2008 vs. 2002 Position by Position Comparison (RB corps)

[Dryden]

Clarett did have his knee scoped in the early season, but was fairly injury-free up until he got that bad shoulder stinger at the end of the game at Wisconsin. From that time on it seemed he was always hurt because the defense would key on that shoulder. His and Beanie's running style are nearly identical...both attack the line and would also bounce it outside, and both combined speed with power and were hard to bring down on initial contact. Beanie did play through his injuries (he did come off the fiield several times on his own due to his ankle), but so did Clarett, at least as well as could be expected for the type of injury Clarett had.

This is the one thing I think Clarett gets a bit of undue grief for. I believe one of the sideline reporters for ESPN back then (Dr. Jerry Punch) explained that the shoulder stinger is simply impossible to just 'play through,' because the arm goes limp on its own when the nerve feels impact, and no amount of mental or physical toughness can allow a player to play through that. The arm shuts down, and you have to deal with it. As for playing through pain, just remember Clarett's performance against Washington St, followed by missing Cincinnati for the knee surgery, followed then by playing the next game against Indiana, where he ran 14-51 w/ 3 TDs in the first half, ripped open his stitches, had his knee sewed back up at halftime, then came out and went 7-53 in just the third quarter (plus a long 28-yard run that was called back on a holding penalty), before sitting the fourth.

Clarett was a unique talent. His vision and footwork were just uncanny for a true frosh, and he would have, in all likelyhood, rolled up 2,000 yards in 2002 if he's injury free.

As for the 2002 vs 2008 debate, I think it's closer at the top between Beanie and MoC than some people argue, but the nod goes to 2008 for RBs #2 - #5 on the depth chart, and it's not that close. As Yogi Berra said, "Our depth is pretty deep."

 

[sepia5]

This is the one thing I think Clarett gets a bit of undue grief for. I believe one of the sideline reporters for ESPN back then (Dr. Jerry Punch) explained that the shoulder stinger is simply impossible to just 'play through,' because the arm goes limp on its own when the nerve feels impact, and no amount of mental or physical toughness can allow a player to play through that. The arm shuts down, and you have to deal with it. As for playing through pain, just remember Clarett's performance against Washington St, followed by missing Cincinnati for the knee surgery, followed then by playing the next game against Indiana, where he ran 14-51 w/ 3 TDs in the first half, ripped open his stitches, had his knee sewed back up at halftime, then came out and went 7-53 in just the third quarter (plus a long 28-yard run that was called back on a holding penalty), before sitting the fourth.

Clarett was a unique talent. His vision and footwork were just uncanny for a true frosh, and he would have, in all likelyhood, rolled up 2,000 yards in 2002 if he's injury free.

As for the 2002 vs 2008 debate, I think it's closer at the top between Beanie and MoC than some people argue, but the nod goes to 2008 for RBs #2 - #5 on the depth chart, and it's not that close. As Yogi Berra said, "Our depth is pretty deep."

Yea, and maybe I'm insinuating that MoC didn't have the guts to play through injuries in the way that Beanie has, and you're probably right that that isn't entirely fair. But, if I'm not mistaken, didn't MoC have problems w/ the shoulder in high school, or at least a history of injury problems that kept him out of games? My main point is that you have to consider that as a difference between the two, IMO.

 

[Oh8ch]

This is the one thing I think Clarett gets a bit of undue grief for. I believe one of the sideline reporters for ESPN back then (Dr. Jerry Punch) explained that the shoulder stinger is simply impossible to just 'play through,' because the arm goes limp on its own when the nerve feels impact, and no amount of mental or physical toughness can allow a player to play through that.

I don't mean to imply MoC was a wimp. But the fact is he missed a lot of PT and IMO that should be factored into any comparison.

 

[Dryden]

Yea, and maybe I'm insinuating that MoC didn't have the guts to play through injuries in the way that Beanie has, and you're probably right that that isn't entirely fair. But, if I'm not mistaken, didn't MoC have problems w/ the shoulder in high school, or at least a history of injury problems that kept him out of games? My main point is that you have to consider that as a difference between the two, IMO.

Agreed. MoC is just a footnote now and Beanie is poised for special things this year. Also, Beanie might have had a special freshman season himself, but he wasn't pressed to play with Pittman here, so that works against him.

When all is said and done, Beanie will make this conversation laughable. But right now, before they've played a game in 2008, MoC's remarkable performances against Texas Tech, Washington St, Michigan, and Miami really make this a tough call for me. I think a lot of the people who pick against Clarett are doing so based on what he did after 2004 with his mouth, and not what he did during 2002 on the field.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Do we disagree that most backs would have missed a few games last season w/ the injuries that Beanie was carrying around since early in the year?

Nope. And just as many would've missed games with the stinger Clarett had. As Dryden pointed out above, Clarett got a lot of shit for that, which he didn't deserve...I don't think we've had a "tougher" RB ever.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I'll just go with a simple Beanie vs MoC is a wash and compare the backups.

The 2008 depth is light years better than the 2002 depth. Ross and MoHall just couldn't see a hole. That '02 scUM game was the most night and day performance of two sets of RB's I've ever seen.

MoC comes in and starts ripping off long runs behind the same line blocking the same guys that the other two couldn't get out of the backfield against.

All I will say on the MoC injury deal was that imo it was a bit of bad luck. Stingers can happen to anyone and they just don't heal without significant time off from contact. Whatever the kid did after, he was THE difference in The Game '02. I will always at least say that for him.

 

[ShakerBuck]

1st round KO, lets move on

 

[Oh8ch]

All I will say on the MoC injury deal was that imo it was a bit of bad luck. Stingers can happen to anyone and they just don't heal without significant time off from contact. Whatever the kid did after, he was THE difference in The Game '02. I will always at least say that for him.

MoC never played an injury free season in HS or College. So while it is pure speculation to say he would have had injuries in his Soph season it is not an unreasonable suggestion.

And I agree. Despite all he has done off the field he was a huge part of our success that season and is thus a huge part of Buckeye history.

 

[Jaxbuck]

MoC never played an injury free season in HS or College. So while it is pure speculation to say he would have had injuries in his Soph season it is not an unreasonable suggestion.

This is true.

Regardless, even if someone wants to say they were stone cold equals or one had a slight advantage over the other, its not enough to negate the huge disparity in the backups.

I love all our former Buckeyes but MoHall and Ross just weren't very good.

 

[generaladm]

Looking at the whole depth chart, 08 wins hands down. Were Mo Wells not a senior, he would be firmly entrenched at 4, if not asked to try another position. Mo Wells is better than Ross or Hall, espeicially in 02. Joe had some great games in 03 (UM, KSU), but didn't hadle the ball much in 02. I would take Beanie over MoC. It's impossible to say what MoC would have done as a junior, but this is only about 02. I think the big difference is that in 02, MoC was the feature of the offense, most of the sets were 2TE + FB, sometimes bringing in an extra lineman in the "bunch" formation. Beanie is able to get similar results out of I form or single back sets. They were both very formidable rushers, but I think Beanie allows for a more open offense.

EDIT: The Joe games I was thinking of were in 04, UM and OkST. Surprised no one caught that.

 

[Oh8ch]

I think the big difference is that in 02, MoC was the feature of the offense, most of the sets were 2TE + FB, sometimes bringing in an extra lineman in the "bunch" formation.

All designed to exploit the strengths of Craig Krenzel?

 

[scooter1369]

This year's stable has much more depth.

The only advantage 2002 had was Brandon Joe, but he didn't make a real impact until 2004.

Beanie vs MoC: Advantage Beanie

Lydell vs Saine: Truly yet to be determined. Lydell was a highly recruited Back that didn't pan out. Saine, with the exception of a few plays, is still a relative unknown as far as college impact goes. Advantage: Saine on potential over disappointment

MoH vs Herron: Again. Do we truly know? Herron has a ton of potential and Mo Hall had two bad wheels. Advantage Boom

Joe vs Lukens: Sorry 2008 Homers, Joe in a landslide

The kicker is Mo Wells. He has play making ability we just haven't seen yet. And we are running out of time to see it. He needs to have a banner year.

 

[Oh8ch]

The kicker is Mo Wells. He has play making ability we just haven't seen yet. And we are running out of time to see it.

And Tressel runs closed practices - so what are you gonna do?

 

[scooter1369]

And Tressel runs closed practices - so what are you gonna do?

Hope he impresses the Tressels enough to play

 

[osubucksfan2]

ummmmmmm.......

I hit the wrong choice

LOL