2009 tOSU Offense Discussion

[jazzman]

Hold on now. Everybody said we would've won the USC game if our offense had been halfway decent. Using the same logic, I think one can make the claim that, had the D and ST not scored 3 TD's, we would've lost. I don't see any problem with that argument.

The offense does need to step up. Pryor looks like a deer caught in headlights every once in a while. Can't have that happening against PSU, Iowa or scUM. If the O doesn't improve its execution, there will be at least one more loss, guaranteed.

When your two tackles had as bad a game as they did today, the QB is instinctively gonna feel the pressure and look like a deer caught in the headlights. Also, our offense was clearly not ready for the 4-4 look of the Wisconsin defense today since they have been playing a 4-3 scheme all year....I think a sizeable bit of the blame on the spluttering offense today should go on the guys upstairs calling the plays.

 

[OregonBuckeye]

Hold on now. Everybody said we would've won the USC game if our offense had been halfway decent. Using the same logic, I think one can make the claim that, had the D and ST not scored 3 TD's, we would've lost. I don't see any problem with that argument.

There's the problem right there. No one knows how it would have turned out. Suppose Wisconsin doesn't get that fake FG for a TD. That's a pretty big "what if" too. Those TD's weren't flukes, IMO. Our D creates havoc and forces QB's into those types of errors. So wondering if they didn't do that stuff doesn't really make much sense. It's what we do. We play great defense and special teams.

Since you brought up the USC game, we could play that game with them too. If their D doesn't intercept that pass and take it to the 2, we win.

Just so we're clear, I do think the O could've played better. Just don't think we were really in danger of losing and I don't agree with the logic that without those TD returns we would have lost.

 

[CookyPuss]

There's the problem right there. No one knows how it would have turned out. Suppose Wisconsin doesn't get that fake FG for a TD. That's a pretty big "what if" too. Those TD's weren't flukes, IMO. Our D creates havoc and forces QB's into those types of errors. So wondering if they didn't do that stuff doesn't really make much sense. It's what we do. We play great defense and special teams.

Since you brought up the USC game, we could play that game with them too. If their D doesn't intercept that pass and take it to the 2, we win.

Just so we're clear, I do think the O could've played better. Just don't think we were really in danger of losing and I don't agree with the logic that without those TD returns we would have lost.

Or to think of it another way, the offense would have had to have been incapable of scoring again in order to the team to lose. I find that hard to believe.

 

[Jake]

This team has 1 senior starter on offense. This offense is so young. Changes have been made with the philosophy. You can see it. Whether it's Hazell having a bigger influence on the playcalling or someone/something else, this isn't the same offensive philosophy. For that reason I don't think the previous years mean this offense is doomed. I'm patient enough to give it a chance and give this extremely young offense a chance to develop.

I'll give it a chance to develop, too, as if there was any other option. The fact remains that the performance of our offense to date this season is consistent with the past 6+ years. That's not my opinion. Those are the statistics talking. :ohwell:

 

[ant80]

There's the problem right there. No one knows how it would have turned out. Suppose Wisconsin doesn't get that fake FG for a TD. That's a pretty big "what if" too. Those TD's weren't flukes, IMO. Our D creates havoc and forces QB's into those types of errors. So wondering if they didn't do that stuff doesn't really make much sense. It's what we do. We play great defense and special teams.

Since you brought up the USC game, we could play that game with them too. If their D doesn't intercept that pass and take it to the 2, we win.

Just so we're clear, I do think the O could've played better. Just don't think we were really in danger of losing and I don't agree with the logic that without those TD returns we would have lost.

You highlighted the second "would've" but you fail to acknowledge that there is a "would've" before the one you pointed out.

I'm just pointing out that the same arguments were made by people on this board after the USC game, about winning the game had the O played better. And I don't remember you coming up with the same arguments against speculating about what would've happened then either. If you are willing to make arguments about being able to win if the O had moved the ball, you have to be willing to concede similar arguments about losing had the D and ST not been able to score as well.

After all, the O's job is to move the ball. The D's job is to stop the opposition O and get off the field. The ST's job is to give good field placement. Of course, you try to score of of every play, but if the latter two did their jobs but failed to score, they wouldn't be considered a failure, and would probably still be considered a success. But if the O didn't move the ball and score, it would be considered ineffective.

 

[NateG]

2 points that I haven't hear yet.


1. If the defense didn't score the offense isn't starting their drives at the 20. Those 2 drives would have been at the 50 and then the 7 going in. The momentum the team got off of that could have easily turned into 2 TD's ala Indiana. Pryor did not get a chance to build on the momentum he built in the 2 minute drill. He finally had gotten a chance to stop thinking and just "hurry up and play". Then went over 45 realtime minutes without getting back on the field. Then 3 plays and the quarter break. No one know what would have happened if he would have had a chance to build off his momentum, especially if Hines didn't score.

2. I thought of this in the stands today. Last year Pryor had help from someone named Wells that could carry a game for a struggling QB if necessary (scUM 07) and if need be open up passing routes. When this year started everyone on our schedule went from focusing on Wells (because of lack of knowledge on Pryor) or splitting focus with Wells to putting the ENTIRE focus of the defenses on Pryor. I never hear a pregame breakdown say anything to the degree of "You need to shut down the Buckeye running game". It's "You have to bottle up Pryor." The threat of a good running game can make even average QB's look good(ala Wisky). 62 yards rushing by running backs will not get it done(97 overall). Saine is a good hard running back and I'm pleased with his comeback to this point, but he is not a game changing back yet.

 

[Buckeyecty4]

We should just treat today's offensive performance like the Illinois, rain game......toss it out and forget about it. The offense was feeling the effects of the flu and lacked continuity. Next week they will look completely different and better.

Of couse it will look better next week. We're playing Purdue. It will probably look good the next three weeks. Then it will likely look inept at Penn State like it has every time (in recent memory) that it goes up against a team with comparable level talent.

Blowing this game off because 1 or 2 guys on the line had the flu earlier in the week is just sticking your had in the sand.

 

[NateG]

I'll give it a chance to develop, too, as if there was any other option. The fact remains that the performance of our offense to date this season is consistent with the past 6+ years. That's not my opinion. Those are the statistics talking. :ohwell:

The stats you mentioned showed when an offense can be great. 2005 and 2006 the stats were better. Why? A QB that was experienced and in sync with his teammates and a back that was a threat(Pittman). Name another QB that was there.... Krenzel? Well that guy won the title with a threat at HB(Clarett). Outside of those 2 we have had Zwick, and Boeckman.

I still want to know in the last 10 years what was the highest rated offenses that won the title? I don't think it's as high as people might think. And titles are what I care about. We have won 4 straight Big Ten titles.

 

[scarletngray]

What I mean is, if the D and ST didn't score 21 points, we would have lost. And usually in most games the D and ST will not out score the offense 2 - 1

Actually, you don't know that because without those scores the Offense would have had more opportunities to get on the field and score themselves. In case you don't know, when your team scores, that means you have to kick the ball off and that puts your Defense on the field. See how that works?

:osu:

 

[UpNorthBuckeye]

Hey, it's Sunday. Maybe Terrelle and Siciliano could watch some NFL today. Watch how the good quarterbacks get the snap look around (as in ALL around) and then zap!! throw the freakin' ball.

I say this all the time, so go ahead and slap me, but I wish football was like basketball... even if you are a star, if you make 3 or 4 bonehead plays in a row, miss all your shots, dribble the ball off your foot... the coach sits you down. Not for the whole game, but sit down and get your head straightened out. We used Bauserman in the first few games, why not against Wisconsin? Obviously we see they weren't that much better than Navy! When Terrelle had his three three and outs (well two three and outs and one six and out) to start the game, put Bauserman in for a drive, let TP stand next to the coaches and think about what's happening in front of him.

But no, I guess no one on the coaching staff is allowed to tell him he is NOT doing well.

These next few games are his chance to get this crap out of his system. And it's not like they're that easy... I mean, Purdue is still a Big Ten team, after all.

 

[jwinslow]

Oh good

Hey, it's Sunday. Maybe Terrelle and Siciliano could watch some NFL today. Watch how the good quarterbacks get the snap look around (as in ALL around) and then zap!! throw the freakin' ball.

Really? Man, just think of all of the struggling QBs who could be transformed just by watching NFL film and realizing how wrong they've been in their approach.

Embarrassing stuff, man.

But no, I guess no one on the coaching staff is allowed to tell him he is NOT doing well.

Seriously?

 

[Steve19]

I think that this offense is a year away from being pretty good. They are very young and it's possible that the disruption of flu last week hurt their preparation for the game.

I noticed several things yesterday.

Defense. The Buckeye defense owned the Badgers. Wow, what a performance. For all the hype of that "greatest line in the country", they were made to look ordinary at best. The press reports on the game do not give the defense well-deserved credit for knock-down performance.

Time of possession. Make no mistake, the defense will pay this week for being on the field so long but thank goodness we have an easier game on the way. The offense won't be able to leave them out there during the last three games of the year.

Young QB. Pryor was uncomfortable facing the Wisconsin defense. I don't know that I would call it confused like some of the "sports analysts" today, but he didn't seem to be seeing what he expected on the other side of the ball. I still think that a few downs with Bauserman would have unsettled the Wisky defense and helped Pryor overcome whatever "big game in Ohio Stadium" thing it is that he seems to experience this year.

Take away the one excellent pass, 4-12 for 52 yards. Take away the 27 yard broken play that started the TD drive, 26 rushes, 70 yards, 2.7 yds/carry. Wisky stopped our running game dead and dared Pryor to throw on them. Pryor had a LOT of time to throw. I don't know if the Wisky secondary was that good--perhaps that explains it--but completing a third of your passes suggests a learning experience for QBs and WRs. Whatever the cause, the performance made it look like a QB with a rating of 55 on the day has regressed and our upcoming opponents will have noticed.

Play calling. I am a bit surprised that we didn't hear the cacophony of protest about play calling during and after the game. That's good. The play calling wasn't all that bad for the first few drives but it got a lot better when Hazell started calling plays on the scoring drive in the first half. That drive started with a broken play where Pryor used his legs. I think that is the main contributor, it settled Pryor momentarily.

Tresselball. So long as this man is coaching at Ohio State, there will be games like this. Don't expect him to reveal plays he is working on for the last three games just so he can achieve style points during a game where his defense and special teams have scored 21 points. Fans see nothing that Tressel doesn't. Tressel sees a much larger chess game being played across a season.

Penn State, Iowa, TSUN. I think this team will learn from this game and beat them.

 

[Taosman]

42 minutes to 17 minutes. The Badgers played their strong hand to keep Pryor and the offense off the field and not let them develop any rhythm on offense.

The 2 minute drill seemed to allow TP to just play and not over think his decisions.

The flu was a big factor this week for the offense.

Let's just forget about this offensive performance and hope Pryor and the offense get back in sync!

It's a team game and you win and lose as a team!

 

[ysubuck]

I know that chronologically TP is a young QB, but he has now had 16 starts as the Ohio State QB. He has been through bowl practice, spring practice, summer camp all the while getting number one reps.

When is he not a young QB anymore? Next season?

The drive right before half time yesterday was a glimpse into what could be, but he looked completely lost 90% of the time the offense was actually on the field yesterday.

 

[cbrian815]

The stats you mentioned showed when an offense can be great. 2005 and 2006 the stats were better. Why? A QB that was experienced and in sync with his teammates and a back that was a threat(Pittman). Name another QB that was there.... Krenzel? Well that guy won the title with a threat at HB(Clarett). Outside of those 2 we have had Zwick, and Boeckman.

I still want to know in the last 10 years what was the highest rated offenses that won the title? I don't think it's as high as people might think. And titles are what I care about. We have won 4 straight Big Ten titles.

Florida, Texas and usc all ranked top 10 in offense. 2008 Florida top 10 in Offense and defense and well on their way to doing it again. Texas had a topped rank offense when they won it all with Vince. Go Bucks