2009 tOSU Offense Discussion

[pnuts34]

I hope u were shaking your head like that when we were getting our heads stomped in by a USC team that didn't have that much more talent than we did. But they actually called plays that were unpredictable, our offense looked attrocious in front of the nation and its not a surprise that we're still labeled as the team that can't beat the big teams in other conferences. We need to tweak the playbook at times, and I think that Pryors running ability gives us that.

 

[BB73]

Someday, I'd love to see JT incorporate the no-huddle into the offense.

I'd like to see some improvement in the 2-minute offense. Watching the end of the PSU game yesterday, the ball was spiked twice on that drive after a first down had stopped the clock to move the sticks. A team should be able to line up and run a play after a first down with no more than a couple of seconds running off after the ball is spotted. Spiking that ball in that situation is only going to save a second or two, and losing the down usually isn't worth it unless the clock is way down.

 

[martinss01]

agreed, clock managment under 2 min is pretty iffy to begin with. we'll burn 10 seconds trying to figure out if we need to call a timeout or not.

 

[ArmyVet83]

I disagree with the logic you guys are using to jump the "vanilla" comment.

No one is saying lets have a flashier offense but less winning. Tressel Ball doesn't mean you actively supress offensive performance. As long as it wasn't leading to excessive turnovers I'm quite sure JT would be happy as hell with a 2008 Oklahoma offense results wise. He has stated many times his goal is 200 yds rushing and 250 passing a game.

There is absolutely no reason we can't be more effective on offense while continuing the strong emphasis on defense and special teams we all know leads to winning football under JT. Likewise there is no reason to jump people who question the offense with the line of reasoning that better offense = less winning.

Good offense and winning are not mutually exclusive. You can do both.

My question is, "How often did the team actually obtain those goals of 200 yds rushing and 250 yds passing? I'll answer that myself.

Our record overall was 10 - 3.

Only once, YSU, did we surpass the goal of 200 yds rushing and 250 yds passing? I'll give an alibi 251 Rush / 244 Pass.

3 other times did we break 400 yds total offense: Minn (279 Rush / 135 Pass); NW (244 Rush / 197 Pass) and UM (232 Rush / 184 Pass). Did they reach JTs goal ? They were wins, yes, but the question did that reach the offensive goal?

Here are your totals for the rest of the games:

Ohio 162 Rush 110 Pass Total 272
USC 71 Rush 136 Pass Total 207
Troy 170 Rush 139 Pass Total 309
Wis 183 Rush 144 Pass Total 327
Pur 125 Rush 97 Pass Total 222
MSU 216 Rush 116 Pass Total 332
PSU 61 Rush 226 Pass Total 287
Ill 305 Rush 49 Pass Total 354
Tx 203 Rush 176 Pass Total 379

I'll take into consideration Wells wasn't healthy for most of the year and we started a true freshman at QB but unless JT has every piece in place he is not and I repeat not an offensive genius when it comes to in game adjustments (injuries, down two TDS, etc.). He is conservative to a fault and when it comes time to play to win instead of playing not to lose, he does not adjust very well. Say what you like about JT's success but YSU is not The Ohio State University.

When you play the great teams USC, Florida, LSU, Miami, FL, what did we do different against Miami that we didn't do against USC, LSU, and Florida? We didn't play with a chip on our shoulder and go toe-to-toe with them and punch them in the mouth like we did against Miami. Our coaches once we got down played scared instead of playing more agressively. If we want to beat USC and any other elite team, we better come ready to play (on both sides of the ball) or it will a looooonnnggg evening.

 

[ysubuck]

I hope u were shaking your head like that when we were getting our heads stomped in by a USC team that didn't have that much more talent than we did. But they actually called plays that were unpredictable, our offense looked attrocious in front of the nation and its not a surprise that we're still labeled as the team that can't beat the big teams in other conferences. We need to tweak the playbook at times, and I think that Pryors running ability gives us that.

The most creative play calling in the world isn't going to produce when your OTs are yelling "LOOK OUT" every other play. There is a reason that TP played exclusively after that game and it isn't because Todd forgot how to play QB. It's because the 5 guys in front of him couldn't block effectively and TP was better at running for his life than Todd was.

 

[NFBuck]

watching the entire team turn in unison to the sideline every single play would drive me to the point of psychosis.

No shit.

 

[Poe McKnoe]

Jim Tressel circa 2003 or 2005

For instance, in my 15 years at Youngstown State, we had five different quarterbacks go to the national championship game, and they were all different. They did different things and ran different schemes. Yes, there were some fundamentals that were the same, but I think you really need to focus on the special talents of each player. We do that offensively, defensively, and on special teams.

We're an aggressive, pressure-defensive football team with the onus on speed. It's fairly complicated. Yet, we want to play fast. So it has to be simple.

Offensively, we want to be balanced. Our goal is to rush for 200 yards every game and throw for 250.

As for what schemes we use, we go all the way from two backs, two tights, and a flanker to no backs and five wides. In this day and age, you have to do a bit of all of it because, first, you need to attack people in different ways and, second, you need to attack your own defense in practice to prepare them.

 

[Jaxbuck]

The most creative play calling in the world isn't going to produce when your OTs are yelling "LOOK OUT" every other play. There is a reason that TP played exclusively after that game and it isn't because Todd forgot how to play QB. It's because the 5 guys in front of him couldn't block effectively and TP was better at running for his life than Todd was.

We have seen the "is it scheme or execution" argument played out a million times. Its never one or the other, its a combination. Ultimately, when you are looking at more than 1 play or 1 game the excuse that so and so missed his block doesn't carry weight. The staff is responsible for acquiring and developing the talent in such a way that the game plan is executed well. We can argue which step in the process is the breakdown point all day long, what we can't avoid is that the staff is responsible for the entire process.

There can be zero question that the offensive side of the ball has been the weakest chain in the link during the JT era. Be that due to talent, scheme, execution or a mix of all three the results aren't up to the same level of excellence we consistently see from the defense and kicking game.

As long as it doesn't result in a higher number of turn overs or the inability to kill clock when needed/control TOP, then there is absolutely no reason why we shouldn't want more offensive effectiveness. Thinking that JT, or any coach, would rather have a 1 point knuckle buster instead of scoring more points is missing the mark by a wide margin imo.

JT hasn't had poor performance on offense on purpose. There is something wrong in the overall process somewhere and he hasn't done a good job of correcting it. Thats not bashing him, thats not wanting to lose more for the sake of a flashier offense. Thats just making a logical conclusion based on readily availible data.

 

[muffler dragon]

watching the entire team turn in unison to the sideline every single play would drive me to the point of psychosis.

Of which personality? :nervous:

 

[muffler dragon]

I'll take into consideration Wells wasn't healthy for most of the year and we started a true freshman at QB but unless JT has every piece in place he is not and I repeat not an offensive genius when it comes to in game adjustments (injuries, down two TDS, etc.).

I'm gonna call bullshit on this statement. Is it JT's fault when the OL false starts, holds, etc? Is it JT's fault when an interception is thrown
? Or when personal foul flags are covering the lawn? We all know what Tressel ball is about, and these factors defeat internally the very thing that Tressel attempts to do.

He is conservative to a fault and when it comes time to play to win instead of playing not to lose, he does not adjust very well. Say what you like about JT's success but YSU is not The Ohio State University.

No shit. He's 83-19 at a much larger school that is also on a whole nother eschelon of difficulty. The dude kicks ass.

When you play the great teams USC, Florida, LSU, Miami, FL, what did we do different against Miami that we didn't do against USC, LSU, and Florida? We didn't play with a chip on our shoulder and go toe-to-toe with them and punch them in the mouth like we did against Miami. Our coaches once we got down played scared instead of playing more agressively. If we want to beat USC and any other elite team, we better come ready to play (on both sides of the ball) or it will a looooonnnggg evening.

You have much different glasses on than I do. Florida was undone from the beginning by personal fouls, other penalties, and a huge injury to Teddy. USC was done because of turnovers. LSU was simply a better team. Am I saying that we shoulda/woulda won those games without these events occurring? No. But the outcome could have been much different in terms of points AND THIS HAS NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH TRESSEL'S GAME CALLING.

 

[muffler dragon]

We have seen the "is it scheme or execution" argument played out a million times. Its never one or the other, its a combination. Ultimately, when you are looking at more than 1 play or 1 game the excuse that so and so missed his block doesn't carry weight. The staff is responsible for acquiring and developing the talent in such a way that the game plan is executed well. We can argue which step in the process is the breakdown point all day long, what we can't avoid is that the staff is responsible for the entire process.

There can be zero question that the offensive side of the ball has been the weakest chain in the link during the JT era. Be that due to talent, scheme, execution or a mix of all three the results aren't up to the same level of excellence we consistently see from the defense and kicking game.

As long as it doesn't result in a higher number of turn overs or the inability to kill clock when needed/control TOP, then there is absolutely no reason why we shouldn't want more offensive effectiveness. Thinking that JT, or any coach, would rather have a 1 point knuckle buster instead of scoring more points is missing the mark by a wide margin imo.

JT hasn't had poor performance on offense on purpose. There is something wrong in the overall process somewhere and he hasn't done a good job of correcting it. Thats not bashing him, thats not wanting to lose more for the sake of a flashier offense. Thats just making a logical conclusion based on readily availible data.

I understand very well what you're saying Jax. And you make many valid points. The part I bring up for consideration is, "What are you looking for?" I did a study sometime last year or the year before that showed that Tressel's teams average around 25 points per game while giving up 13-14. And this is consistent throughout his careers at YSU and OSU. I'm really interested in finding out what more you would like, and I mean that sincerely. I just find that, yes, there are points of frustration; however, when I look at the overall body of work --- I just don't know that I can fault what JT has done.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I'm really interested in finding out what more you would like, and I mean that sincerely. I just find that, yes, there are points of frustration; however, when I look at the overall body of work --- I just don't know that I can fault what JT has done.

I would like an offense that is on par with the defense in terms of sustained excellence year in and year out. If people want to measure that by national unit rankings, points per game, yards per game whatever.

If the defense can routinely be in the national top 10 in scoring defense why can't we be a top 10 scoring offense?

Why should OSU have a goal of anything less than excellence?

 

[muffler dragon]

I would like an offense that is on par with the defense in terms of sustained excellence year in and year out. If people want to measure that by national unit rankings, points per game, yards per game whatever.

If the defense can routinely be in the national top 10 in scoring defense why can't we be a top 10 scoring offense?

Why should OSU have a goal of anything less than excellence?

Impressive. That gives me a LOT to think about.

Truthfully, the first thing that popped into mind was what I perceive to be a matter of "ease" for lack of a better term. I've always been of the mindset that it's "easier" to have a tremendous defense than it is a tremendous offense. Granted, my perceptions are quite skewed from previous personal history and the fact that I'm not at all knowledgeable of the level of expertise needed for collegiate athletics and beyond.

Thanks Jax for the thought-provoking point(s). I dig it.

 

[Yertle]

I have no stats to back this up, but I always felt that the offensive game plan is a tremendous help in the national ranking of the defense. Basically, the heavy ground attack and conservative pass plays shorten the game, thus making the defensive stats more impressive. Furthermore, the Buckeyes have obviously been the top team in the conference year in and year out, which means most teams are playing catch up after the first half. One thing our DC's know how to do is take advantage of a team when they get one dimensional.

I think if the Bucks started pressing for big offensive stats, it would lead to shorter drives, more total plays, and worse defensive numbers as well.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I have no stats to back this up, but I always felt that the offensive game plan is a tremendous help in the national ranking of the defense. Basically, the heavy ground attack and conservative pass plays shorten the game, thus making the defensive stats more impressive. Furthermore, the Buckeyes have obviously been the top team in the conference year in and year out, which means most teams are playing catch up after the first half. One thing our DC's know how to do is take advantage of a team when they get one dimensional.

I think if the Bucks started pressing for big offensive stats, it would lead to shorter drives, more total plays, and worse defensive numbers as well.

Accumulating yards and scoring points is not a bad thing. It does not hurt the defense. For example:

2008 UF National ranks
scoring Offense 3rd/43.64 ppg
scoring Defense 4th/12.93 ppg

The idea that the offense is purposely buttoned up at all times to help the defense or that a having a good offense will wear the defense out is just not true.

Things that the offense can do to hurt the defense are a poor 3rd down conversion percentage, turn overs and not scoring a lot of points.

2008 OSU National rankings
3rd down conversion: 34th
TO's lost: 4th (1 being best)
scoring: 43rd

One wouldn't expect a JT coached team to be have a ton of TO's but the offenses ability to sustain drives and score points was a top 30-40 type of effort. Good but far from great.