CFB Early Lines Thread (week of 10/8)

[MyTurn2Raise]

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 also doubtful. 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.

[droopy0021]

[ 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.

[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

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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

[/ QUOTE ]

I strongly disagree with lots of this post

Penn St is not slow
Penn St is faster than Wisconsin

Wisconsin had so many passing yards v Illinois because they fell way behind and middle passing routes are the weak spot on the Illini D. However, by turning Wisconsin to pass first, Illinois won the turnover battle.
Don't forget how 'lucky' that Wisconsin pass total v Illinois was. The Badgers had a player on the ground catch a 40+ yard pass after two Illini both bobbled what should've been a pick. Also, Beckum had a 35 yard completion that he didn't catch. The announcers in the booth were stunned when the completion stood, which flipped Wisconsin from their own 10 to their own 45 down 24-13. Ummm....Wisconsin never held down the Illini rushing. Illinois scored TDs on 2 of their 4 drives in the second half v Wisconsin. It took some incredible breaks (not only the two passes mentioned above, but also a fumble incorrectly blown dead that would've given Illinois a 38-19 lead) to keep the Badgers in the game.
Wisconsin never handled the Illini rushing attack well (though I doubt that is relevant at all considering PSU's offensive shceme).
Illinois drives
2nd qtr
10 plays--42 yards--FG
7 plays--75 yards--TD
3 plays--0 yards--punt
3rd qtr
9 plays--79 yards--TD
3 plays-- -3 yards--punt
4th qtr
4 plays--32 yards--punt
9 plays--71 yards--TD
4 plays--11 yards--clocked out the game

As far as Illinois-Mizzou, it should be noted that Mizzou returned a fumble 101 yds for a TD, returned a punt 66 yards for a TD, and kicked a FG to end the first half after Illinois fumble a kick return. The Mizzou offense only scored 23 points, which is far below their average. In addition, the Tigers only averaged 6.6 yards per pass play, which is a very modest number. It would be average to slightly above average pass defense. Mizzou scored on 1 of 5 first qtr possessions, 1 of 3 second qtr, 1 of 4 3rd qtr, and 1 of 3 4th qtr. I fail to see how that is scoring at will. It's above average, but not at will.


LOL @ the Badgers resorting to the air and that being a good thing. 2+ picks is a given if Wisconsin has to throw the ball 40 times.

You are right that Penn St's offense is not dynamic and it is hurting them. They do have the skill players with Williams-Butler-Norwood at wideout. They haven't shown an ability to capatilize on that.


The big11ten criticisms of dynamic offenses, in general though, is an old, tired and incorrect statement.

Does everyone forget Chuck Long under Hayden Fry at Iowa in the 80s? What about the Jim Everett Purdue teams? Mike White with Dave Wilson, Tony Eason, and Jack Trudeau at Illinois a few years before Jeff George played at both Purdue and Illinois? Iowa and Illinois were right there with Ohio State as the second best programs in the big11ten from 1982-1991 or something precisely because they did throw the ball all over the place. Look at the current set of offenses: Purdue under Tiller has played "basketball-on-grass" since 97, N'Western and Illinois use the shotgun spread rushing attack that West Virginia is known for, Indiana's offense has been unreal under Antwan Randle El in the mid90s to the Kellen Lewis and James Hardy shotgun spread pass of today, and MSU hasn't completely left behind the offense of John L. Smith that brought L'ville to national prominance. Just because Wisconsin and Penn St play a boring style doesn't mean the conference does as a whole.

BTW---I think the Wisconsin ML might be a good play, but had to correct many of the statements here.

[psuasskicker]

Good post MT2R, though your last line sums it up. Both of these teams IMO are bad and can find ways to give the game away. I like the Wisc ML a good bit actually, though I hate betting against PSU and probably won't.

- C -