FB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[bleedpurple]

Thankfully, I don't think Klinkner sees another defense as good as UWRF until the playoffs, so he has time to get things right. Or they can make a change. Clearly we can run the ball. If our passing game can even become serviceable, our defense might win us the whole thing.

This is the point I was going to make. We found a way to win against one of the best defenses in the country with no passing game. The fact that we had no passing game is not good. But...we may well not see a defense like that again EVEN in the playoffs. If we do, we either find a way to win again, or more preferably, have a stronger passing game than we did today.

No one involved with the program believes the passing game was good enough on Saturday. But on the other hand, our defense was so dominant, we firmly believed, "we don't mess up, we win". You may think that's playing it too conservatively. I would understand that viewpoint. But I think it was wisdom. When you see a path to victory over the defending national champion, you take it even if it doesn't look pretty.

[emma17]

Bleed, I hope your opinion and others about the greatness of UWRF's defense holds true. I think the jury is still out as to how they match up w a high level, balanced offense.

I don't know the passing numbers match up w your idea the UWW staff was playing it safe. Klinkner had 25 pass attempts, by my count 15 were in the second half.

I agree the staff likely played it safe by having him run the ball straight up the middle for a yard or two. Whether that is wisdom is another question. My idea of playing it safe is pretty simple. Hand the ball off to guys that play the position of running back. They too will get stuffed every now and then, but as we saw, the good ones (even the average ones), will break off for runs longer than a yard or two.

I really hoped the OC had learned his lesson in last year's game at UWRF when Klinkner handed the ball off to a running back a whopping three times in the entire first half.

UWL will be up for the challenge.

[badgerwarhawk]

UWL will be up for the challenge.

So will UWW.

[bleedpurple]

Bleed, I hope your opinion and others about the greatness of UWRF's defense holds true. I think the jury is still out as to how they match up w a high level, balanced offense.

I don't know the passing numbers match up w your idea the UWW staff was playing it safe. Klinkner had 25 pass attempts, by my count 15 were in the second half.

I agree the staff likely played it safe by having him run the ball straight up the middle for a yard or two. Whether that is wisdom is another question. My idea of playing it safe is pretty simple. Hand the ball off to guys that play the position of running back. They too will get stuffed every now and then, but as we saw, the good ones (even the average ones), will break off for runs longer than a yard or two.

I really hoped the OC had learned his lesson in last year's game at UWRF when Klinkner handed the ball off to a running back a whopping three times in the entire first half.

UWL will be up for the challenge.

I don't disagree with your philosophy of handing off to the running back. By playing it safe, I actually meant the type of passing game we employed. Many of those passes were "rolling pockets", moving away from the River Falls pressure. I may be wrong, but it felt like we were just trying to connect on short comeback routes with Justin on the run. If it wasn't there, throw it out of bounds and live for another day. Again, I could be misreading our intent, but I know that's not the passing offense we will employ all year. I think Justin has improved as a drop back passer and I believe we will be much more standard and balanced against most defenses. It was also a tough game to be without Brooks. This is a "Next man up" sport,but he has been a clutch option in crucial situations for us over the past year.

At the end of the day, I default to my original point. I don't think anyone in the program feels like the passing game was good enough on Saturday. I just have more hope than some because I truly do think the RF defense is loaded. Time will tell.

[bleedpurple]

Excellent podcast again Pat. And congratulations!!!

[colinsteinke]

Bleed, I hope your opinion and others about the greatness of UWRF's defense holds true. I think the jury is still out as to how they match up w a high level, balanced offense.

I don't know the passing numbers match up w your idea the UWW staff was playing it safe. Klinkner had 25 pass attempts, by my count 15 were in the second half.

I agree the staff likely played it safe by having him run the ball straight up the middle for a yard or two. Whether that is wisdom is another question. My idea of playing it safe is pretty simple. Hand the ball off to guys that play the position of running back. They too will get stuffed every now and then, but as we saw, the good ones (even the average ones), will break off for runs longer than a yard or two.

I really hoped the OC had learned his lesson in last year's game at UWRF when Klinkner handed the ball off to a running back a whopping three times in the entire first half.

UWL will be up for the challenge.

I don't disagree with your philosophy of handing off to the running back. By playing it safe, I actually meant the type of passing game we employed. Many of those passes were "rolling pockets", moving away from the River Falls pressure. I may be wrong, but it felt like we were just trying to connect on short comeback routes with Justin on the run. If it wasn't there, throw it out of bounds and live for another day. Again, I could be misreading our intent, but I know that's not the passing offense we will employ all year. I think Justin has improved as a drop back passer and I believe we will be much more standard and balanced against most defenses. It was also a tough game to be without Brooks. This is a "Next man up" sport,but he has been a clutch option in crucial situations for us over the past year.

At the end of the day, I default to my original point. I don't think anyone in the program feels like the passing game was good enough on Saturday. I just have more hope than some because I truly do think the RF defense is loaded. Time will tell.

Any thoughts on a Brooks return?

[Patrick Coleman]

Thank you!

[emma17]

UWL will be up for the challenge.

So will UWW.

Agreed- both teams will be fired up for the game.
What I mean is I believe UWL, based on scouting UWW, will focus even more intently on stopping the run and forcing Klinkner to throw the ball. I didn't see much of anything from UWW receivers vs. UWRF. Maybe Brooks is the difference maker at receiver that some believe he is.
I was able to attend the game v UWL last year- it was hard to watch that second half.

[bleedpurple]

Bleed, I hope your opinion and others about the greatness of UWRF's defense holds true. I think the jury is still out as to how they match up w a high level, balanced offense.

I don't know the passing numbers match up w your idea the UWW staff was playing it safe. Klinkner had 25 pass attempts, by my count 15 were in the second half.

I agree the staff likely played it safe by having him run the ball straight up the middle for a yard or two. Whether that is wisdom is another question. My idea of playing it safe is pretty simple. Hand the ball off to guys that play the position of running back. They too will get stuffed every now and then, but as we saw, the good ones (even the average ones), will break off for runs longer than a yard or two.

I really hoped the OC had learned his lesson in last year's game at UWRF when Klinkner handed the ball off to a running back a whopping three times in the entire first half.

UWL will be up for the challenge.

I don't disagree with your philosophy of handing off to the running back. By playing it safe, I actually meant the type of passing game we employed. Many of those passes were "rolling pockets", moving away from the River Falls pressure. I may be wrong, but it felt like we were just trying to connect on short comeback routes with Justin on the run. If it wasn't there, throw it out of bounds and live for another day. Again, I could be misreading our intent, but I know that's not the passing offense we will employ all year. I think Justin has improved as a drop back passer and I believe we will be much more standard and balanced against most defenses. It was also a tough game to be without Brooks. This is a "Next man up" sport,but he has been a clutch option in crucial situations for us over the past year.

At the end of the day, I default to my original point. I don't think anyone in the program feels like the passing game was good enough on Saturday. I just have more hope than some because I truly do think the RF defense is loaded. Time will tell.

Any thoughts on a Brooks return?

My only thought is that La Crosse better prepare for him....or not. lol

[emma17]

Bleed, I hope your opinion and others about the greatness of UWRF's defense holds true. I think the jury is still out as to how they match up w a high level, balanced offense.

I don't know the passing numbers match up w your idea the UWW staff was playing it safe. Klinkner had 25 pass attempts, by my count 15 were in the second half.

I agree the staff likely played it safe by having him run the ball straight up the middle for a yard or two. Whether that is wisdom is another question. My idea of playing it safe is pretty simple. Hand the ball off to guys that play the position of running back. They too will get stuffed every now and then, but as we saw, the good ones (even the average ones), will break off for runs longer than a yard or two.

I really hoped the OC had learned his lesson in last year's game at UWRF when Klinkner handed the ball off to a running back a whopping three times in the entire first half.

UWL will be up for the challenge.

I don't disagree with your philosophy of handing off to the running back. By playing it safe, I actually meant the type of passing game we employed. Many of those passes were "rolling pockets", moving away from the River Falls pressure. I may be wrong, but it felt like we were just trying to connect on short comeback routes with Justin on the run. If it wasn't there, throw it out of bounds and live for another day. Again, I could be misreading our intent, but I know that's not the passing offense we will employ all year. I think Justin has improved as a drop back passer and I believe we will be much more standard and balanced against most defenses. It was also a tough game to be without Brooks. This is a "Next man up" sport,but he has been a clutch option in crucial situations for us over the past year.

At the end of the day, I default to my original point. I don't think anyone in the program feels like the passing game was good enough on Saturday. I just have more hope than some because I truly do think the RF defense is loaded. Time will tell.

Any thoughts on a Brooks return?

My only thought is that La Crosse better prepare for him....or not. lol

Ha. As Pat said on the podcast- the Blanchard treatment (or something to that effect).

[emma17]

Part of last year's box score vs. UWL. Unfortunately, I see a pattern that has not changed. 16 completions for 79 yards- yeouch!


https://www.d3football.com/seasons/2025/boxscores/20251004_6sus.xml?view=boxscore

[Mitch Hall]

Eagles' defense must improve if they are to beat WW.

[AndrewB]

Part of last year's box score vs. UWL. Unfortunately, I see a pattern that has not changed. 16 completions for 79 yards- yeouch!


https://www.d3football.com/seasons/2025/boxscores/20251004_6sus.xml?view=boxscore

Should be the same conditions at UW-L as the game last year at the PERK.  Hot and extremely windy at times.  Look for the same low scoring game as last year. 

[AndrewB]

Eagles' defense must improve if they are to beat WW.

They should be fine.  Just like last year they probably give up between 17-21 points in this game. 
They gave up 24 @ St John's
They gave up 28 at home vs Hardin Simmons
They gave up 31 @ Oshkosh against who I believe is the best quarterback in D3.  There's a reason he was recruited by GVS.
Windy conditions and the first road test of the year for Whitewater.
Low scoring very close game.

[AndrewB]

Part of last year's box score vs. UWL. Unfortunately, I see a pattern that has not changed. 16 completions for 79 yards- yeouch!


https://www.d3football.com/seasons/2025/boxscores/20251004_6sus.xml?view=boxscore

Kyle Hass was worse.  Zero touchdowns and 3 interceptions.  The only offensive touchdown they scored was with the backup quarterback.