blockers to handle four of your d-linemen up front and release three o-linemen out to your linebackers. So your safeties have to be in on stopping the run game. I respect Justin White and his climb into the playing group, but as a starter, he’s going to give up five inches and close to 50 pounds when trying to tackle him.
WILDCAT
* With Braelon Allen as QB. He will attempt passes out of the Wildcat. I’ve always said that in order for the Wildcat to really work, the RB running the Wildcat MUST be a threat to throw it - which is rarely the case. Wisconsin has tried to establish that, but it hasn’t worked that well or looked that good, with one exception.
Allen has attempted three passes, completing two of them, for 33 yards.
- The Wildcat hit an absurdity level of low on a third-and-2 in the second quarter against Illinois when Allen faked a handoff, rolled out and threw incomplete to an open receiver. Punt. Wisconsin trailed 14-10 at the time. I wonder what Barry Alvarez thought about that. Well, wait, I think we found out the next day.
- On third-and-2, Allen was stopped for a loss, in the 2Q against Northwestern.
+ Threw a 22-yard TD pass on third-and-two against Northwestern. The play was stopped and looked stupid, but Allen rolled out, bought time and threw to RB Mellusi over the middle. Mellusi was originally supposed to pass protect after carrying out a Wildcat fake handoff. When do you ever fake a hand off to someone and then throw it to that guy for a TD? Only in the backyard when playing 3 on 3 against your neighborhood friends. No way this play was designed to throw to Mellusi. He just stayed in to pass pro, and when Allen got in trouble scrambling aroud, Mellusi went out for a pass, threw his hand up in the air and Allen tossed it to him. That gave Wisconsin a 28-0 lead. They made it work.
WISCONSIN OFFENSIVE PERSONNEL
QB GRAHAM MERTZ (6-3, 216, Jr., Overland Park, Kan.)
* Four-star recruit, ranked No. 42 in the nation, and the No. 2 QB.
* Has a strong arm, but misses high too much.
* Play man-to-man on his receivers and challenge him to hit his targets. That’s what Illinois did, with some effective blitzes mixed in.
* Mertz did not trust his pass protection when Illinois blitzed (and went with two-deep, man coverage). Does Michigan State have the type of pass rush to instill that kind of doubt in Mertz? Does Michigan State have the ability to play good man coverage behind a blitz? So far this season, no and no.
* Mertz is usually mediocre, but if you make things easy for him, he can get on a roll. He completed 17 straight passes against Illinois in 2020, back when Illinois was bad.
* Mertz looks solid when under center, on a three-step drop, on a timing route. He did a lot of that last week.
* Against Illinois, he was 17 of 33 for 206 yards with 1 TD and 2 INTs. He was sacked five times.
Last week plays of note:
+ 21-yard square-in to Skyler Bell, in the 1Q last week. Mertz had all day against a four man rush, throwing against a soft cover-three. He made one read, waited and delivered.
+ 15-yard slant-and-go for a TD last week to Dike. That was a first-and-10 in the red zone, under center, play action.
+ 52-yard TD to Dike on the first play of the 2Q. Single safety deep, time to throw, and that single safety was SLOW. He connected with Dike 12 yards downfield on a dig and he went 40 yards after the catch.
- He has spats of inaccuracy. Missed TE 82 on a deep seam, open due to a NW bust in coverage. But Mertz led him too much.
+ 21-yard TD pass to Dike last week to go up 21-0 in the 2Q. He was flushed out of the pocket and threw a decent touch pass while Northwestern’s coverage completely lost Dike. Northwestern is slow on defense and much, much, much more mistake-prone than they ever were with Hankowitz as d-coordinator.
- INT in the 1Q against Illinois. Throwing from his end zone on third-and-nine, threw a jumpball to WR Keontez Lewis. He threw it to the back shoulder at 30 yards. The Illinois CB was in phase, didn’t look back for the ball in time, but got his arm through the catching zone at the last second, forced a tipped ball and a safety coming over to help got the INT. Not necessarily a bad read or a bad throw.
- INT in the 2Q against Illinois, feeling pressure against a blitz on third down, made a bad play worse, throwing an off-balance prayer. Poor decision by Mertz.
RB BRAELON ALLEN (6-2, 235, Soph., Fond Du Lac, Wis.)
* Four-star recruit, ranked No. 135 in the nation.
* Rushed for 1,268 yards last year as one of the beest freshmen in the country. Had eight 100-yard rushing games last year.
* He is averaging 105 yards rushing per game and 6.1 per carry (634 yards on the year).
* Illinois held him to 2 yards on eight carries.
* Last week, he had 136 yards on 23 carries.
RB 1 Chez Mellusi (6-0, 210)
* Transfer from Clemson.
* More than 800 yards rushing last year.
* Is out with a wrist injury.
* Is averaging 37 yards rushing per game and 4.0 per carry (232 yards on the year).
RB 20 Isaac Guerendo (6-0, 223, Sr, Clayton, Ind.)
* Was a 5.6 three star recruit, No. 13 in Indiana. Signed as a WR recruit.
* Has 21 rushing attempts on the year, 100 yards, 4.4 per.
* Played in four games last season, then injured. Had 160 yards rushing last year in four games.
+ 21 yard TD catch to cap the opening drive against Illinois two weeks ago. He lined up as a wide receiver on the play, as an outside receiver no less. He was one of two RBs on the field for that play. Illinois inside LB Calvin Hart was a little late getting out there on him.
Michigan State’s Cal Haladay allowed a TD to a RB on a similar play earlier in the year, against Washington. Might Wisconsin try to scheme a similar matchup for Gurendo in this game? Maybe. But we can also assume Michigan State has repped that look a few times and Haladay should be ready. Guerendo made the play on this one, but it’s not like he’s a great pass catching threat.
FB 34 Jackson Aker (6-1, 238, R-Fr., Madison, Wis.)
* They use the fullback quite a bit. He played on 20 of Wisconsin’s 69 snaps last week.
* When he’s in the game as part of the Wildcat, he’s in there to block. Allen is going to keep it. When Mellusi or Guerendo are in there, Allen will run the zone read, might hand it off, and might even throw to the TE. That’s been the trend so far.
WR 13 CHIMERE DIKE (pronounced DEE-KAY) (6-1, 195, Jr., Waukesha, Wis.)
* 5.6 three-star recruit, ranked No. 4 in Wisconsin.
* Career-highs last week in catches, receiving yards and TDs.
* 25 catches averaging 73.6 receiving yards per game.
* Slippery route runner. Mertz zeroes in on him the way Thorne looks for Reed.
* RPO bubble screen for a gain of 5 last week. The run portion of the option was a power to the strong side. Usually, RPO runs are simple zone runs. But Wisconsin mixed in a power.
+ Gain of 25 on a crossing route vs man-to-man last week on third-and-four.
+ 6-yard TD pass last week as the inside receiver out of a trips formation. He’s the inside guy. Who are you putting on him? Your best cover corner? (as if Michigan State has one). Or do you stay standard and put your nickel on him? If Angelo Grose is your nickel, he can’t cover Dike in man-to-man. You’d better play zone or make sure he has safety help and make sure your safety knows what he’s doing. But if you have four DBs on WRs and safety help for Grose, you could end up light in the box vs the run. Take your pick. It’s better if you have lockdown coverage guys at those positions, but Michigan State does not.
+ Slot out for 25 yards against Illinois in the 1Q against man-to-man. Good route, open by three steps.
WR 11 Skyler Bell (6-0, 190, R-Fr., Bronx, NY)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, ranked No. 6 in Connecticut.
* Second on the team with 15 catches. Has 3 TDs. Averages 42.6 receiving yards per game.
+ 19 yard gain on deep square-in on opening play of the Illinois game.
- Dropped a crossing route in the 2Q against Illinois, helping stall a drive.
WR 86 Vinny Anthony
* They used him on a jet sweep on third-and-four in the 1Q last week. The play wasn’t blocked well but he capitalized on two missed Northwestern tackles for a gain of five.
* No catches on the year, but two rushing attempts.
WR 3 Keontez Lewis (6-2, 190, Soph., East St. Louis, Ill.)
* 5.7 three-star recruit, ranked No. 8 in Illinois.
* 5 catches on the year.
+ 40-yard catch against Washington State.
+ Terrific, tippy-toe catch for 25 yards on a deep fade against Illinois, hauling in a pass that wasn’t thrown all that well.
* Good talent in this guy, but he doesn’t get used a lot.
WR 6 Dean Engram (5-9, 170, Jr., Columbia, Md.)
* 5.6 three star recruit ranked No. 7 in Washington DC
* Eight catches. Had a lot during garbage time vs Northwestern.
* They went deep to him for an INC on a deep out, the first play after an INT.
TIGHT END
* lost Clay Cundiff (9 catches), Hayden Rucci (4 catches) to injury at TE.
82 JACK ESCHENBACH (6-6, 241, Sr., Downers Grove, Ill.)
* No-star walk-on.
* 8 catches on the year.
* 10 yards on a square out route last week.
* Gain of 12 on a counter boot square out against Illinois.
OFFENSIVE LINE
* When I said this was Wisconsin’s worst offensive line since 1992, that’s like saying George was the worst of the Beatles. They’ve had some great offensive lines at UW since 1993.
This o-line is merely average, which is below average by UW’s standards. This o-line, overall, is still better than MSU’s. But Michigan State could change my mind on that this weekend.
Part of my negative report on UW’s o-line was based on getting abused by Illinois’ defensive front. But upon further review, that Illinois defensive front is pretty good. Lovie Smith recruited some good players in there.
For instance, on UW’s first run play after falling behind Illinois 14-10, UW ran a pin-and-pull with the center and play-side offensive tackle pulling. Illinois’ No. 88 on the defensive line swiped the pin man to the ground, and then evaded a puller on his way to Braelon Allen for a tackle for no gain.
The quickness and upper body strength of the Illinois d-lineman, and technique, allowed him to beat TWO blockers on that play. (Meanwhile, Illinois had 8 in the box out of its base 3-4, plus a safety). Illinois was beating blockers AND out-numbering Wisconsin in the box out of no fear for the UW passing attack.
Anyway, No. 88 for Illinois caught my eye on that play. Enough that I had to look him up. Well, his name is Keith Randolph. He took an official visit to Michigan State way back in December of 2018, a couple of weeks before the Red Box Bowl. Ron Burton recruited him for Michigan State, but Lovie Smith won out. Randolph was a 5.7 three-star recruit, ranked No. 4 in Illinois. I don’t remember that much about him, but he was a former basketball player. SpartanMaggers Jason Killop and OhioSpartan put in FutureCasts for Michigan State for him. That was one that got away. Good evaluation by Michigan State, for what it’s worth.
LT 79 JACK NELSON (6-7, 310, Soph. Stoughton, Wis.)
* Four-star recruit, ranked No. 198 in the country, No. 2 in Wisconsin.
* Beat out portal-bound Logan Brown for the starting job as this year progressed.
* Can get buckled with a bull rush, doesn’t seem that strong in the upper body to withstand a hard bull rush. That doesn’t mean you can beat him with the bull rush every time, he’s just not overly sturdy and can get bent back.
- Got shoulder swiped out of the way on an inside zone against Illinois that went for a 1-yard gain.
LG 65 TYLER BEACH (6-6, 317, Sr., Grafton, Wis.)
* Third-team All-Big Ten last year. HM All-Big Ten in 2020.
* Did not play last week.
- Beaten by a LB bull rush for a sack on third and long in the 2Q against Illinois.
C 75 JOE TIPPMANN (6-6, 317, Jr., Fort Wayne, Ind.)
* 5.7 three star recruit, ranked No. 8 in Indiana.
* Honorable Mention All-Big Ten last year.
+ Sturdy in picking up a run-blitzing LB last week and driving him out of the picture on third-and-one for a Braelon Allen conversion.
* Very active as a pulling center.
RG 63 TANOR BORTOLINI (6-4, 313, Soph., Kewaunee, Wis.)
* 5.5 3-star, ranked No. 8 in Wisconsin.
* Started five games last year.
* Started at LG last week.
+ Looked good with his feet and physicality on an inside zone on the opening drive against Northwestern for a gain of 34.
* Decently mobile and physical as a pull blocker on power to the C-gap.
* Started at RG vs Illinois.
(RG 74 MICHAEL FURTNEY 6-5, 315, Sr., Milan, Mich.)
* 5.6 three-star recruit ranked No. 20 in Michigan.
* Committed to UW in March of his junior year. Syracuse and Kentucky were the first to offer, following by Wisconsin in January. Michigan State offered in February. He took an unofficial visit to Michigan State and later committed to UW.
* Had two career starts prior to this year.
+ Nice pull and kickout on a C-gap power, giving room to Allen for a gain of 14 last week after Northwestern pinned them deep at the 2-yard line.
RT 78 TREY WEDIG (6-7, 315, Soph., Oconomowoc, Wis.)
* Four-star recruit, ranked No. 93 in the nation and No. 1 in Wisconsin.
* Replacing Riley Mahlman, who has been out for a few weeks with an injury.
+ Good with the combo block, getting movement with the double team and getting out to the LB.
DEFENSE
* Wisconsin is No. 10 in the Big Ten in yards allowed per play (5.1), Michigan State is 14th at 6.1.
* Wisconsin had 10 penalties in the loss to Illinois, and ranked No. 97 in the FBS in penalties prior to last week.
* A lot of off man-to-man, and zone. Occasionally press man-to-man. They keep it in front and tackle on the spot.
* They began last week with a true 3-4.
* They also play some 2-4-5 with two big down defensive linemen, two big, versatile, stand-up OLBs on the edge and a pair of sturdy inside linebackers.
* Wisconsin leads the Big Ten in interceptions with 10.
* They don’t disguise nearly as much in the secondary as Ohio State or Minnesota. If they’re in cover-four at pre-snap, they stayed in cover four last week. If they were in press at pre-snap, they stayed in press man-to-man.
* They bring some creative four-man pressures. They aren’t blitzes if it’s just four rushing. But it’s hard to locate which LB is joining the three d-linemen in rushing. And that LB is usually turning the corner with sharp footwork on a stunt. The LBs are quick and sturdy.
GUESS SOME GAMEPLAN
* They do more one-gapping than the defensive fronts Michigan State has seen thus far. What does that mean? That means Wisconsin is trying to penetrate more than the two-gapping, log-jamming type of philosophies that most other teams use these days.
One-gapping usually creates more TFLs. But you need an extra man in the box in order to one-gap, or race one there quickly upon reading run, which can leave you susceptible to play action pass.
One-gapping, in theory, can make a defense susceptible to trap plays and screen passes.
* Northwestern clipped off a 44-yard gain on a screen to the RB Hull in the 2Q. And hit another screen for 14 yards in the third quarter. Let the d-linemen one-gap their way up the field, get your o-linemen out on the two LBs, and there could be room for a play or two.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Michigan State pop off a little gainer on a screen pass to the RB.
DEFENSIVE LINE
* Wisconsin staged a nice one-gapping goal line stand early in the Illinois game, but it was erased by a fourth-and-goal pass interference call.
* Overall, it’s a decent UW defensive line but not as good as usual.
NT 95 KEEANU BENTON (6-4, 316, Sr., Janesville, Wis.)
* Was a 5.5 three-star recruit, ranked No. 5 in Wisconsin.
* Second-team All-Big Ten by the coaches last year.
* Had 5 TFLS last year.
* Has 3 TFLs this year, 2 sacks.
* Suffered an ankle injury last week, was helped off the field, putting a little bit of weight on it but not much.
* Plays a one-gapping shade and looks reasonably quick. In the games I’ve seen, he didn’t strike me as a second-team All-Big Ten type of guy. Maybe I was watching the wrong film. Good matchup for Nick Samac. I think Samac will be okay against 95.
DL 99 ISAIAH MULLENS (6-4, 303, Sr., Columbus, Ohio, Harvest Prep)
* 5.6 three star recruit, ranked No. 39 in Ohio.
* Second-year starter.
* Not firm at all, for his size. Illinois pushed him around. He missed the Northwestern game but is supposed to be back this week.
NT 94 Gio Paez (6-3, 316, Jr., Los Angeles/Hough HS in Charlotte, NC)
* 5.5 three-star recruit, ranked No. 45 in North Carolina
* Had two tackles last season.
* Looked pretty solid in relief of Benton when two-gapping and knocking the Northwestern center back on fourth-and-one last week.
56 DL RODAS JOHNSON (6-2, 293, Jr., Columbus, Ohio, De Sales)
* Was a 5.8 four-star, ranked No. 8 in Ohio.
* 2 TFLs on the year.
* Was not a starter last season.
EDGE 98 CJ GOETZ (6-3, 240, Sr., Mukego, Wis.)
* 5.7 three-star recruit, ranked No. 1 in Wisconsin.
* Stand-up OLB/DE
90 James Thompson (6-5, 295, Soph., Cincinnati Roger Bacon)
* 5.5 three-star ranked No. 48 in Ohio. Committed to UW over MAC schools.
* 1.5 TFLs on the season, coming off the bench.
OLB 19 NICK HERBIG (6-2, 228, Jr., Kauai, Hawaii)
* 5.8 four-star recruit, ranked No. 2 in Hawaii.
* It’s hard to run wide to his side. He is mobile, gets his feet set, defeats TE blocks, gets off the block, sets the edge and makes the tackle. He does the job of two people on those plays.
* Really good motor and quickness as an edge pass rusher. Five sacks on the year.
* Seems bigger than 228 with as much as he plays as a stand-up DE. But that 228-pound frame serves him well when he shifts out to play slot defender as a pass defender, depending on the formation and personnel group.
+ Knifed inside the Northwestern tight end while one-gapping on a third-and-two in the third quarter, helped displace the line of scrimmage. Creating room for ILB Jake Chaney to make the tackle. Herbig is an outside LB who did what a defensive end is supposed to do on a play like that. He played bigger than his 228.
+ Came untouched from the edge for a blind-side sack and fumble last week. UW rushed only four on that play, but an ILB was one of the four. The ILB caught the eye of the RT. The RT for Northwestern blocked the ILB and not Herbig on the edge.
ILB 36 JAKE CHANEY (5-11, 229, Soph., Cape Coral, Fla.)
* 5.6 three star recruit, unranked in Florida.
* A lot better on his drops and converging to the pass than MSU’s inside LBs.
+ Good quickness as a short-strider, getting pressure on the QB last week for a pressured INC. It was a four-man rush, but at pre-snap, you didn’t know which of the six up near the line of scrimmage was going to rush. Turned out that No. 36 rushed, and he stunted, just to make it harder to locate who was rushing and who was supposed to block him.
ILB 54 JORDAN TURNER (6-1, 225, Soph., Farmington, Mich., Farmington High)
* 5.7 three star recruit, ranked No. 14 in the state. Michigan State offered. He committed during the summer of 2019, prior to his senior year.
* Six tackles last year as a freshman.
* Ranks third on the team in tackles with 25.
* All of these LBs are quick, smart and sturdy.
* Did not play last week.
ILB 55 Maema Njongmeta (6-0, 229, Jr., Buffalo Grove, Ill.)
* 5.7 three-star recruit, ranked No. 8 in Illinois.
* Six tackles last season.
* Pretty quick.
ILB 39 TATUM GRASS (6-2, 232, Jr., Holmen, Wis.)
* Former walk-on TE.
* Decently forceful at taking on offensive line blockers at the LB level.
* Isn’t late when plugging a gap. Firm when he gets there.
DEFENSIVE BACKS
2 CB RICARDO HALLMAN (5-10, 177, R-Fr., Miami)
*5.8 four star recruit, ranked No. 49 in Florida.
+ Good break on the ball from off man-to-man for a pass break in the 1Q vs Illinois.
1 CB JAY SHAW (5-11, 187, Sr., Corona, Calif.)
* Was a 5.7 three star recruit, ranked No. 49 in California.
* Transfer from UCLA
* Pretty good hips and feet. Not great but not bad. He is not a weakness.
- In press coverage, beaten deep for 34 yards by Illinois WR Brian Hightower on Illinois’ first pass play of the day.
- Flagged for pass interference on a 15-yard fade in man to man against Illinois in the red zone.
+ Plays decently physical against the run on the edge and against WR screens.
21 CB Justin Clark (5-11, 180, Pontiac, Mich./West Bloomfield).
* Transfer from Toledo. Had 18 starts at Toledo.
* Decent coverage and tackle on a return route against Illinois, gain of 5.
11 CB Alexander Smith (5-11, 183, Sr., Culver City Calif.)
* Has been out with a hamstring injury.
5 NICKEL CEDRICK DORT (5-11, 183, Sr., Palm Beach Gardens, Fla.)
* Two-star recruit.
- Helped off the field last week in the 3Q after taking a nasty fall to the turf.
* Transfer from Kentucky.
* Plays the slot when they sub him in for a defensive linemen when they go with a 2-4-5.
12 Max Lofy (5-10, 189, Soph., Colorado Springs)
* 5.6 three-star recruit.
* The player in the slot replacing Dort.
* Three tackles last year.
S 15 JOHN TORCHIO (6-1, 211, Sr., Lafayette, Calif.)
* Two-star recruit, walked on at UW.
* Second on the team in tackles with 27. Four pass break-ups.
* Sometimes comes down to the LB level as a box safety.
* Had four career starts prior to this year.
+ Good read and pass break up on a shallow cross while playing zone defense in the 1Q last week.
S 13 KAMO’I LATU (6-0, 195, Jr., Honolulu, Hawaii)
* 5.5 three-star.
* Transfer from Utah.
+ Had a stand-still INT in deep zone last week off of a poor decision by Northwestern QB Helinsky.
+ INT at the goal line on fourth-and-four from the 20 last week. Playing deep in man-to-man, he simple cut in front of a flag route.
SPECIAL TEAMS
Wisconsin leads the Big Ten in kickoff return average at 23.7 per (Michigan State is No. 11 at 17.8).
Isaac Guerendo is No. 4 individually at 24.2 on 13 returns (MSU’s Tyrell Henry is No. 5 at 22.6 on five returns).
PK Nate Van Zelst
* Second-stringer pressed into duty due to injury. Missed a short FG on the opening drive last week.
ADD IT ALL UP
Wisconsin has the more reliable defense. I think I have talked myself into believing that Mertz is the more stable, upward-trending QB of the two. I give Michigan State a chance to make defensive personnel changes to adapt to the power run game Wisconsin will present, but can Michigan State deploy those changes without making assignment and communication errors in the back seven?
If this game is close, can MSU’s kicking game be counted on to hit important field goals? Can Wisconsin's. Slight edge to UW.
Michigan State is capable of winning this game, but not until and unless it gets its crap together. It would be a lot easier to get that crap together with Darius Snow and Xavier Henderson on the field, but MSU’s ability to achieve solvency on defense has been slow. But the schedule waits for no one.
