Connect with us

Wisconsin

BYU vs Wisconsin Preview: Keys to the Game, Wisconsin Overview, Prediction

Published

on

BYU vs Wisconsin Preview: Keys to the Game, Wisconsin Overview, Prediction


For the first time since 2011 versus Gonzaga, BYU is playing a round of 32 game in the NCAA Tournament. Wisconsin, meanwhile, is going for their first Sweet 16 appearance since 2017 after an 85-66 win over Montana. Both teams scored 80+ in their first round game in what could foreshadow a high-scoring game between two of the nation’s best offenses.

You can also check out the Rise and Hoop Podcast where I previewed BYU-Wisconsin.

BYU and Wisconsin by the Numbers

Wisconsin KenPom: 13

Advertisement

NET: 15

AP Rank: 13

Record: 27-9 (13-7 Big 10)

Notable Wins: Arizona (H), UCF (N), PItt (N), Iowa (H/A), Rutgers (A), Minnesota (H/A), Ohio State (H), USC (A), Nebraska (H), Northwestern (A/N), Indiana (H), Purdue (A), Illinois (H), Washington (H), Michigan State (N), UCLA (N), Montana (N)

Losses: Michigan (H/N), Marquette (A), Illinois (A), UCLA (A), Maryland (A), Oregon (H), Michigan State (A), Penn State (H)

Advertisement

BYU KenPom: 23

NET: 25

AP Rank: 17

Record: 25-8 (14-6 Big 12)

Notable Wins: NC State (N), Wyoming (N), Arizona State (H/A), Oklahoma State (H), Colorado (A), Cincinnati (H), Baylor (H), UCF (A), West Virginia (A), Kansas State (H), Kansas (H), Arizona (A), West Virginia (H), Iowa State (A/N), Utah (H), VCU (N)

Advertisement

Losses: Ole Miss (N), Providence (A), Houston (A/N), Texas Tech (H), TCU (A), Utah (A), Arizona (H), Cincinnati (A)

KenPom Prediction: Wisconsin 76, BYU 74 — Wisconsin 58% win probability

FanDuel Spread: Wisconsin -1.5

Point Total: 154.5

Wisconsin Overview

Advertisement

The Badgers are one of the best offensive teams in the nation. The top player to watch is sixth-year senior John Tonje, who was one of two unanimous First-Team All Big 10 selections. The 6-foot-5 guard averages 19 points and 5 rebounds on 46% shooting from the field and 39% from three. Tonje can score in a variety of ways — he averages 6 three-point attempts per game and is adept at drawing fouls and getting to the line. Tonje is 34th nationally in fouls drawn per 40 minutes, and averages 6.5 free throw attempts per game and shoots 91% from the foul line. I believe Tonje is the best guard BYU will have seen up to this point. VJ Edgecombe is a top 5 pick and played great versus BYU, but isn’t as productive as Tonje, and Caleb Love isn’t as consistent Tonje.

Wisconsin’s three starting guards go 6-foot-5, 6-foot-4, and 6-foot-4. John Blackwell is the Badgers second-leading scorer at 15.6 ppg and forms a great duo with Tonje. The sophomore guard shoots 32% from distance and is more streaky than Tonje, but he’s had multiple games this year where he’s made 4+ threes.

What makes Wisconsin different than any other team BYU has seen is the skill set of their starting frontcourt. UW’s two frontcourt starters are 7-foot fifth-year senior Steven Crowl and 6-foot-11 sophomore Nolan Winter. Both players average just under 10 points per game and are adept three-point shooters. Crowl shoots 42% from three on two attempts per game and Winter shoots 37% from three on 2.6 attempts per game. BYU has not seen a frontcourt with that size AND ability to shoot from three.

Wisconsin doesn’t really rely much on their bench for scoring, but they typically run an 8-man rotation. 6-foot senior guard Kamari McGee is leading scorer off the bench with 6.7 ppg and shoots 46% from three.

As a whole, offense is the strength of this Wisconsin team. They rank 13th nationally in KenPom offensive efficiency and rely on the three ball. BYU shoots the most threes in the Big 12 and Wisconsin shoots the most in the Big 10; nearly half the field goal attempts for both teams are from three. Wisconsin shoots 34.8% from three, which is 123 nationally, while BYU shoots 37% from distance.

Advertisement

The Badgers are the best free throw shooting team in the country, shooting 82.7% from the foul line. Five of their top six scorers shoot at least 80% from the line. One component that is not part of Wisconsin’s offense is offensive rebounding. The Badgers rebound 28% of their misses, which is 237 nationally in offensive rebound percentage. VCU ranked 12th nationally in offensive rebound percentage going into the BYU game, rebounding more than 36% of their misses.

The Badgers are known for their offensive, but their defensive ratings are stout. In fact, Wisconsin ranks 24th nationally in KenPom defensive efficiency, which is three spots ahead of VCU. Wisconsin’s defensive philosophy is completely different than VCU’s.

VCU is a pressure defense who relied on forcing turnovers, and that is not UW’s identity. Wisconsin has one of the lowest defensive turnover percentages nationally, ranking 332 with a 14.4% defensive turnover percentage. What the Badgers do well is rebound and protect the rim. They don’t get many blocks, but their two seven footers can congest the paint and make shots difficult around the rim. In addition to not forcing turnovers, Wisconsin can be a susceptible at times to the three ball. Wisconsin in Big 10 play allowed opponents to shoot 35% from three, which was 12th in the Big 10.

Four Under-the-Radar Storylines

Keba Keita vs UW Frontcourt

Advertisement

I am fascinated to see how Kevin Young uses Keba Keita this game. Wisconsin’s front court is skilled and neither starters are statues, but they aren’t athletic like most of the Big 12 frontcourts; they are a stereotypical Big 10 frontcourt is some ways.

I imagine Kevin Young will spread the floor with three shooters and then ruthlessly put Egor Demin and Keba Keita in PNR situations to see if 7-foot, 250 pound center Steven Crowl can cover the space to slow down Egor and cover Keba. In BYU’s blowout win over Kansas, Keba abused Hunter Dickinson in PNR situations and Dicksinson; I imagine BYU will try to do the same versus the Badgers. Wisconsin has seen some really good big men in the Big 10, but no one with the athleticism that Keba has.

Will Boskovic get more minutes?

Fouss will get minutes and I think he will be successful. Wisconsin doesn’t double-team the post a ton, and I trust Fouss to score one-one-one versus just about anyone in the country. Fouss has showed he can score against bigger players one-and-one. Boskovic could get some more run here though for defensive purposes. Both Wisconsin bigs can shoot the three, and Boskovic could get some minutes if Fouss struggles to get out on the perimeter. Boskovic is more adept there and wouldn’t give up a ton of size down low. I expect Fouss to get a healthy dosage of minutes, but I think Boskovic carves out a role this game.

Can Mawot Mag slow down John Tonje?

Advertisement

Mag had the main assignment on A10 POY Max Shulga and had Shulga in a straight jacket. Shulga had zero two-point attempts and was uncomfortable all game when guarded by Mag. Mag has been matched up against top opposing guards all year and has routinely slowed them down. Tonje may be his toughest test yet. If Mag can make Tonje take difficult shots and/or limit his attempts, he may be the top reason why BYU is able to come out with a victory.

Is Kanon Catchings an under-the-radar x-factor?

Catchings came through in Big 12 play when it was not expected. In his three conference games with double-digit points, he had multiple games preceding with single-digit outputs. Catchings played four minutes versus VCU to at least get his feet coming off his knee injury versus West Virginia a few weeks ago. I’m not counting on Kanon to come through big, but he has some things going in his favor. Kevin Young is all about exploiting mismatches, and Kanon can do that versus Wisconsin. Nate Winter is 6-foot-11 and plays the four in Wisconsin’s starting lineup. I could see KY putting in Kanon to force that matchup and then give Kanon some off-ball screening action to force Winter to chase him around the perimeter. That isn’t Winter’s strong suit and could open up a handful of Kanon looks. Even two threes from Kanon could be a difference in this game. So if you want a deep cut x-factor, I’ll go with Kanon Catchings.

Prediction

VCU stylistically on paper was a tougher matchup for BYU than Wisconsin, but the Badgers are a better team and will be a tougher game for BYU. Their offense is as good as BYU has seen this season and their defense is big and sound.

Advertisement

I expect a offensive-centric game versus two offenses that rank top 15 nationally. Both teams are playing well and this could prove to be the most entertaining second round game. John Tonje presents a huge challenge for BYU and could single-handedly win this game.

Since I force myself to pick a winner, I’ll side with BYU for some of the reasons I highlighted above. 1) I think Mag can slow down Tonje just enough to prevent him from taking over this game, 2) Keba can present matchup problems to Wisconsin’s front court, and 3) Wisconsin’s lack of defensive pressure will give BYU additional shot attempts and allow Egor Demin and Dallin Hall to play a bit more free.

Prediction: BYU 85, Wisconsin 83

*Record Straight Up: 26-8

*Record Against the Spread: 18-16

Advertisement

* I’ll make a prediction for every game and track my record through the season



Source link

Wisconsin

Badgers football losses go beyond field and into Wisconsin’s economy, UW report says

Published

on

Badgers football losses go beyond field and into Wisconsin’s economy, UW report says



Ripple effects could be felt in other UW athletic programs

The 2025 Badger football season is one fans already want to forget − but the negative economic impact could be felt well beyond the final game on Nov. 29.

If the team’s poor performance continues, it could reduce the program’s profit by $20 million annually, according to a new report from the Center for Research on the Wisconsin Economy, housed at University of Wisconsin-Madison

Advertisement

The ripple effects can be felt in other university athletic programs subsidized by the football program, and could impact student applications to the university, alumni donations, and research output, according to the report − titled “The Economic Impact of Badger Football’s Declining Performance.”

Beyond the financial blow to the campus, the report estimates the city of Madison could could lose up to $160 million, and the state could lose up to $280 million “stemming from reduced attendance, game day spending, tourism and reputational value.”  

The UW Athletic Department disputes the findings of the report.  

“Wisconsin Athletics respects the work and research of our world-renowned academic partners, along with their passion for the sports that represent our institution,” a department statement said.

“Although we do not believe that this study portrays a complete and accurate representation of the economic factors around the football program, we all share a common interest in its successful future.

Advertisement

“We welcome the opportunity to collaborate with the Center for Research on the Wisconsin Economy on any future works on this topic,” according to the statement.

Badger football is profitable 

In 2023, the football team had revenue of $106. 7 million and expenses of $42.3 million, with the program earning more than $64 million, according to the U.S. Department of Education’s Equity in Athletics Data Analysis cited in the report.  

In 2024, Badger football had $107.4 million in revenue according to its NCAA membership filing, and had expenses of $49.6 million − posting a profit of $57.8 million. The Badgers men’s basketball program earned a $7.3 million profit that year.

If the winning percentage falls from nearly 80%, as it was during the 2017 to 2019 seasons, to 50%, that could mean “Badger Football’s annual profit could drop by about $20 million,” the report reads. 

Advertisement

The team this season so far has a 2-6 record with four games remaining in November.

Is it Luke Fickell’s fault? 

Short answer: not in the beginning.  

The report says the program’s profit didn’t decline during 2022 and 2023 despite the 14-12 regular season record. That was during Luke Fickell’s first two seasons as head coach.

“This is probably because there was a lot of excitement” about Fickell’s hiring, the report states.  

Advertisement

Fans recently have been chanting “fire Fickell” at home games. Wisconsin Athletic Director Chris McIntosh addressed fans concerns in an Oct. 20 letter.

It said the football season has “fallen well short of our standards” and added the department is committed “to elevating the investment into our football program to position us to compete at the highest level.” 

Financial impact is already being felt 

 This year the program is on pace to have the lowest attendance in more than 30 years with a 51,980 average scanned attendance during the first four home games. That’s according to data obtained via an open records request and analyzed by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.  

But fans have been signaling their disappointment before this season.  

According to the research center report, “Badgers sold 38,082 season tickets for general seating areas in 2025, down from 42,197 in 2024 and 41,206 in 2023.” 

Advertisement

Football helps subsidize other programs, generates donations 

The Athletic Department’s total profit was less than $11 million in 2023, including the football program’s $64 million profit.

“This suggests that the department’s other programs and operations are subsidized heavily by the football team,” the report states.  

The report cites research that shows “when a male graduate former team wins its conference championship, his donations for general purposes increase by about 7% and his donations to the athletic program increase by about the same percentage.

“Moreover, if a male alumnus’s team won its conference championship during his senior year, his subsequent giving to the athletic program is about 8% a year higher.” 

Advertisement

The Badgers last won the Big Ten football title in 2012.

“If the poor performance continues, its impact on alumni donations and engagement is likely to diminish,” the report reads.

Local economic impact of athletic program 

College sports programs affect communities and states as fans go to games, restaurants, and bars, buy merchandise, and pay for hotel rooms.  

The report compared the UW athletic program’s impact on Madison and Wisconsin with the University of MinnesotaTwin Cities program on Minneapolis area and Minnesota. Both football teams had similar performances in 2022 and 2023.  

It showed the Badgers’ impact on Madison contributed to 3,360 jobs and $462 million of economic output.

Advertisement

The Gophers’ impact on the Twin Cities contributed to 1,152 jobs and $298 million of economic output.  

Statewide, the Badger athletic program contributed to 5,640 jobs and $757 million of economic impact in Wisconsin. In Minnesota, the Gophers contributed to $474 million of economic impact. 

The report says the Twin Cities population is larger than Madison’s population − making the latter “likely more sensitive to Badger Football’s performance.”  

NIL and program investment 

UW can revitalize the program by investing in facilities, recruiting budgets, NIL (name, image and likeness) deals for athletes, and competitive compensation for players and coaches, the report said.

The report estimates the Badgers NIL collective funding in 2023 and 2024 was $8.9 million. The highest spent in the conference was Ohio State at $20.2 million, it said.

Advertisement

NIL deals aren’t public information and the estimate is based on methodology from nil-ncaa.com/big10. .

Spending more money on the football program “could help reverse the team’s declining performance,” the report said.

“Enhanced facilities can attract top transfers and recruits, while better coaching and talent ensure the return on these assets are maximized,” it said. “Strategic, dual-focused investments are essential to rebuild competitiveness and mitigate the economic risks estimated above.” 

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter John Steppe contributed to this report.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Three former Wisconsin Badgers make Utah Jazz G League training camp roster

Published

on

Three former Wisconsin Badgers make Utah Jazz G League training camp roster


Recent Wisconsin basketball graduates John Tonje, Steven Crowl and Max Klesmit officially made the Salt Lake City Stars’ training camp roster on Monday. The Stars, the G League affiliate of the Utah Jazz, began their training camp on Monday. Their first game of the 2025-26 season is scheduled for Tuesday, Nov. 11.

Tonje’s inclusion on the roster is no surprise. Following an All-American 2024-25 season leading the Badgers, the Jazz selected him with the No. 53 overall pick in the 2025 NBA draft. He then officially signed a two-way deal with the organization in late August. He’s one of three two-way players on the Stars’ roster, along with Elijah Harkless and Oscar Tshiebwe.

Crowl, meanwhile, converted a Summer League roster spot into this training camp invitation. He should have an inside track at G League action, given his fast-growing experience within the organization.

Finally, this opportunity is Max Klesmit’s first at the NBA or G League level. He’ll likely need strong play throughout training camp to earn a spot on the team’s regular-season roster.

Advertisement

Contact/Follow @TheBadgersWire on X (formerly Twitter) and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Wisconsin Badgers news, notes and opinion





Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Wisconsin will join lawsuit against USDA to force release of FoodShare funds, Evers says

Published

on

Wisconsin will join lawsuit against USDA to force release of FoodShare funds, Evers says


play

  • Wisconsin is joining a multi-state lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture over FoodShare funding.
  • The lawsuit aims to force the release of contingency funds before benefits run out on November 1 due to a federal government shutdown.
  • The USDA recently changed its guidance, stating contingency funds cannot be used for benefit payments.
  • Wisconsin’s state legislature is unlikely to provide state funding to continue the program.

Wisconsin will join a multi-state lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture to force the release of contingency funding for FoodShare before benefits run dry for thousands of Wisconsin residents on Nov. 1.

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers made the announcement Oct. 27 at a roundtable event at the Milwaukee Public Library’s Martin Luther King Branch, where community advocates warned looming cuts to government programs would impact their businesses.

Advertisement

“The good news is, the federal government can (release the FoodShare money),” Evers told reporters. “They can do it; there’s nothing stopping them from doing it. In fact, we’re going to be suing them for not using the funds that they have.”

The forthcoming lawsuit will argue that both USDA and the Office of Management and Budget have previously and recently said that SNAP benefits are an obligation of the United States.

Before Friday, the USDA advised $3 billion worth of contingency funding could be used for administrative costs and benefit payments in the event of a shutdown. But on Oct. 24, the agency issued a new memo saying funding cannot legally be used for such purposes.

The lawsuit is scheduled to be filed just a few days before federal funding for the FoodShare program will evaporate because of the federal government shutdown.

Advertisement

At that point, FoodShare enrollees may use leftover benefits during the month of November but will not receive any new benefits until the government reopens.

Wisconsin and the other states suing the federal government together provide more than 21 million individuals with food assistance, according to Evers’ office.

State lawmakers could create a new state-funded appropriation to keep the program alive as the shutdown continues, but Senate President Mary Felzkowski said this week the Legislature is unlikely to do that, calling the matter a federal issue.

Advertisement

Evers cannot act alone by issuing an executive order to continue the program, his office said, because the state Legislature has the power to appropriate money.

In September, about $116 million in benefits were issued to FoodShare recipients, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending