• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.
I agree on Andy. It was great knowing that if we couldn't move the ball anymore, he would give our defense a nice cushion. I would indeed call him a weapon. I'm quite shocked he has yet to catch on in the NFL.
 
Upvote 0
Just think of how Tress played to his teams strength that year! What will this teams strengths be? Not punting. Not total defensive domination. Not long distance field goal kicking, although Houston isn't chopped liver in that department! On offense will we try to make every game a track meet with our speed? Can this defense get even close to 39 sacks? And most importantly. Does this team have the heart to keep fighting no matter how bad things are going?
 
Upvote 0
bukIpower said:
I'll throw my hat in the ring...

QB-Smith ( I like how Krenzel played, and if not for him no NC but at times he drove me crazy when he missed an open man)

wait, you would take a quarterback that still hasnt estbalished himself as a proven winner and has had one amazing game and has somewhat hurt the image of the program for a quarterback that did nothing but win?
 
Upvote 0
JonathanXC said:
QB Craig Krenzel '02
RB Maurice Clarett '02
FB Branden Joe '02
WR Ted Ginn Jr. '05
WR Michael Jenkins '02
TE Ben Hartsock '02
RT Ivan Douglas '02
RG Bryce Bishop '02
C Nick Mangold '05
LG Adrien Clarke '02
LT Rob Sims '05

Offense 3 from 2005 8 from 2002

LE Kenny Peterson '02
LT Darrion Scott '02
RT Quinn Pitcock '05
RE Will Smith '02
OLB A.J. Hawk 05
MLB Anthony Schlegel '05
OLB Bobby Carpenter '05
CB Ashton Youboty '05
SS Mike Doss '02
FS Nate Salley '05
CB Dustin Fox '02
Well, general agreement, but....

Pitcock over Tim Anderson? Tim really anchored that 2002 DL - he did a lot of the dirty work in the trenches that allowed Smith, Scott, Peterson, Thompson, and Fraser to make big plays. Pitcock will have to have one hell of a year to equal Tim Anderson's 2002 campaign, IMO.

Schegel over Wilhelm? Wilhelm was an All-American in 2002....

Youbouty over Gamble? Chris made huge interceptions against Cincinnati, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Purdue, each of which was integral to victories in those games. Plus, Gamble played WR and PR that season. If Youbouty comes close to Gamble's 2002 campaign, I'll be thrilled.

Mangold over Step - I can buy that, although I personally like Step a little better.

Sims - I hope that he has improved since 2002; I'd prefer to call it a wash.

Ginn, Hawk, Carpenter - no arguments here.

Generally speaking, I think that a lot of people here have short memories or unrealistic expectations. Remember, that 2002 team was one of the best ever, from any school, any era. If 2005 comes close, we'll be fortunate indeed.
 
Upvote 0
LordJeffBuck said:
Well, general agreement, but....

Pitcock over Tim Anderson? Tim really anchored that 2002 DL - he did a lot of the dirty work in the trenches that allowed Smith, Scott, Peterson, Thompson, and Fraser to make big plays. Pitcock will have to have one hell of a year to equal Tim Anderson's 2002 campaign, IMO.

Schegel over Wilhelm? Wilhelm was an All-American in 2002....

Youbouty over Gamble? Chris made huge interceptions against Cincinnati, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Purdue, each of which was integral to victories in those games. Plus, Gamble played WR and PR that season. If Youbouty comes close to Gamble's 2002 campaign, I'll be thrilled.

Mangold over Step - I can buy that, although I personally like Step a little better.

Sims - I hope that he has improved since 2002; I'd prefer to call it a wash.

Ginn, Hawk, Carpenter - no arguments here.

Generally speaking, I think that a lot of people here have short memories or unrealistic expectations. Remember, that 2002 team was one of the best ever, from any school, any era. If 2005 comes close, we'll be fortunate indeed.

Totally agreed...My thoughts exactly.
 
Upvote 0
bucknut11 said:
You hit it LJB. Schlegel has proven to be pretty good, but Wilhelm was fantastic in 2002.
I don't know of anyone I take over 2002 Wilhelm. Maybe Spielman's senior year, but I was only 12, so I don't think I really appreciated his abilities properly. I like Schlegel, but Wilhelm was a monster.

I think I'd give the edge to 2002 players, as well, because we know what they did and how they played. 2005 is just predictions, at this point. When the 2002 season was just predictions, I thought that they didn't have much chance. (I predicted they'd win 8 games that year.) Here comes this Krenzel guy, who gets credit for beating Michigan the year before (despite maybe 16 pass attempts), the RB (Ross) seemed decent, the OL, I thought, was the main weakness. They lost their best CB (Derek Ross), and the other CB was being moved back to LB (Grant), leaving just a sophomore white kid who moved over from safety (Fox) and a kid who seems to be hurt a lot (McNutt). The two returning safeties were solid, but I thought Doss' decision to stay his last year was going to be heartbreaking for him - win a national championship?? No way! I knew Smith and Wilhelm would be studs (if Wilhelm stayed uninjured), but I didn't know about the rest of the defense. Finally, you got Andy Groom, a solid punter, and Mike Nugent, who had a very shaky freshman year. I didn't see much reason to be optimistic about 2002.

My point is that my prediction for 2002 was way off, because I didn't know how some of those players would perform. And we have no way of knowing how the 2005 players will perform. Just predictions. But I will say this: I feel better about the 2005 team right now than I did about the 2002 team before the Texas Tech game, in 2002.
 
Upvote 0
LordJeffBuck said:
I applaud your idea, but question your results:

QB: Krenzel vs. Smith/Zwick - STRONG EDGE Krenzel (2002)
RB: Clarett vs. Pittman/Haw/Wells - STRONG EDGE Clarett (2002)
FB: Joe vs. Johnson - EDGE Joe (2002)
WR: Jenkins vs. Holmes - EDGE Jenkins (2002)
WR: Gamble vs. Ginn - EDGE Ginn (2005)
WR: Vance vs. Gonzalez - EVEN
TE: Hartsock vs. Hamby - STRONG EDGE Hartsock (2002)
RT: Olivea vs. Barton - EDGE Olivea (2002)
RG: Bishop vs. Downing - EVEN
OC: Stepanovich vs. Mangold - EDGE Stepanovich (2002)
LG: Clarke vs. Datish - EDGE Clarke (2002)
LT: Sims vs. Sims - EVEN

DT: Anderson vs. Pitcock - EDGE Anderson (2002)
DT: Peterson vs. Green - STRONG EDGE Scott (2002)
DL: Thompson vs. Penton/Richardson - EDGE Thompson (2002)
DE: Smith vs. Kudla - STRONG EDGE Smith (2002)
DE: Scott vs. Patterson - STRONG EDGE Scott (2002)
MLB: Wilhelm vs. Schlegel - EDGE Wilhelm (2002)
WLB: Grant vs. Hawk - STRONG EDGE Hawk (2005)
SLB: Reynolds vs. Carpenter - STRONG EDGE Carpenter (2005)
FS: Nickey vs. Salley - EVEN
SS: Doss vs. Everett/Whitner/Mitchell - STRONG EDGE Doss (2002)
CB: Gamble vs. Youbouty - EDGE Gamble (2002)
CB: Fox vs. ????? - STRONG EDGE Fox (2002)

PK: Nugent vs. Huston - STRONG EDGE Nugent (2002)
P: Groom vs. Trapasso - STRONG EDGE Groom (2002)
LS: Andrews vs. ????? - STRONG EDGE Andrews (2002)
PK: Gamble vs. Ginn - EDGE Ginn (2005)

[2002 starters are the Fiesta Bowl starters, as set forth in the official web site; 2005 starters are returning players from last year, or projected game one starters.]
I agree with LJB's choices except in the O-line. My O-line comparison is this:

RT: Olivea vs. Barton - EVEN
RG: Bishop vs. Downing - EDGE Downing (2005)
OC: Stepanovich vs. Mangold - EVEN
LG: Clarke vs. Datish - EDGE Clarke (2002)
LT: Sims vs. Sims - older, wiser version (2005)

And as others have pointed out, the O-line depth for 2005 is much better than in 2002.
 
Upvote 0
LordJeffBuck said:
HOWEVER, the comparison isn't quite fair, because we already know how the 2002 players performed in 2002, but we don't yet know how the 2005 players will perform this season. Granted, Jenkins, Smith, Scott, Anderson, Wilhelm, and Doss were returning stars, but going into 2002, no one knew that: (a) Krenzel would emerge as one the best field generals in the history of Buckeye football; (b) that Clarett would be a freshman phenom who would give the Bucks a much-needed running attack; (c) that Chris Gamble would star on both sides of the ball; (d) that Kenny Peterson would finally live up to his 5-star billing; (e) that Fox, Grant, Nickey, and Thompson would become valuable role players in a great defense; and (f) that the special teams would be truly special.

The 2005 team also has its stars (Holmes, Ginn, Hawk, Carpenter, Schelgel, Pitcock, Youbouty, Salley), but we have no idea how the young players will perform (especially on the lines and at RB and CB), and we don't know whether either QB will take over as the leader of the team. If several players step up their games, then the 2005 Bucks might just be equal, or at least close, to the 2002 version.

Remember, the 2002 Buckeyes went 14-0 and were ranked the best ever Buckeye squad and the 17th best team of all time (out of the 10,519 teams that have taken the field from 1869-2004) by the Billingsley Report. The 2005 team has a long way to go to match those accomplishments.
I would go a step further and say the comparison is totally unfair. You can't compare performances between years that include a year that hasn't been played and expect a reasonable conclusion. At best you can look at 2001 and 2004, compare the leaps by players who had another year's experience or went into their senior year in 2002 determined to give it everything they've got, then guess which players will make that leap in 2005. None of the comparisons I see takes that into account. Players like Will Smith and Matt Wilhelm ballooned in 2002. It's not out of the question that Mike Kudla, Mike D'Andrea and Anthony Schlegel will do the same. It's not out of the question that Maurice Wells could be an Archie-like back and that the speedy Pittman/Haw/Wells triumvirate could be better than Clarett/Ross/Hall. Yet understanding that the 2002 team was one of the best of all time, it is still possible for us to be better at every position in 2005 and not be a better team. No one is factoring in the one thing that made 2002 so special... confidence and leadership on both sides of the ball.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Carmen Ohio brings up good points about comparing the season that the players on the 2002 team had (known commodity) and the season that the players on the 2005 will have (yet unknown commodity) based on their performance in 2004. You don't know how players will improve/step-up this season. We all (especially me) thought in 2003 we were in deep kimchi when Groom graduated and we were "stuck" with Der Shankmeister B.J. Sander...we had no clue that Sander would end up being just as good as, or even a little better than, Groom was and that he'd win the Ray Guy Award. So, you never know who will be the next pleasant surprise.
 
Upvote 0
We must realize that there are alot of similarities between the 2001 and 2004 squads. Both struggled but IMO the 2004 squad finished stronger. I think the optimism comes from the POTENTIAL that the 2005 squad has. I think there are areas that both squads are better than the other

special teams

kickers
2002 10
2005 7.5 They have potential but 2002 was definately a banner year

returner
2002 8.0
2005 10 Ginn might end up the best returnmen in the NCAA history

Coverage
2002 8.0
2005 9.0 Welch has proven to be a great gunner

Overall the squads going into the season are about even. If Huston and Trappasso can come close to the Groom and Nugent the 2005 squad will be better.

Offense
2002 QB 8.5
2005 QB 8.0

2002 OL 8.0 without Clarett they looked very bad at times
2005 OL 8.5 they showed signs of life against Michigan and Okie St.

2002 RB's 9.0 with Clarett 7.0 without Clarett the running game depended on one guy.
2005 RB's 8.0 There is alot of potential but noone on Claretts level

2002 WR's 9.0 very nice corps
2005 WR's 10 Maybe the best and deepest corps ever at OSU

2002 TE's 9.0 Hartsock was great
2005 TE's 7.5 We have potential but I've been disappointed with our production

2002 FB's 7.5 Joe is more of a runner
2005 FB's 9.5 Johnson will be the best FB since Jamar Martin. We have needed a blocker like him for a few years. IMO the best Blocking FB in the B10 this year. Will be better than Bernstein.

Defense
2002 DL 10
2005 DL 8

2002 LB 9.5
2005 LB 10

2002 DB's 9.5
2005 DB's 9.0

Overall the special teams are close, defense in 2002 was better, and the offense for 2005 will be better. The 2005 team has the potential to be better. To say they are better is wrong.

I'm optimistic even though I know its hard to go undefeated. I think we will improve more than anybody outside of the Buckeye community believes. I hope we are NC's but its gonna be tough.
 
Upvote 0
Is leadership really an issue here? With AJ, Schlegal, and Carp, all seniors, all on the AA short list (well... schlegal soon to be), on the field?

Nah.

2004 had serious issues because it was a young, rebuilding team. All those mistakes that we hated to watch *cough* Purdue, NW *cough* will be nonexistant with a much more experienced group of players. We were teeming with talent last year, we're teeming with talent this year. With a year under their belts, these players have just as much a shot of getting that NC than any other team in the country.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top