[thelyingthief]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just a warning to all those following the Badgers

I've heard rumblings Hill is not looking too great following the punishment in Champaign. Swann is out for remainder of the year with hamstring injury . Wisky's backup RB cannot play road games. I think that explains why the Penn St line is higher than most of us think it should be.

[/ QUOTE ]


Just heard that this a.m.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think you're over-reacting: hill is listed as probable; although swann is out, jefferson has been in the rotation, and can catch the deep ball.

people are overestimating penn state's talent: they are, as they always are, SLOW. and i mean, SLOW. true, they play defense fairly well, but is that enough? wisconsin, but for turning the ball over twice in succession on the pass, dominated an illinois defense incapable of handling an air game (re: mizzou game against illinois, where missouri fell asleep after scoring at will; that game was not even close, except for the score)--and i'm not convinced penn st. can, either. penn has a solid set of line backers (as always), but while good line backing can function well enough against the Big Ten's run first and last mentality, wisconsin CAN throw, has the arsenal in place to throw, and WILL throw. the big ten still hasn't entered the modern era offensively, in which throwing is considered a viable aspect of the game. i think the badger's will have to resort to the air and are planning to do so.

also, wisconsin handled the illini's rushing attack fairly well, if one overlooks the first quarter, where the bulk of the rushing yards were forfeited, and the offense fielded by penn is much less dynamic and talented than illini's. i expect wisconsin's front to look much better here than in the illinois game.

all in all, i would say, wisconsin wins this match-up (did i mention, penn st. is SLOW?), in crappy-valley, AT LEAST 45% of the time. at +230 wisconsin is a great play.

tlt