As many of you have undoubtedly heard, the NCAA and the Big Ten Conference have handed down their punishments to Penn State for the Sandusky Scandal that has dominated news narratives of collegiate athletics and the nation at large for the better part of a year. What happened was a tragedy. A horrific and chilling example of what can happen when serious crimes are not taken seriously and reputation is put before what is right. It is also an example of what can happen when athletics have too much power in academic institutions.
While many around the country talk about what these rulings mean for Penn State, I’m writing about what this means for Wisconsin, and not just on the gridiron. As a rising national power in football and perennials powers in basketball, and hockey, Wisconsin sports have taken a prominent position both locally and nationally. With that, there is the natural, and justified, concern that athletics is taking too prominent a position in college sports; that the term student-athlete is less about the student, and more about the athlete.
Wisconsin faced a similar situation as Penn State did with the publication of UW Athletics official John Chadima’s inappropriate conduct with student employees. While obviously very different than the Jerry Sandusky incidents, Chadima’s case was a chilling affirmation that the UW does not have a spotless and sterling record. However, the UW did not try to cover up the incident. Chadima was immediately placed on leave (which he then resigned from), and an independent investigation was called for by the school. Kudos to the UW for that.
Wisconsin needs to be in front of this, and lead the way in changing the “football first” culture. Overall, I think the UW is on the “safe” side of the “football culture” battle. We are not like SEC schools where winning a National Title is more important than literally anything else. But we’re flirting with the line. Beloved Athletic Director Barry Alvarez frequently parks very near to a statue of himself (like Joe Paterno did) and head football coach Bret Bielema is not an overly large member of the campus community like fellow coach Bo Ryan is.
Additionally, the next Chancellor needs the fortitude and inner strength to take on a wildly popular athletic director and a rising football program. We need a Chancellor unafraid to take the right steps, even if they may be detrimental to athletic success. Preferably, we would like a Chancellor with previous experience leading or managing major Division 1 institutions.
But what does this mean for football?
Clearly, such a monumental decision will have a tremendous impact on Badger football and while the lessons the UW can learn from this case are important, many of our students and fans are eager to discuss how this will impact the most visible part of the NCAA sanctions: the football program.
Good news abounds for Bucky and friends. We all might as well book hotel rooms in Indy right now because the Badgers seem like the clear (only?) team to win the Leaders division. Ohio State and Penn State are ineligible and so our only challengers are Purdue, Illinois, and Indiana. Yep, seems like a solid bet.
However, it is important that the Badgers remain focused. Sloppy play encouraged by complacancy could take Bucky out of the national title hunt, and we do not want to be “Asterik Champions” who lose to both Ohio State and Penn State before getting into the championship by default. Let’s go out and rock their socks like it still was relevant.
Additionally, the Badgers may scoop up some major talent from Penn State. One of the conditions of the sanctions was that all players may immediately transfer to other major schools without sitting out 1 year as is usually the case. While possible, it seems like that many current players will remain with the team, but the best value could lie in this year’s incoming freshman class with several VERY highly recruited players now tempted away from a team that they could never advance into the postseason.
You have to wonder how many phone calls Beilema and his staff have already made…
I actually disagree that this is good news for Wisconsin on the football front. Perhaps I'm alone in thinking this, but if we don't make the 4 team playoff at least once in the next decade or so, I will be severely disappointed. While I love winning Big 10 titles, that next step just got a whole lot more attainable. In order for that to happen we need to either be undefeated or have only 1 loss. If we go undefeated we are virtually guaranteed a spot. However, with one loss we need to have a strong schedule and some big victories. Penn State will be a severely weakened team for the next decade. Now 4 of our 5 divisional games, all but Ohio State, are against weak teams and our guaranteed cross over game is against Minnesota. In the past a 1 loss team had little chance of making the national title game anyways, but now multiple 1 loss teams are almost guaranteed to be in that 4 team playoff. Even though a weak Penn State might mean 1 or 2 more Big Ten title game appearances and maybe an extra championship or two. There are now much greater odds that a 1 loss Wisconsin team gets shut out of the 4 team playoff.
@Patrick McEwen I agree with your logic, but, personally, I really don't think of Wisconsin as a top four program - and don't want to. I don't need us to win a national championship to be happy with our program's success. I like thinking of the Rose Bowl as an attainable goal and one that makes us really happy. When we start thinking about a national championship as the ultimate goal, it makes the Rose Bowl less appealing. In reality, I think making the Rose Bowl consistently is amazing and we don't want that to lose its luster either. Fans of schools like Alabama and LSU are entitled and are disappointed with any non-national title season; I don't ever want Wisconsin fans to act the same way.
@mbeemsterboer The problem with that is the the Rose Bowl's place in college football tradition is already changing. In the last few years, there were occasions like the USC/Texas game for the national title in the Rose Bowl every fifth year where the bowl was no longer the Big Ten/ Pac 12 matchup. Anytime the Big Ten or Pac 12 champion was in the national title game, even when they picked the second team from those conferences, it was no longer the traditional match up of league champions. In the new playoff format, the frequency of those scenarios is even greater. The Rose Bowl will now be involved in the national title picture every 3rd year as a semifinal game instead of every fifth as the title game. With 4 teams in the playoff instead of just 2, the Big Ten and Pac 12 will probably see at least one of their league champions in the playoff every year and sometimes both league champions instead of a single league champion there as the non-SEC champion team every 2nd or 3rd year. The Rose Bowl is no longer what it once was. In 2025 when the deal for the 4 team playoff is over, I would not be surprised to see the playoff expanded to 8 teams and either the Rose Bowl made a permanent part of the playoff or bowls only for teams that didn't make the playoff.I don't expect Wisconsin to ever win a national title. Under the current system, I thought we had a chance of going undefeated and getting to lose to the SEC champion in the national championship game. However, now that there are 4 teams in the playoff, wouldn't you like to see a 1 or 2 loss Big Ten champion Wisconsin team as the 4th team in that playoff rather than ranked 5, 6 or 7? I don't know if Wisconsin will ever go undefeated, but I think having 2 or 3 teams that win Big Ten championships and finish with 1 or 2 losses in the next 10 years are pretty realistic expectations. I would really like to see at least 1 of those teams make the 4 team playoff.
Latest blog post: In support of NCAA's penalties issued against Penn State: all but one
On the issue of booking hotel rooms in Indy for the B1G Championship Game, that is a good idea regardless of our chances of making it. You book early enough and you get a great rate with no penalty for canceling if you do it more than 72 hours beforehand. That's forward thinking.