2010 tOSU Special Teams Discussion

[Oh8ch]

Let's face it - 25% of the roster is never going to see meaningful minutes anyway. Why not try to replace some of those career bench warmers with productive special teamers, guys who can be first stringers on special teams rather than third stringers on offense or defense?

I don't think anyone is recruited to be a career bench warmer. They are recruiting misses and seem to happen in relative numbers at every position.

OSU recruits speed, big speed and power. What would one be looking for in a special teams specialist that they would not be looking for in a linebacker or safety?

Our coverage team on kick offs is pretty much a who's who of HS athletes. I don't think speed or willingness to make a hit are the crux of the problem.

 

[jwinslow]

Twenty years ago they said the same thing about kickers and punters....

Let's face it - 25% of the roster is never going to see meaningful minutes anyway. Why not try to replace some of those career bench warmers with productive special teamers, guys who can be first stringers on special teams rather than third stringers on offense or defense?

because the premise of your question is a faulty one. You don't get to replace the misses with successful scouting and developing, those individuals are the chunk of kids in every class that don't pan out.

BTW, the numbers are closer to 50% for a recruiting class in terms of individual members playing a sizeable role . Now you not only have made a significant dent in the already limited depth at RB and LB, but you now have players with absolutely no value. O'Neal may not be able to handle the mental and physical responsibilities at safety, but he can still really help you on coverage units. What are you going to do with a kick coverage guy who is a bust ?

What 6 scholarships will you not be extending anymore due to the added burden of these new specialists?

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

Twenty years ago they said the same thing about kickers and punters....

Let's face it - 25% of the roster is never going to see meaningful minutes anyway. Why not try to replace some of those career bench warmers with productive special teamers, guys who can be first stringers on special teams rather than third stringers on offense or defense?

25% of those guys that you recruit exclusively for sp teams aren't going to see the field either, so we are back to square one. Coaches put their best players and best athletes on the HS level at QB and RB. If you want to win the odds game, that's where you start.

 

[brodybuck21]

just to put some things in perspective both iowa and wisky had some major gaffes on special teams this weekend as well. We are not unique in that category in the big ten. I do like how Barclay is kicking fg's however. Wish more people would mention the good things our special teams unit is doing....

 

[buckeyes_rock]

just to put some things in perspective both iowa and wisky had some major gaffes on special teams this weekend as well. We are not unique in that category in the big ten. I do like how Barclay is kicking fg's however. Wish more people would mention the good things our special teams unit is doing....

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Are other top ten teams doing this? Perhaps I've just got my head in the sand, but I've really believed/bought into the notion that this is a coaching issue.

No, but the NFL essentially does this. In other words, there are NFL players who are career special teamers, who aren't really asked to play on offense or defense.

As far as the bust factor, the less responsibilities a player has, the less likely he is to bust out. If a kid comes into a program knowing that his only role will be special teams, then he will be more likely to succeed in that limited role than in an expanded dual role (special teams and offense or defense).

 

[Oh8ch]

And as regards recruiting special teams players, the last player taken in the class of 2002 was Troy Smith.

 

[jwinslow]

No, but the NFL essentially does this. In other words, there are NFL players who are career special teamers, who aren't really asked to play on offense or defense.

Because those players don't cost as much as the quarterback. They do in college, and usually they are not just specialists, they are WRs or DBs who have to earn their spot by also executing on special teams.

As far as the bust factor, the less responsibilities a player has, the less likely he is to bust out. If a kid comes into a program knowing that his only role will be special teams, then he will be more likely to succeed in that limited role than in an expanded dual role (special teams and offense or defense).

That's still a huge assumption and one not supported by the results. Oliver, Ebner, Evege are veterans who generally focus on special teams, yet the units have struggled under their watch.

But the general point stays the same, you don't get to replace the unavoidable chunk of 'busts' with 'hits'. You simply get to replace them with a different flavor of 'bust', even if the probability is slightly lower due to lower responsibilities.

 

[cjmik_75]

I wasn't going to nitpick the ST again because as it's mentioned earlier they have done some good things. FG have been good so far this year, not great but good. But the thing I wanted to see was explosion against a shitty OU team. Yes the chances were limited because of 5 turnovers and lack of scoring on OU's part and they went for it on fourth and one at midfield and were stuffed. After rewatching the OU game (these are unoffical stats just approximately from the replay) here's the return game vs OU:

3 kickoff returns = 17.33 avg

1 punt return = 22 yds

2 fair catches

Zero touchbacks

2 rugby style punts by OU executed to perfection were downed inside the 3 yard line. One @ the 3yd line bounced at the 21 - probably should have been caught. The other landed at the 13 placed perfectly between the numbers and the sideline - not much could've been done there.

I was just hoping for more from the return units regardless how many chances they were given. I know these guys have the potential to make the big plays because I saw glimpses vs Miami. I was expecting more against OU not less. That's all.
:osu:

 

[Smooth Olaf]

I know our special teams have been turrrrrible so far, but I just have to tell the boys at the BTN something.

A kick return that is called back for an illegal block in the back does not count. Stop claiming it does, douchebags.

 

[pokey]

I believe that Malcolm Jenkins was very important to our success on special teams. I don't see that type of player on the team that rarely makes a mistake anticipating where he has to be to make the play.

 

[sepia5]

No, but the NFL essentially does this. In other words, there are NFL players who are career special teamers, who aren't really asked to play on offense or defense.

As far as the bust factor, the less responsibilities a player has, the less likely he is to bust out. If a kid comes into a program knowing that his only role will be special teams, then he will be more likely to succeed in that limited role than in an expanded dual role (special teams and offense or defense).

How would you identify a special-teams specialist out of high school?

I don't know. I don't think our players that ended up being special teams studs in the past were recruited to be special teams specialists. They were brought in because they were good athletes in their own right that the staff thought could play at tOSU, or at least provide quality depth. It just turned out that they were fantastic on special teams. It seems to me that if we continue to bring in the best athletes available, we at least have just as good a chance at ending up with great special teams units. I don't profess to know what's wrong right now, though. It's mind boggling, really.

 

[Buckskin86]

Special teams not fixed. Anyone who thought what they saw out there Saturday meant the special teams worries were a thing of the past should re-watch the game as soon as they finish reading this column. Just because the Buckeyes did not have a kick blocked or allow a big return touchdown doesn?t mean they have things under control. They might be headed in the right direction, but there were a few times where Eastern Michigan had a lane. Corey Welch averaged over 20 yards on seven kick returns and Ryan Downard took his punt back 27 yards. If that?s not enough, Drew Basil had to make two tackles on kick coverage and Ben Buchanan had to make one on his only punt of the game.

http://www.the-ozone.net/football/2010/EMU/postgame/10things.html

 

[sparcboxbuck]

We must really be bad if the Mods are concerned. This ugly thing showed itself late last year. Still surprised we haven`t fixed it. Don`t see a reason why our starters can`t play on special teams if need be. Go Bucks

IIRC this wouldn't be the first time that it happened. See Lil Animal and MF, et. al.

Point noted and agree.

 

[gracelhink]

http://www.the-ozone.net/football/2010/EMU/postgame/10things.html

Special teams not fixed. Anyone who thought what they saw out there Saturday meant the special teams worries were a thing of the past should re-watch the game as soon as they finish reading this column. Just because the Buckeyes did not have a kick blocked or allow a big return touchdown doesn?t mean they have things under control. They might be headed in the right direction, but there were a few times where Eastern Michigan had a lane. Corey Welch averaged over 20 yards on seven kick returns and Ryan Downard took his punt back 27 yards. If that?s not enough, Drew Basil had to make two tackles on kick coverage and Ben Buchanan had to make one on his only punt of the game.

So how does JT restore the "most important play" to its "special" effectiveness level?
Buchanan only punted one time yesterday, and he made the tackle.
Others have noted that the punt formation is new and may be suspect.
Here are some observations :

The wide spacing on the line formation is supposed to allow the coverage unit better release downfield, not require them to hold blocks against rushers and so offer advantage in coverage.
Three upbacks are designated big bodies to protect the punter from rush.
There are 5 "specialists" on the punt team; punter, snapper, and the 3 big body blockers positioned to protect the punter. The 3 big bodies form a great wall, but are not as effective in coverage against the return.
That leaves 6 designated downfield tacklers, (plus snapper)with responsibility for lane coverage and tackling the punt returner.
The opponent can have 10 blockers on 6 coverage specialists.
This is not good math or odds for the punt coverage unit.
I hold my breath if the returner breaks through the first line of coverage--
the 3 big body blockers are not typical "safeties" against elusive punt returners, a "wall" is not effective as a last line of defense against a returner at full speed.
Most of the attention on the ST coverage units has focused on the personnel on the units and if the better defensive players and athletes added to the unit would solve the problem with broken coverage.
I don't pretend to know the answer but IMHO JT might need to reassess punt protection and coverage scheme.
Re. the formation being used now, I think JT may want to ask these questions.
Are the wide line splits creating the desired advantage in coverage?
Are 6 downfield punt coverage specialists sufficient to cover effectively?
Would 8 or 9 coverage specialists on the unit be preferrable to the 3 big bodies designed to protect the punter and 6 downfield specialists?
Who does JT want as last line of defense?