When will Wisconsin’s offense improve? Why isn’t Maema Njongmeta playing? Badgers mailbag

MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin is coming off an offensive performance to forget during a 15-6 loss to Iowa. You had questions about it for the Badgers mailbag.

Note: Submitted questions have been lightly edited for length and clarity.

How long should we expect it to take before we see marked improvement on offense? Is it a question of talent? New scheme? Do you think this staff is in over its head? — David M.

I don’t think the staff is in over its head. I do think it’s going to take longer than many of us anticipated. Luke Fickell said after the Washington State loss that he believed the talent was there to succeed immediately. The Badgers likely could use more help at tight end and on the offensive line. It certainly doesn’t help losing running back Chez Mellusi and quarterback Tanner Mordecai. But there were inconsistencies on offense even with those players in the lineup.

Fickell said after the Iowa loss that the staff was trying to find out how the offense fit with the players it had. That leads me to believe a lot of this is scheme-related. I think there’s flexibility in the plan, but coaches aren’t going to wholesale change what they’re trying to achieve in a new system.

I asked Fickell this week whether the offensive overhaul had created more of a challenge than anticipated. He said the answer was no and cited the nature of the players trying to learn new things, such as perimeter blocking.

“We didn’t do a great job this past week of blocking on the perimeter,” Fickell said. “The way they played their zone match concepts and some of the things, the nickel took a lot of things away from us. Not something that our guys probably saw a ton against our defense, playing a little bit more man, playing a little bit more on-body stuff. Sometimes, it’s a little bit easier to block out there on the perimeter just by the nature of the guy’s playing man-to-man on another guy. So that’s where guys are thrown into these other situations.

“Do they recognize, whether it’s a Tucker Ashcraft, who’s a freshman, or Hayden Rucci, who probably hasn’t played other than the start of spring ball out there in space a lot? Do they recognize some of those things and be able to execute on game day when things are a little bit different? That’s where we’re having to continue to kind of tailor what it is that we need to do based on what our guys have the best opportunity to do.”

Now, while I don’t think perimeter blocking is the reason Wisconsin’s offense has struggled, it was interesting to hear from Fickell about some of the nuances required for this system to succeed. It’s obvious after the Iowa game that Wisconsin isn’t there yet.

I noticed in Saturday’s Iowa loss that most of Mordecai’s throws were “outside the numbers” rather than inside the hash marks. Do you know what percentage of Phil Longo’s Air Raid attempts with the Badgers have been outside throws vs. inside?  — Robert Z.

Most of Mordecai’s passing attempts this season have been between the yardage markers on the field. According to Pro Football Focus, Mordecai has completed 73 of 93 passes (78.4 percent) for 606 yards with one touchdown and two interceptions on throws between the numbers. He has completed 41 of 78 passes (52.5 percent) for 518 yards with two touchdowns and one interception on throws outside the numbers.

It makes sense that the percentage of completions is higher across the middle because that’s generally where the slot receivers work. A lot of Mordecai’s deep shots down the sideline come to the receivers on the outside of the formation.

Against Iowa, Mordecai completed 10 of 13 passes for 56 yards between the numbers. He completed 2 of 7 passes outside the numbers for 50 yards. Those two throws were a 42-yard completion to Bryson Green and an 8-yard completion to Will Pauling up the right sideline when Mordecai broke his hand. Braedyn Locke, meanwhile, completed 10 of 14 passes for 74 yards with no touchdowns and one interception on throws between the numbers. He completed 5 of 10 passes for 48 yards on throws outside the numbers.

Braedyn Locke completed 10 of 14 passes for 74 yards against Iowa after Tanner Mordecai suffered a broken hand. (Jeff Hanisch / USA Today)

Do the receivers run traditional “route tree” routes? I have yet to see a slant. Not many shallow crossers or drags etc. I’ve heard the Air Raid is a “run to green space” offense. But if it’s not working, why would we not see some bunches and picks and scheming to get receivers open? — Scott S.

Thanks to the magic of advanced statistics, I can give you the numbers on every kind of route that Wisconsin’s pass-catchers have run on plays in which they have been targeted. These stats are arranged by most passing attempts per route concept and are courtesy of TruMedia:

What’s interesting is how much Wisconsin’s offense has favored hitches and out routes. Hitches typically come on shorter throws when a receiver stops in the route and turns to look for the ball at about 5 yards. The Badgers are averaging about 7.9 yards per completion on those throws. Out routes are when the receiver runs down the field and then turns outward toward the sideline. Those plays are averaging 9 yards per reception. It’s not surprising that go routes, when the receiver simply runs straight down the field, have been high risk and high reward. The Badgers are averaging 37 yards per completion on go routes but have connected on just 23.8 percent of those throws.

Two of Mordecai’s touchdown passes came on in routes. One was a 29-yard touchdown against a Buffalo single-high safety to receiver Chimere Dike, who broke inside and underneath slot receiver Skyler Bell running up the field.

A lot of the route types that have the highest completion percentage are those shorter throws, such as wide receiver and tight end screens or flare/swing routes that typically go to the running back out of the backfield. You are correct that slant routes are not a big part of the offense. These numbers don’t necessarily solve the problem of what the offense specifically needs to change, but they do offer a good indication of how Wisconsin has chosen to attack defenses in the passing game.

GO DEEPER

Wisconsin at midseason: Biggest surprise, key stats and a path to 8 wins

Why can’t we see the freshman RB? He’s quicker and more like Chez Mellusi. — Jeffrey C.

I understand why fans clamor to see a young, athletic prospect with long-term upside. But the answer comes back to whether he is ready to compete right now. And, based on the determinations of the coaching staff, freshman running back Nate White still needs time to progress physically and climb the depth chart. You can say he’s more like Mellusi in terms of shiftiness. But White is also listed at 5-foot-11 and 170 pounds — 42 pounds lighter than Mellusi.

I like what Wisconsin has in White. His burst is impressive. There was a carry in the first week of preseason practices in which he turned a negative-yardage play into a short gain by juking a defender in the backfield. A couple of days later, he broke free thanks to a big hole created by his offensive line and scored a 40-yard touchdown. Of course, he also did this with the third-team offense while matching up against younger defensive reserves and only earned those reps after Grover Bortolotti sustained an injury.

“He’s going to be really tough to tackle,” running backs coach Devon Spalding said in August. “He’s really tough for being what he weighs right now. He’s not afraid of contact. He tries splitting defenders. He’s done a nice job for us.”

Still, potential doesn’t mean instant production. Jackson Acker, Cade Yacamelli and Bortolotti appear to be ahead of White at this stage. It’s more reasonable to see what White looks like next season with a full year in a college weight room and offensive system. I’m intrigued to see what the running back group looks like next season with three 2024 commits joining the fray: Dilin Jones, Darrion Dupree and Gideon Ituka.

What is happening with Maema Njongmeta? He’s a captain, and no one is talking about it. — Jeff K.

I wouldn’t say no one is talking about it. I addressed it a couple of weeks ago after Njongmeta played just one snap against Purdue on the final fourth-and-10 play of the game. At the time, Fickell said the staff liked Jake Chaney at inside linebacker instead because of how the opponent would spread out Wisconsin’s defensive players. My assumption was that Njongmeta would play more against the Iowas of the world — teams that line up and pound it with tighter formations. Instead, Njongmeta played just six snaps against Iowa on Saturday, per Pro Football Focus.

Njongmeta’s lack of playing time is surprising based largely on his previous body of work. He started 11 games last season and led Wisconsin with 95 tackles to go with 12.5 tackles for loss and earned third-team All-Big Ten honors from the media. He then started the first three games this season and recorded 16 tackles.

But it seems pretty clear that defensive coordinator and inside linebackers coach Mike Tressel views Njongmeta as a No. 2 behind Chaney, who has started the past three games next to inside linebacker Jordan Turner and has five starts total. Chaney ranks second on the team with 36 tackles and is coming off a career-high 11-tackle performance against Iowa. During one fourth-quarter drive, after Iowa took a 12-6 lead on a safety, Chaney was in on all three tackles to force a three-and-out.

It certainly is unusual to see a captain and starter have his role diminished in this way. But the new coaching staff isn’t obligated to play him if there is a belief that another player is better suited for the role. That is a difficult spot for Njongmeta but one he’ll have to figure out how to embrace as a leader on the team.

“Us as coaches tell them don’t change,” Fickell said this week. “Be the same person you are. Still take the same role. The nature of it is it’s really difficult. It’s like when a guy gets injured. What we’re going to ask Tanner to do and the leadership we’re going to ask of him and whether it’s Tanner or Chez, ‘You guys have got to keep your role. Guys still look to you.’

“Boy, is that difficult. But we’re going to have that expectation for him to do that and make sure they understand their teammates are counting on them for that role that they need to provide. But there’s no doubt it is definitely harder.”

Do the coaches still have Braelon Allen on a carry count of 18, as that is exactly what he had for carries once again? Are they going to adhere to this no matter what, even to the detriment of the team? Or are they actually going to give Jackson Acker (or one of the other backs) more carries, as throwing 70 percent of the time is not going to win many games? — Todd J.

For starters, Allen is not on an actual carry count. The number 18 stems from a comment that Fickell made on Big Ten Network during the league’s media days event in July. Here’s what Fickell said then: “I would love to see him average at the end of the year 18 carries a game for about 140 (yards). Meaning that if that’s the case, we’re going to have the best version of Braelon that we need. If you carry it 30, by the end of the year, it does wear you down. You can be 245 pounds like he is and be as physical as he is, but it still takes a toll. I think we all have to recognize that, and he’s got to be one to recognize that as well.”

When Fickell said that, Mellusi was healthy and able to complement Allen with one of the top 1-2 running back tandems in the country. Allen averaged 13 carries through the first four games, while Mellusi averaged 12.8. Since Mellusi’s injury, Allen has averaged 19.5 carries during the past two games. Yes, he carried exactly 18 times against Iowa. He also carried 21 times for 101 yards and a touchdown the week before against Rutgers.

There is certainly a balance Wisconsin must strike with Allen so as not to wear him out. Allen has a history of injuries in his college career, including this season. But the Badgers are in the business of trying to win games, and Allen is one of the team’s best playmakers. Acker will get some carries — he had 13 against Rutgers and just three against Iowa — but Allen’s value is as high as it has been all year.

“Braelon’s going to have to put some more on his shoulders,” Fickell said. “Any time you’ve got some new guys in there, there’s other things you’ve got to throw upon other people.”

Did the Badgers set their own record for failed third-down plays on Saturday? — Steve B.

Wisconsin converted just 2 of 17 third down attempts against Iowa (11.7 percent). I went back and looked at all the game logs since 2009. There is no other game in which Wisconsin had 15 failed third-down conversions and just two in which the Badgers were worse percentage-wise on third down. Both of those came in 2021. Wisconsin converted 1 of 14 third downs against Notre Dame (7.1 percent) and 1 of 11 third downs against Purdue (9.1 percent) that season. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Wisconsin finished with its worst third-down conversion rate (33.9 percent) in 2021 in any year since 2009.

Wisconsin has been uneven on third downs this season. It looked as though the Badgers were trending in the right direction after converting 21 of 35 third downs (60 percent) in victories against Purdue and Rutgers. The Badgers rank 68th nationally in third down conversion rate overall at 40.4 percent. But Wisconsin was especially terrible against Iowa.

The average yards to gain on third down was 6.7. Wisconsin faced third-and-10 or more on five occasions and never had a third-and-1. The only third-and-1 Wisconsin had turned into a third-and-6 when right tackle Riley Mahlman was flagged for a false start penalty. Whether Wisconsin can win with Locke at quarterback depends in large part on the Badgers simply giving themselves a chance on some of these drives.

(Top photo of Luke Fickell: Dan Sanger / Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)