Ranking Wisconsin football’s defensive position groups ahead of spring practice
Wisconsin Badgers defensive position group rankings ahead of 2026 spring practice, ranked from lowest confidence to strongest units.
The Wisconsin football program finally found something to hang its hat on last season — a defense that showed real signs of life. Now, in what feels like a make-or-break year for the coaching staff, the challenge shifts from proving the defense could succeed to proving it can be sustained.
Luke Fickell enters Year 4 with an uninspiring 17–21 overall record and a 10–17 mark in Big Ten play. While much of the attention this offseason has centered on the Badgers’ offensive rebuild, it’s important to acknowledge what happened on the other side of the ball. The defense, to Mike Tressel’s credit, took a notable step forward in 2025 after a subpar 2024.
Wisconsin finished 24th nationally in total defense, allowing 323.5 yards per game. The run defense, in particular, found consistency, ranking 15th in the country at just 105.2 rushing yards allowed per contest. That steadiness helped the Badgers finish 39th in scoring defense at 21.6 points per game. The pass defense had its uneven moments — 62nd nationally at 218.2 yards per game, but the overall structure was sound.
The advanced metrics backed that up. According to GameOnPaper, Wisconsin ranked 54th in defensive EPA per play and 25th in EPA per rush, reinforcing the idea that the run defense wasn’t a fluke. There’s still room to grow — 73rd in EPA per dropback shows that — but the baseline is stronger than it was, and the hope is that the staff can build on that.
That matters.
Because if Wisconsin is going to climb back into the upper tier of the Big Ten, the defense can’t just be solid to good. It must become a difference-maker again. The trajectory is encouraging, but another leap is required.
“I think they’ve got a good beat on what we need to do and how we need to do it,” Fickell said. “The guys up front, in particular, were the strength and consistency of the defense. They grew throughout the entire season. But the truth is, they’re in a good place and moving in a really good direction.”
With that in mind, here’s how the Badgers’ defensive position groups stack up heading into spring practice, starting with the biggest question marks.
5. Outside Linebackers/Edge Rushers
Wisconsin finally got its pass rush figured out this past season.
Unfortunately, its two most productive edge rushers — Mason Reiger and Darryl Peterson — have exhausted their eligibility. So now the question shifts from “Can they generate pressure?” to “How can they replace it?”
When I look at this room, I see one of the more intriguing position groups on the entire roster. There aren’t many units that feature this kind of range in terms of different body types, different skill sets, and different ways to deploy them. This staff made it clear they wanted to commit to stopping the run and getting bigger up front, and that ideology shows up here.
Everything starts with Sebastian Cheeks.
He took a legitimate step forward last season and looked disruptive in ways that get you excited about what’s possible with an offseason to prepare as the top outside linebacker. In 12 games, Cheeks totaled 25 tackles, 5.5 tackles for loss, three sacks, and 27 pressures. He’s athletic. He can bend. And he plays with the kind of urgency you want off the edge. If this pass rush is going to produce, Cheeks is the foundation.
After him, you look at Tyreese Fearbry and Nicolas Clayton.
Clayton might have one of the highest ceilings of any player on the roster. He appeared in all 12 games as a true freshman, mostly on special teams, and played 15 snaps on defense, but the traits are unmistakable. It wouldn’t surprise anyone internally if he pushes for a significantly larger role this fall. Fearbry was used more in a rotational capacity last season (73 snaps), but the staff believes he has what it takes to be productive. Now it’s about becoming consistent and turning potential into impact.
Then you add Justus Boone from Arkansas. Boone has a high-level pedigree. He’s developed in SEC rooms. He’s flashed, but hasn’t quite put together the full season you’d expect from someone with his talent. At 6-foot-4 and 275 pounds, he brings a frame that could allow Wisconsin to use him in a similar way to what Peterson was asked to do a year ago — a bigger edge presence who can set the edge and still affect the passer. If Boone finds that gear in Madison, he raises the ceiling of the entire room.
Liam Danitz adds another layer. The Division III Hope College transfer brings one of the more impressive athletic profiles you’ll find at the position, regardless of the competition level, and this will be his first full offseason devoted entirely to football. Projecting that jump is tricky — the leap in competition is real — but he’s an experienced body who gives the staff something different to work with. Danitz is big, fast, and explosive.
Micheal Garner returns as that jumbo edge presence, someone who can anchor against the run and set a firm edge. And behind them, there’s a collection of younger players trying to force their way into the rotation.
The transfer portal has made every offseason about identifying certain types of players and introducing competition. In this room, that competition could lead to real flexibility. You can mix and match skill sets. You can build personnel packages. You can tailor fronts to opponents.
But here’s the honest part.
I can’t sit here and say I feel better about the pass rush today than I did at this time last year. There’s more than enough talent on paper to believe it could be a productive room. You can see which players the staff expects to play meaningful snaps. But until some of those leaps happen on the field — or show up consistently — my confidence isn’t quite there.
