2009 tOSU Offense Discussion

[crazybuckfan40]

I agree great discussion today...

One thing that bothers me is...Yes we shut it down in the fourth quarter, but you can shut it down while still doing some simple things...Some screens, some misdirection running plays, shovel passes, etc...

But the way we just seem to run it into the back of the lineman and get 0 or 1 yds. we might as well take a knee 3 times and punt...

Not sure if that makes sense, but it is frustrating with the athletes and talent that we have, we should still be able to lineup in a running formation against a stacked box and at least be able to pick up 4-5 yds...

 

[Woody1968]

It looked to me like JT shut it down in the 3rd quarter after we went up by 3 scores. I would have liked to have seen more from the offense at that point, you have them under control and you have a lot of time left.
The one misdirection play was a thing of beauty and Saine nearly popped it. We don't run nearly enough of that kind of stuff to keep the defenses at honest. Play calling, again.

JT is simply not going to take risks against the better teams we play, especially when we are taking control of the game. He never has, and I can't believe he will start now. He's not going to risk a turnover on our side of the field and let the game get within 10 points. Unfortunately, he's not going to get offensive when we are up by only 3 points to a tough opponent either.

 

[NateG]

I agree great discussion today...

One thing that bothers me is...Yes we shut it down in the fourth quarter, but you can shut it down while still doing some simple things...Some screens, some misdirection running plays, shovel passes, etc...

But the way we just seem to run it into the back of the lineman and get 0 or 1 yds. we might as well take a knee 3 times and punt...

Not sure if that makes sense, but it is frustrating with the athletes and talent that we have, we should still be able to lineup in a running formation against a stacked box and at least be able to pick up 4-5 yds...

I think this is what CBrian was saying. You can run without running the I form with a dive play with 8 in the box.

 

[Woody1968]

I agree great discussion today...

One thing that bothers me is...Yes we shut it down in the fourth quarter, but you can shut it down while still doing some simple things...Some screens, some misdirection running plays, shovel passes, etc...

But the way we just seem to run it into the back of the lineman and get 0 or 1 yds. we might as well take a knee 3 times and punt...

Not sure if that makes sense, but it is frustrating with the athletes and talent that we have, we should still be able to lineup in a running formation against a stacked box and at least be able to pick up 4-5 yds...

Yes, I agree. If we run, we should mix it up and try to get a bit more outside and get more time off the clock. Of course, maybe JT doesn't think the players can keep from getting run out of bounds...

 

[CalvinistBuck]

Your D is playing lights out...you have a nice lead. Why wouldn't you do everything you can to shorten the game?

I know what you are saying though...but right now, and especially Saturday, you get Pryor off the field and take the win.

The offense has to get better, but Saturday was not the time to turn it over to a QB who was struggling all day.

This is the best summation I've come across regarding the final possessions on O. However, if one of the motives was to get TP off the field, why not put in JB?

Also, instead of dive plays that were evidently predictable and easy to stop, why not some more creative running plays? As a coach, I try to put my players in a position where they can succeed. Did Coach Tressel tell his guys to go get that three-and-out and get back to the sideline? Admittedly, if this was purely clock-killing and nothing else then this line of questioning could be considered petty.

Don't get me wrong, I think Coach T is the greatest and his approach is phenomenal at winning the games we are supposed to win. I'm just asking questions. I appreciate the constructive dialogue.

 

[buckeyes_rock]

This is the best summation I've come across regarding the final possessions on O. However, if one of the motives was to get TP off the field, why not put in JB?

Also, instead of dive plays that were evidently predictable and easy to stop, why not some more creative running plays? As a coach, I try to put my players in a position where they can succeed. Did Coach Tressel tell his guys to go get that three-and-out and get back to the sideline? Admittedly, if this was purely clock-killing and nothing else then this line of questioning could be considered petty.

Don't get me wrong, I think Coach T is the greatest and his approach is phenomenal at winning the games we are supposed to win. I'm just asking questions. I appreciate the constructive dialogue.

I don't think the Wisky game was the best judge of what we should be able to do in the 4th quarter clock killing mode. We had o-linemen that were coming off illness and probably not at full strength and our offense hadn't played enough in the second half to establish any rhythm. But you are right. We ought to be able to impose our will at the end of a game and sustain a drive to eat the clock.

So far this year I haven't seen that at all. I go back to that Illinois game a few years ago when Juice and company ran all over us to keep the ball away at the end. It can be done and needs to be done to win the big ones. Our defense is good, but to put that kind of pressure on them to "do it all," is bound to fail at least once. I felt just terrible for our defense during the USC game...played their butts off, but ultimately gave up the game winner simply because our O couldn't help them out.

What's interesting to me is that other teams know at the end that we'll run it up the gut. It would seem then that the misdirection or even play action would be wide open. To use the line I hear all the time...maybe we're saving it for Michigan....LOL!

 

[bukIpower]

Shoot I'll take it a step further..... I've always believed that you should just run your offense like you would if you didn't have the lead. You never know what could happen in a game. So many times we shut it down really early in a game (like the 3rd quarter) and it really seems to just disrupt the offensive flow for not only that game but for the week following as well. IMO, it's what has sometimes caused those games we have where it seems like we have the worst offense alive. It's hard to build upon an offensive performance when you just spend the last 20 minutes of a game running Dives.

Just weird things like putting the back up QB in the game during the second quarter when only up 10, and then shutting the offense down when we're up 31-17 or therebouts. It hasn't burnt us yet because we normally have a top 10 defense but man I think our offense pays a huge price as far as rythem goes when we go into protect mode.

But, this'll never change. We'll always go into starve the clock mode when up 14+ points late in the game, and hey if it leads us to victory i'm all for it. However, sometimes on rare occasion its not enough to run the clock (USC) and also the majority of the time its hard to get any momentum when you do what we do.

Its like our defense. We look nasty when we're attacking and on OUR game. The second we go into a soft zone, and protect the lead often times teams get yards in chunks on us like any normal team. Play like you're behind and I bet you win just as many games as you do while playing conservatively. Unlike the conservatice approach you wouldn't be slowing down the rythem.

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

I don't often respond to the media on the message board, but what I heard today was a really special level of stupid.

Listening to the podcast of Monday's edition of Chris Spielman's radio show, I heard the always-worthless Bruce Hooley making fun of some of the show's e-mailers for comparing this year's offense to 2002. By itself, I can live with this. There are a lot of reasons why such comparisons are off base, not the least of which is that the 2002 team would not have found a way to lose the USC game.

But Hooley's reasoning was really 31 flavors of dumb-ass. He simply named some of the players from the 2002 offense that spent time in the NFL. Seriously... that's why he thinks the 2002 offense is SO much better than the 2009 offense that such comparisons are silly. And he said so in those words.

It's too bad that he didn't take any calls from people who I am certain were lined up to ream his ignorant ass for that comment. The 2002 offense averaged 29.29 points per game. The 2009 offense is averaging 29.67 points per game. There were a lot of reasons why the 2002 offense was part of a championship team, but simply claiming that they were "better" because they had future NFL players is a really special level of stupid speculation.

And while we're on the subject; the 2002 defense allowed 13.07 points per game and the 2009 defense is allowing 12.00 points per game. No, I'm not saying that the 2009 defense is better. But I am saying that the 2009 team has a lot of the same elements and there are 6 games left. Let's see what happens before we pass judgement.

This offense is inconsistent, but it has shown a great deal of potential. If the inconsistency gets ironed out - still a distinct possibility - this team could be very special.

 

[jwinslow]

When krenzel was the third best pro on the offense, not counting ol, that's a pretty poor premise.

No, gamble was not pro material on offense.

 

[BuckNut65]

I don't think the Wisky game was the best judge of what we should be able to do in the 4th quarter clock killing mode. We had o-linemen that were coming off illness and probably not at full strength and our offense hadn't played enough in the second half to establish any rhythm. But you are right. We ought to be able to impose our will at the end of a game and sustain a drive to eat the clock.

I think the one thing we realize is that if we have a lead in the fourth we are going to get ultra-conservative. I can't remember a drive of late when we were in the lead against a quality opponent that we were able to pound the ball at will. Is it the play-calling, o-line, lack of execution?
The one underlying factor is that we always rely on our D to hold on and win the game for us. It worked in 2002 but I'm not sure we can continue to ride that horse over and over. When we have tried this approach in the last several games against big opponents we all know the results.

 

[ysubuck]

Do you think that it's the mind set of the players at this point?

They know what the expectation is: we want to milk the clock, punt and play defense. Do you think that just might take some of the starch out of their shorts so they are playing less than inspired football?

If the expectation is attack, attack, attack then would the players take the field with a different mind set in the 4th quarter with a 14 point lead?

 

[Merih]

Do you think that it's the mind set of the players at this point?

They know what the expectation is: we want to
milk the clock, punt and play defense.

That might be the yours or what other fans expectations are (and it has been for a few years) but I can guarantee you that's not the expectation of the offense or the coaches.

Do you think that just might take some of the starch out of their shorts so they are playing less than inspired football?

When is the last time you can honestly say that an Ohio State team didn't play hard? Better said have you ever seen this young team not play hard?

If the expectation is attack, attack, attack then would the players take the field with a different mind set in the 4th quarter with a 14 point lead?

Again, the offense does not have a lazy mindset. If anything, they are pressing too much. You try to make the perfect play every play, you're going to make mistakes. They need to take their inspired football and play to have fun and relax. Terrelle especially, he is pressing too hard for things to happen.

 

[ThirdGenBuckeye]

Do you think that it's the mind set of the players at this point?

They know what the expectation is: we want to milk the clock, punt and play defense. Do you think that just might take some of the starch out of their shorts so they are playing less than inspired football?

If the expectation is attack, attack, attack then would the players take the field with a different mind set in the 4th quarter with a 14 point lead?

I don't think it's the mindset of the players. Speaking with someone from the first team offense today, the starting O is definitely fired up to attack this sub par Purdue defense. They've been practicing that way all week and the coaches aren't going in any sort of direction where their only responsibility is to milk the clock and let the defense do the work.

I wouldn't be worried about a lackluster attitude from the offense tomorrow. They want to put up points and are confident they'll do that this week.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

I have to admit how impressed I was watching Kelly last night. I love that philosophy of get inside the red zone, then fire away at the endzone. We seem to get inside the redzone and immediately start thinking about positioning for the field goal.

 

[Dryden]

I don't think it's the mindset of the players. Speaking with someone from the first team offense today, the starting O is definitely fired up to attack this sub par Purdue defense. They've been practicing that way all week and the coaches aren't going in any sort of direction where their only responsibility is to milk the clock and let the defense do the work.

I wouldn't be worried about a lackluster attitude from the offense tomorrow. They want to put up points and are confident they'll do that this week.

Damn. I was really hoping to see the defense and special teams knock the snot out of Purdue and outscore them all on their own.

I don't know why people keep complaining about the offense. I happen to think it's very unselfish of them to get off the field so quickly so we can all enjoy this awesome defense some more!