2016 tOSU Offense Discussion

[Bill Lucas]

People are finding fault with an Ohio State offense that only produced 38 points against a decent defense. Think about that and think back to the fact that there was a time in the recent past when 38 points was an offensive explosion for an Ohio State team. We have it really good right now.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

If JT hits Samuel in the first quarter we get 7 instead of 3, and if he hits Clark in the third we get another 7 instead of punting. That's 11 more points solely from hitting a guy 2-3 yards ahead of his defender. Now we're talking a 49-17 win over a team that beat Sparty and JT having a 4-TD day (3 passing, 1 rushing) with over 200 yards passing and 137 yards rushing.

 

[Buckeye Maniac]

If JT hits Samuel in the first quarter we get 7 instead of 3, and if he hits Clark in the third we get another 7 instead of punting. That's 11 more points solely from hitting a guy 2-3 yards ahead of his defender. Now we're talking a 49-17 win over a team that beat Sparty and JT having a 4-TD day (3 passing, 1 rushing) with over 200 yards passing and 137 yards rushing.

Add in Baugh catching that pass, and you can take off the int and it would take his % from 9/21 to 12/21, not fantastic but much better.

 

[ScriptOhio]

I don't know if everyone has seen this or not; they play it on the stadium scoreboard jumbotron before the game:

"The Cadillac position of college football"

 

[OHSportsFan]

I'll be the stick in the mud that says 21 points came off the following drives:

2 plays, 9 yards
2 plays, 6 yards
4 plays, 33 yards

It was a bad offensive day held together by some decent running by Barrett, Weber and the underutilized Samuel. I don't know that it means anything more than just one day, but it looked like the same script that has caused the Buckeyes issues before- WRs can't get open, JT hesitant and inaccurate in his throws, and a gameplan that turtles immediately to over-reliance on the QB. How Indiana lets JT pick up a 3rd and 9 on a QB sweet play in the 4th was their one true baffling defensive design as most should have expected that to come.

Wisconsin seems to be a defensive team that has the ability to turn a team one-dimensional. Passing game needs to be better. I think it will be and I think this team will enjoy the road environment.

(on the other side, though, I'm seriously not worried about the Badgers reaching above the 17 point mark, barring bad turnovers, so the offense really might just need to do enough for 4 scores and they will)

 

[cdiddy70]

I'll be the stick in the mud that says 21 points came off the following drives:

2 plays, 9 yards
2 plays, 6 yards
4 plays, 33 yards

It was a bad offensive day held together by some decent running by Barrett, Weber and the underutilized Samuel. I don't know that it means anything more than just one day, but it looked like the same script that has caused the Buckeyes issues before- WRs can't get open, JT hesitant and inaccurate in his throws, and a gameplan that turtles immediately to over-reliance on the QB. How Indiana lets JT pick up a 3rd and 9 on a QB sweet play in the 4th was their one true baffling defensive design as most should have expected that to come.

Wisconsin seems to be a defensive team that has the ability to turn a team one-dimensional. Passing game needs to be better. I think it will be and I think this team will enjoy the road environment.

(on the other side, though, I'm seriously not worried about the Badgers reaching above the 17 point mark, barring bad turnovers, so the offense really might just need to do enough for 4 scores and they will)

This is a great post.
I wouldn't change a word.

The pass game still appears to lack core competencies, which has been the case since Mensa left.
First world problem but it bit us last year.

 

[zincfinger]

...As far as the coaches abandoning the pass too quickly, that is pretty much the exact opposite argument we all had in the last game like this vs MSU, so no. I am not buying it...

I wouldn't characterize the complaints about last year's offensive play-calling against MSU as being the opposite of the criticisms above of the play-calling against Indiana. They are similar to one another in that both point to an alleged over reliance on the quarterback run. That said, and with the caveat that I didn't see the game, I don't have a problem with the play-calling last weekend for at least two reasons:
(i) when one approach is not working, and another is, it only makes sense to repeat the approach that is working; and
(ii) a lot of those quarterback runs were options where IU made a point of defending the pitch and forcing Barrett to keep.

 

[zincfinger]

At least they picked Indiana to have an "off" game against. I expect a bounce back in Madison next Saturday night.

When people talk about championship teams having gotten "lucky" along the way, or having "gotten all the bounces", this is what that really means, in my opinion. Every team has a couple of bad games over the course of a season. The main difference between a team that finishes #1 and a team that finishes #5, is that the championship team was fortunate to have those bad games against weaker opponents, when they could afford it.

I don't have any issues with how JT runs, just the risk of injury.

He gets hurt and we are proper fucked

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

I'll be the stick in the mud that says 21 points came off the following drives:

2 plays, 9 yards
2 plays, 6 yards
4 plays, 33 yards

It was a bad offensive day held together by some decent running by Barrett, Weber and the underutilized Samuel. I don't know that it means anything more than just one day, but it looked like the same script that has caused the Buckeyes issues before- WRs can't get open, JT hesitant and inaccurate in his throws, and a gameplan that turtles immediately to over-reliance on the QB. How Indiana lets JT pick up a 3rd and 9 on a QB sweet play in the 4th was their one true baffling defensive design as most should have expected that to come.

At the risk of harping on the "if" factor, if JT hits Samuel in stride on our second drive, you can bet IU is not playing everyone within 6-8 yards of the LOS. They were selling out on the run and short routes...there were very few passing lanes. The only to loosen up a secondary is to burn them deep at least once. We were two bad passes and a bullshit call on Hooker's INT return from a 56-17 blowout over a 4-1 conference foe...

 

[ShowMeBuck]

I'll be the stick in the mud that says 21 points came off the following drives:

2 plays, 9 yards
2 plays, 6 yards
4 plays, 33 yards

It was a bad offensive day held together by some decent running by Barrett, Weber and the underutilized Samuel. I don't know that it means anything more than just one day, but it looked like the same script that has caused the Buckeyes issues before- WRs can't get open, JT hesitant and inaccurate in his throws, and a gameplan that turtles immediately to over-reliance on the QB. How Indiana lets JT pick up a 3rd and 9 on a QB sweet play in the 4th was their one true baffling defensive design as most should have expected that to come.

Wisconsin seems to be a defensive team that has the ability to turn a team one-dimensional. Passing game needs to be better. I think it will be and I think this team will enjoy the road environment.

(on the other side, though, I'm seriously not worried about the Badgers reaching above the 17 point mark, barring bad turnovers, so the offense really might just need to do enough for 4 scores and they will)

I get this.

But then again I don't.

The offense SHOULD turtle when your passing game is struggling, you have a great punter, great defense, and a productive run game that includes the numbers changing running QB.

Indiana is legit and features a quick strike offense that can get them back into a game quickly. So why give them a chance when you can sweep the leg with a suffocating run game?

Some of you people act like we should just ignore what the day is telling us, throw 2 or 3 more INTs so we can have a nail biting win or a loss. For Peet's sake. You all realize the point is the W right?

It was ONE game.

And we won by 21.

Sheesh.

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

When people talk about championship teams having gotten "lucky" along the way, or having "gotten all the bounces", this is what that really means, in my opinion. Every team has a couple of bad games over the course of a season. The main difference between a team that finishes #1 and a team that finishes #5, is that the championship team was fortunate to have those bad games against weaker opponents, when they could afford it.

This is the best way I've seen it put so far.

Look through the schedules of the top 5 undefeated teams. They've all had head scratchers already

Ole Miss scored 43 on Alabama 1 game after putting up 38 vs Wofford. The vaunted Kentucky defense held Bama to 34 points. Bielema's Hogs scored 30 on Saban's Tide

Clemson beat Auburn by only 6, 19-13.

They also beat Troy by 6, 30-24.

TSUN has come closest to avoiding off games. They allowed Colorado 28 points. Whether being held to 14 by Wiscy means anything remains to be seen. Wiscy's other opponents appear to have been frauds.

Washington beat Arizona 35-28

AtM beat the 2-4 GameCocks 24-13 and 3-3 UCLA 31-24


It happens to everyone. Usually more than once per season. In 4 1/2 seasons, it has yet to happen to Urban in a big game on the road.

 

[Jaxbuck]

TSUN has come closest to avoiding off games. They allowed Colorado 28 points.

They have benefited from the worlds easiest schedule and still only avoided flirting with a loss because the Colorado QB got hurt.

That said, and to your point, the only team I ever recall just running a #6 on their entire schedule was 1995 Nebraska. Even that team had a 14 point game (and trailed after 1 quarter) against a mediocre opponent (Washington State at home). They absolutely obliterated everyone else on the schedule.

I have openly wondered why we can't just "go all '95 Nebraska on people" just once in my life as an OSU fan. Yeah, I'm spoiled but I blame Tressel. More importantly we could very well be seeing it. Stay tuned.

 

[OHSportsFan]

When people talk about championship teams having gotten "lucky" along the way, or having "gotten all the bounces", this is what that really means, in my opinion. Every team has a couple of bad games over the course of a season. The main difference between a team that finishes #1 and a team that finishes #5, is that the championship team was fortunate to have those bad games against weaker opponents, when they could afford it.

Not sure who said it (Dakich?) and it was related to college basketball but the premise was basically, over the course of a 30 game schedule your team will play 10 games above their normal level, 10 games at their true level and 10 games below. The coach's job, particularly at a great program, is to get wins out of those 10 nights where the team is short of their potential, for whatever reason.

Think it can apply to any college sport.

I get this.

But then again I don't.

The offense SHOULD turtle when your passing game is struggling, you have a great punter, great defense, and a productive run game that includes the numbers changing running QB.

Indiana is legit and features a quick strike offense that can get them back into a game quickly. So why give them a chance when you can sweep the leg with a suffocating run game?

Some of you people act like we should just ignore what the day is telling us, throw 2 or 3 more INTs so we can have a nail biting win or a loss. For Peet's sake. You all realize the point is the W right?

It was ONE game.

And we won by 21.

Sheesh.

And I totally get this. With the end goal of just getting a win, I think Meyer did what was needed. I posted in the game thread he's going Tresselball to get out of last weekend with a sure W. I never truly felt like the game was in doubt of a win. Doesn't take away from the frustrations of how "off" the team looked- penalties, errant passes, drops, missed blocks, and again going away from spreading the wealth. The win is all good with me, though. I'll take 10 more anyway they get it.

I have openly wondered why we can't just "go all '95 Nebraska on people" just once in my life as an OSU fan. Yeah, I'm spoiled but I blame Tressel. More importantly we could very well be seeing it. Stay tuned.

That would be swell.

 

[Systems_id]

They have benefited from the worlds easiest schedule and still only avoided flirting with a loss because the Colorado QB got hurt.

That said, and to your point, the only team I ever recall just running a #6 on their entire schedule was 1995 Nebraska. Even that team had a 14 point game (and trailed after 1 quarter) against a mediocre opponent (Washington State at home). They absolutely obliterated everyone else on the schedule.

I have openly wondered why we can't just "go all '95 Nebraska on people" just once in my life as an OSU fan. Yeah, I'm spoiled but I blame Tressel. More importantly we could very well be seeing it. Stay tuned.

Well I mean our closest victories so far have been by 21 points each. We're doing all right so far. A far cry from one of the most talented Ohio State teams ever barely beating Northern Illinois by a TD.

 

[matcar]

They have benefited from the worlds easiest schedule and still only avoided flirting with a loss because the Colorado QB got hurt.

That said, and to your point, the only team I ever recall just running a #6 on their entire schedule was 1995 Nebraska. Even that team had a 14 point game (and trailed after 1 quarter) against a mediocre opponent (Washington State at home). They absolutely obliterated everyone else on the schedule.

I have openly wondered why we can't just "go all '95 Nebraska on people" just once in my life as an OSU fan. Yeah, I'm spoiled but I blame Tressel. More importantly we could very well be seeing it. Stay tuned.

1998. We were doing just that. Sparty. My heart shrank 3 sizes that day.