MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin was hammered by Iowa 42-10 on Saturday night in yet another underwhelming big-game performance. You had questions for the Badgers mailbag. Here are the answers:
(Note: Submitted questions have been lightly edited for length and clarity.)
What is your sense of how Chris McIntosh is viewing this season? Do you think he’ll push or force Luke Fickell to make any major staff changes (Phil Longo and/or Mike Tressel?) Do you also think he’s committed to giving Luke four full years before judging/deciding on his tenure here? — Ryan S.
I absolutely think McIntosh is committed to giving Fickell at least four full years before determining the future. I don’t know how you can hand the keys to a new coach after firing the previous coach because the program is trending backward and not give the new guy time to change things.
Giving up on Fickell early would only lead to starting from square one again while also serving as an admission of failure on McIntosh’s part. Whether he likes it or not, McIntosh’s success is tied to what Fickell achieves because McIntosh is the one who convinced Fickell to come to Wisconsin — at an average annual salary of $7.8 million.
It’s also important to note that Fickell’s contract runs through March 31, 2031. Under the terms of the initial contract, early termination would result in Wisconsin owing Fickell 80 percent of the total compensation remaining on his deal. At a minimum, the school would owe $6.48 million but likely a lot more. That’s not a position Wisconsin wants to be in given that Paul Chryst received a reduced buyout two years ago of $11 million, paid from the University of Wisconsin Foundation, the school’s fundraising organization.
The general consensus I gathered from talking to former Badgers players such as Joe Thomas and Joe Schobert is that four years is a reasonable timeframe to show whether a coach can make progress with a roster full of his players. Now, that’s not the case everywhere. Mike Riley was fired in 2017 after three seasons at Nebraska when he went 19-19, including 4-8 in Year 3. His replacement, Scott Frost, got five years before he was fired despite going 16-31 because the program had such a vested interest in a native son having success.
The Nebraska comparisons keep coming up more and more with Wisconsin because they are two programs that once had sustained success and have struggled to replicate that formula (though the Cornhuskers have had issues for far longer than the Badgers). I don’t see McIntosh forcing Fickell to make a staffing change because I think Fickell would do it on his own. He didn’t come here to go 6-6 or 7-5, and if he believes a new coordinator is necessary, he’ll pursue that avenue — just as he did in firing his offensive line coach after last season.
The real challenge is that I don’t know whether it’s realistic to believe Wisconsin’s record will be substantially different in Year 3 given how unbelievably difficult the schedule is. We knew it would be an issue in Year 2, and it has been. It’s even harder next season with road games against Alabama, Oregon, Indiana, Michigan and Minnesota and home games against Ohio State and Iowa, among others. Fickell no doubt has a tremendous task in front of him.
Barry Alvarez’s first three seasons: 11-22 overall, 5-19 in conference games, 0 winning seasons, 0 bowl games. Meaningful comp or no? And, yes, Paul Chryst was a winner while Don Morton was not. Both left the cupboard bare for their successor. No coach wins without players. — Andrew M.
I understand the desire to make this comparison, but we’re talking about two completely different circumstances in different eras of the sport. When Alvarez took over Wisconsin in 1990, the program was one of the worst in the country. The starting point was to figure out how to field a competent team with fewer resources. Morton went 6-27 overall in his three seasons and never won more than three games, so Alvarez’s first three seasons could be considered progress.
Alvarez went from 1-10 to 5-6 by Year 2, which meant there were early signs of hope. I think that was reflected in how the fan base felt because even during Year 3 when Wisconsin again went 5-6 and narrowly missed a bowl game, average attendance figures at Camp Randall Stadium had risen from 41,734 in Morton’s final season to 61,378. There was probably more patience from fans who hadn’t seen a winner for a long time, so expectations were different. Consider that Alvarez signed a four-year contract that included a starting 11-month base salary of $110,000.
I think Fickell’s challenge is extremely difficult but in a different way than Alvarez’s. Wisconsin essentially is middle of the pack in a Big Ten that is harder than ever and has to take the next step at a time when one of its greatest traditional advantages — developing players over time — is threatened by the transfer portal. Yes, that means Fickell can overhaul a roster in one offseason in a way that Alvarez couldn’t. But it also means he’s going to lose key players every year. I talked to Alvarez after the USC loss this season and asked him about how much different things were now with NIL and the portal.
“You’d be a fool to say no, it doesn’t make any difference because it’s totally different,” Alvarez said. “I didn’t have to deal with that. I’m glad I didn’t have to deal with it. It wouldn’t be fun to deal with. It’s a totally different game. I had to worry about recruiting. Now, you’ve got to recruit your own guys and then you’ve got to see who’s available out there from other teams that are ready to walk.”
Wisconsin’s recruiting under Chryst might have suffered at the end, but I don’t think he left the cupboard bare. Even with two offseasons worth of transfers and recruiting additions under Fickell, Wisconsin still starts five players on offense who were Chryst guys — three offensive linemen, as well as tight end Riley Nowakowski and wide receiver Vinny Anthony, who is the best big-play threat on the team. Eight defensive starters were recruits under Chryst and were part of a defense that two years ago ranked 11th nationally. I know Wisconsin isn’t winning as much as it wants to. But if Fickell had better players, he’d be using them.
Should we bring back the veer? — Pierre M.
It worked so well the last time, why not? (Kidding.) Wisconsin fumbled the ball only 111 times and lost 61 of them during the three-year veer run under Morton. If you want to change the offense, maybe don’t go back that far in time.
A huge reason, in my opinion, for the underperformance of the last five years has been competent QB play. How is it that we haven’t been able to recruit and develop even capable two-deep play at that position a la John Stocco, Scott Tolzien, Joel Stave, Alex Hornibrook, etc.? Everyone wants a Russell Wilson, but QB play at the level of any of the above would have this team at 7-2 (or better). — Amy W.
Let’s evaluate Wisconsin’s quarterback decisions over the last five years, beginning with the 2020 season. Graham Mertz earned the starting job when Jack Coan sustained a preseason right foot injury, and it was hard not to be excited about the future given that Mertz was the program’s highest-rated QB recruit in the online ranking era and lit up Illinois in his starting debut. Coan finally was cleared to play late in the season, but Wisconsin coaches stuck with Mertz. Coan then transferred to Notre Dame.
Wisconsin basically put its future on Mertz because the Badgers didn’t land a scholarship quarterback in the 2020 recruiting class. They offered three players — including Tyler Van Dyke — but didn’t get any of them with Mertz already in the fold and settled for none.
Wisconsin’s 2021 quarterback, Deacon Hill, was a gamble that didn’t pay off. Wisconsin was the first school to offer Hill a scholarship even though he had started only two varsity games at Santa Barbara (Calif.). Wisconsin ended up signing him even with a late push from nearby UCLA. Hill had a big arm but struggled with touch, was eventually passed on the depth chart by 2022 quarterback signee Myles Burkett and transferred. Mertz’s best season came in 2022, but he rarely stood out in big games and transferred when the new staff arrived. His longtime backup, Chase Wolf, threw more interceptions than touchdowns in his career. Burkett transferred last offseason to FCS Albany.
I actually think Wisconsin made decent transfer portal decisions by adding Tanner Mordecai last season and Van Dyke this season. It’s just too bad for the Badgers that Mordecai didn’t play like the quarterback everyone wanted him to be until the ReliaQuest Bowl because his college career was over after that. We’ll never know what Van Dyke could have done this season because of the ACL tear he suffered against Alabama. Braedyn Locke certainly isn’t playing like the long-term answer, which leaves quarterback as a question mark for the future.
The quarterbacks you mentioned were aided by ridiculously talented running backs and stout offensive lines that made them even better. John Stocco’s best season came with running back Brian Calhoun gaining 2,207 yards of total offense. Scott Tolzien nearly had three 1,000-yard rushers in his final season. Joel Stave benefitted from a combination of Montee Ball, James White and Melvin Gordon — two Doak Walker Award winners. Alex Hornibrook happened to have Jonathan Taylor rushing for 1,977 yards in his best season as QB. That matters a lot for the success of a quarterback, especially at a place like Wisconsin.
I don’t understand why the Badgers’ leading yards-per-carry running back hasn’t seen the ball since the Northwestern game. With the running game sputtering, why hasn’t Cade Yacamelli gotten a single carry in two games? — Jim H.
I asked Fickell the week of the Northwestern game how the staff decided when to use Yacamelli given his production and the fact the Badgers wanted to get freshman running back Darrion Dupree more opportunities as the backup. The answer wasn’t all that satisfactory, but here’s what Fickell said:
“There’s not an exact science. And I know it can be frustrating for some, and Cade in particular. There’s nobody that’s got a higher per-carry average than Cade does. But I think that’s a product of a little bit of the system. We try to refer to it every week and remind guys that if you do what’s best for the team, in the long run, it’ll be best for you. Cade is a prime example of that. When he gets his opportunities, he’s taken incredible advantage of those opportunities.”
Fickell went on to praise Yacamelli’s maturity and ability to handle his role. Yacamelli then carried three times for 10 yards against Northwestern, which included scoring on a 3-yard touchdown run. He hasn’t carried the ball since in games against Penn State and Iowa.
To me, this is a simple case of Wisconsin wanting to use just two running backs and Yacamelli being the third guy. Fickell made it clear earlier in the season that he wanted to pare down his running back rotation to develop a better rhythm. That means Tawee Walker is the starter, Dupree is the backup and Yacamelli is the odd man out. That has to be a tough pill to swallow for Yacamelli, who has 33 carries for 278 yards — an average of 8.3 yards per attempt — and two touchdowns.
Yacamelli couldn’t possibly have done more to earn snaps, but the staff clearly sees Dupree as a player with a higher ceiling long-term. Dupree also is someone this staff recruited. He did a few good things late in the Northwestern game and was a rare bright spot against Iowa when he carried seven times for 52 yards. Dupree also is a dynamic receiving threat, having caught nine passes for 104 yards. Of course, making this decision means Wisconsin runs the risk of losing Yacamelli — if the Badgers won’t use him, here’s betting another program will.
Jesse, in your wildest dreams, did you expect that at game 20 a Luke Fickell-coached team would be so inept? We can all argue about the process, but given Fickell’s background and success at Cincinnati, it’s shocking to me that the team is capable of a no-show at Iowa where it looks like the worst team in the Big Ten. — Steve S.
I want to have some perspective on this by noting that Wisconsin is 5-4 overall and 3-3 in the Big Ten. The Badgers are far from the worst team in the league. But they’re also extremely average. And for a program that was well above average for so long and aspires to return at least to that level and beyond, it feels deflating.
I did not expect Fickell to be 12-10 overall and 8-7 in the Big Ten since the start of last season. That’s pretty similar to Paul Chryst over his final two and and a half seasons, when he went 15-10 and 9-8. I think many people were understandably caught up in Fickell’s success at Cincinnati and enthusiastic about the changes he was attempting to implement at Wisconsin. I also think the challenge of elevating Wisconsin has been far greater than most, including Fickell, anticipated.
If I go back to the start of the season, I had Wisconsin sitting with exactly the same record through nine games as it has right now, with losses to Alabama, USC, Penn State and Iowa. I think the shock comes from how Wisconsin generally has played. It’s one thing to lose. It’s another thing to be outscored in those four losses 98-17 in the second half. For so long, this was a program built on grit and a high execution level. Fickell had better find those traits again, among many other things, to move the program forward.
(Photo: Todd Rosenberg / Getty Images)
