By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
John Waelti: On Wilson, football cliches and conventional nonsense
Placeholder Image
Football season is over once again. Some are grateful for this. For those who live and die by it, selected channels on the idiot box replay it over and over again - maybe if they replay it enough times, it will come out different.

Football has become as much a part of American culture as apple pie and shopping for stuff we don't need. Even those of us who believe ourselves too sensible to be caught up in it fall victim.

If we scribes dwell exclusively on what matters, like incessant war and decline of the American middle class, we could get depressed. So to maintain equilibrium, it becomes rational to focus on the irrational and inconsequential, such as who wins football games.

Characters like Terry Bradshaw, Howie Long, Michael Strahan, and Jimmy Johnson have the best jobs in the world. They have proven their manhood on the field and can insouciantly criticize the toughest guys on the planet. They are entertaining, well paid, wined and dined, and probably have groupies and hot women chasing "em all over the place. And best of all, in contrast to big time politicians who control our national destiny, and Wall Street bankers and CEOs who control our nation's wealth, if they are wrong it doesn't matter - nobody gets hurt.

We cheeseheads were pleased that Seattle won that big game. Not that we have anything against Denver, or Manning for that matter. He's a class guy. But so is Badger Russell Wilson.

The media billed this game as "the best offense vs. the best defense." Like most clichés in politics, economics, and sports, it was only partly true. In fact, it was arguably the best offense, Denver, against the most finely tuned, best balanced, most superbly coached team in the NFL, Seattle.

Media nitwits will once again question whether Manning can win the big games, which is ridiculous. Manning wins lots of big games. There is nothing wrong with Manning. Apart from that opening errant snap that resembled something out of "The Three Stooges," he played well - even set some records.

Denver's problem was not Manning, but running into Seattle's buzz saw. The key word here is "balance," great defense balanced with great special teams and great offense led by Wilson.

Wilson, the Badger who was dismissed by the geniuses who make their livings analyzing this stuff. Who ever heard of a premier NFL quarterback coming from the Wisconsin Badgers? His great performance at UW was discounted because it was against our much-maligned Big 10 Little Sisters of the Poor. And besides, the kid was "too short" to make it in the NFL, 5'11" instead of the requisite minimum 6'1".

So he was not drafted until the third round. In his rookie year he beats out heir-apparent Matt Flynn. He led Seattle's offense to a record number of victories in his first two years, and to the Super Bowl in his second year. Everyone seemed shocked, except of course, Seattle fans and us cheeseheads who followed him at UW.

Wilson proves once again that the numbers by which prospective draftees are judged - speed at running the 40, how much they can bench-press, how high they can jump, size for a given position - are, at best, indicators of probable success rather than absolute prerequisites for success.

We cheeseheads watched with envy as Seattle's special teams kept Denver's kick returners inside the 20. When our Packers kick off, we figure on giving opponents at least the 25, and often the 30 or 40-yard line. And Packer punts risk giving us a coronary.

Manning's record of completed passes came to naught. Receivers of those short passes were immediately nailed. Short passes completed against Green Bay are good for at least another five or 10 yards.

Fans should applaud the new rules designed to reduce crippling injuries of the players. These new rules favor the offense, making skilled defensive players even more important. We can understand our Packers building the team around a great quarterback like Aaron Rodgers. But you shouldn't have to depend on consistently getting 35 or 40 points to win. Even Rodgers can't do it when he gets knocked around and spends more time on the ground than searching for open receivers.

Until the Packers get an in-depth offensive line to protect Rodgers, a pass rush to augment Matthews, some super-aggressive ball hawks in their defensive secondary, and some dependable special teams play, they are going nowhere. That's a long list of deficiencies. They made the playoffs only because of the inept Vikings, and the inexplicable collapse of Detroit and Chicago. That will not always be so.

Those super-competitive "type A" driven personalities who coach professional football are nothing if not observant. We can bet they will follow Seattle's example of success and put a premium on aggressive defensive backs to counter the increasingly wide-open passing strategy in the NFL.

Regarding defensive backs, one can say much the same about the Wisconsin Badgers. Were it not for about four plays, two hail-Mary passes - and the two blocked punts overlooked by the media nitwits who "analyze" this stuff - against Ohio State and Michigan State, Wilson and the Badgers would have gone a lot further and got a lot more national publicity than they did. Until the Badgers improve their pass defense and special teams, and get a passing quarterback to augment their running game, they will remain, at best, good or even very good, but short of elite status.

It's not that we're giving up on our Badgers or our publicly owned Packers - I have a share of Packer stock gracing our wall at home. That, along with a few bucks, might get me a cuppa joe at some of Seattle's famed premier coffee joints.

Meanwhile, we're grateful for what Wilson has done for the Badgers and Wisconsin, and are happy for his success at Seattle.



- John Waelti's column appears every Friday in the Times. He can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net.