• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2018 tOSU Offense Discussion

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Systems_id said:
I don't think this is it at all. Most of the positive yards we do get is because Webber or Dobbins made someone miss or they just ran someone over. I've seen maybe a handful of free holes for them to run through this year. Not sure if it's scheme or the o-line, probably a little of both, but the backs are the last place I'd lay blame on. Webber fighting for that 4th and 2 he probably didn't get was a microcosm of what the backs have had to put up with all year.
Click to expand...
Just wish we would take the TE out (or Ruckert in) and try to put even more stress on the defense throwing the ball.

If we cant line up and pound with a TE then at least force them into either their nickle. Take my odds with Dobbins/Weber against a 195 pound DB over a 230 pound linebacker.

We are struggling to score right now because we are forcing things. 2 TEs isn't helping us run the ball and it's actually making everything easier to defend. We are convinced that the way we run the ball is by adding people to run block and I just cant stress enough that that isn't the only way to do it.

You can either add more blockers on offense or subtract defenders from the box. Goes both ways.

Ask yourself this... ever watched overtime regular season hockey? 4 on 4 is up and down the ice with non stop scoring chances. God forbid if you take a penalty and its 4 on 3 because there's so much open ice to operate with.

My point? Its better to force teams out of the box than to just keep adding people to block. Giving the OL and the Backs better views of an open box would go a long ways.

We think we've tried a lot to fix this but IMO we haven't even begun trying.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
bukIpower said:
Just wish we would take the TE out (or Ruckert in) and try to put even more stress on the defense throwing the ball.

If we cant line up and pound with a TE then at least force them into either their nickle. Take my odds with Dobbins/Weber against a 195 pound DB over a 230 pound linebacker.

We are struggling to score right now because we are forcing things. 2 TEs isn't helping us run the ball and it's actually making everything easier to defend. We are convinced that the way we run the ball is by adding people to run block and I just cant stress enough that that isn't the only way to do it.

You can either add more blockers on offense or subtract defenders from the box. Goes both ways.

Ask yourself this... ever watched overtime regular season hockey? 4 on 4 is up and down the ice with non stop scoring chances. God forbid if you take a penalty and its 4 on 3 because there's so much open ice to operate with.

My point? Its better to force teams out of the box than to just keep adding people to block. Giving the OL and the Backs better views of an open box would go a long ways.

We think we've tried a lot to fix this but IMO we haven't even begun trying.
Click to expand...

Did you not see the photo posted by Jax where we had 4 WRs on the field and they were spread as far as you can possibly spread the field and they out numbered us in the box? I still do not get where you do not understand that just because you have 4 WRs on the field at the same time, the defense is not going to suddenly and magically take a player out of the box because one guy is smaller and faster than the guy he replaced? Why do you not get that?
 
Upvote 0
Hstead said:
Did you not see the photo posted by Jax where we had 4 WRs on the field and they were spread as far as you can possibly spread the field and they out numbered us in the box? I still do not get where you do not understand that just because you have 4 WRs on the field at the same time, the defense is not going to suddenly and magically take a player out of the box because one guy is smaller and faster than the guy he replaced? Why do you not get that?
Click to expand...
Then you throw to the open fucking person out wide... what dont you get about that?

MY POINT... theyll be out numbered somewhere and you make them pay for it. I could care less if we run for 50 yards as long as we are throwing for 450-500.

THEN... When they play the 4 wide more honestly it opens up the box.

As was pointed out those are LBs on a WR and you abuse that mismatch until they tap out and put the nickle in. You can't just do what I'm suggesting 1 or 2 times and boom everything is fixed I fully understand that .

I'm talking about making it our formation of choice and not a change of pace. Highlight our strengths to the extreme and force teams to match us up out wide. Once they do teams stand no chance to stop our backs for anything less than 6 ypc
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
bukIpower said:
Then you throw to the open fucking person out wide... what dont you get about that?

MY POINT... theyll be out numbered somewhere and you make them pay for it. I could care less if we run for 50 yards as long as we are throwing for 450-500.

THEN... When they play the 4 wide more honestly it opens up the box.

As was pointed out those are LBs on a WR and you abuse that mismatch until they tap out and put the nickle in. You can't just do what I'm suggesting 1 or 2 times and boom everything is fixed I fully understand that .

I'm talking about making it our formation of choice and not a change of pace. Highlight our strengths to the extreme and force teams to match us up out wide. Once they do teams stand no chance to stop our backs for anything less than 6 ypc
Click to expand...

Isn't that exactly what they've been doing when they haven't been running the ball... regardless of WR4 being a WR or TE?
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
Isn't that exactly what they've been doing when they haven't been running the ball... regardless of WR4 being a WR or TE?
Click to expand...
No... base is the TE either at the LOS or at the outside hip of the tackle.

I'd want the 4th WR because it gaurantees a mismatch if they don't change their personnel. You force a team out of 3 LBs and you force them to not cheat towards the box.

Most LBs can keep up with our TEs but make that TE another WR and it's a different story
 
Upvote 0
bukIpower said:
No... base is the TE either at the LOS or at the outside hip of the tackle.

I'd want the 4th WR because it gaurantees a mismatch if they don't change their personnel. You force a team out of 3 LBs and you force them to not cheat towards the box.

Most LBs can keep up with our TEs but make that TE another WR and it's a different story
Click to expand...

I was being a bit tongue in cheek. See @Jaxbuck picture as noted above.
 
Upvote 0
Hstead said:
Did you not see the photo posted by Jax where we had 4 WRs on the field and they were spread as far as you can possibly spread the field and they out numbered us in the box? I still do not get where you do not understand that just because you have 4 WRs on the field at the same time, the defense is not going to suddenly and magically take a player out of the box because one guy is smaller and faster than the guy he replaced? Why do you not get that?
Click to expand...
The big guy will catch a pass for 4-12 yards. The little guy can take it to the house.

Teams have decided to make Dobbins beat an extra defender and bet that Haskins can't exploit single coverage for most of the game. The result has been record setting passing numbers and some nearly dicey outcomes in perfect weather.


The defense is not leaving people uncovered outside they are merely not supporting them. So LBs sucked up on a play fake (or simply trying to run with the wrs) can get beaten badly. Or a simple horizontal pass (as a pseudo run) on a RPO now has a much better chance of gaining big yards after eluding the first tackler.


In the meantime, heal up Mr Bowen.
 
Upvote 0
Hstead said:
Did you not see the photo posted by Jax where we had 4 WRs on the field and they were spread as far as you can possibly spread the field and they out numbered us in the box? I still do not get where you do not understand that just because you have 4 WRs on the field at the same time, the defense is not going to suddenly and magically take a player out of the box because one guy is smaller and faster than the guy he replaced? Why do you not get that?
Click to expand...

bukIpower said:
Then you throw to the open fucking person out wide... what dont you get about that?

MY POINT... theyll be out numbered somewhere and you make them pay for it. I could care less if we run for 50 yards as long as we are throwing for 450-500.

THEN... When they play the 4 wide more honestly it opens up the box.

As was pointed out those are LBs on a WR and you abuse that mismatch until they tap out and put the nickle in. You can't just do what I'm suggesting 1 or 2 times and boom everything is fixed I fully understand that .

I'm talking about making it our formation of choice and not a change of pace. Highlight our strengths to the extreme and force teams to match us up out wide. Once they do teams stand no chance to stop our backs for anything less than 6 ypc
Click to expand...

If I may here, and please note the size of the grain of salt I am advising you to take with my limited X & O expertise, I think you are both right.

@bukIpower is right in that you want to take people out of the box, not bring extra defenders in with extra blockers. This is why the I formation died.

@Hstead is right that body type doesn't really matter. What does matter is exploiting the cushion/soft spot they create by having a LB in close to LOS and a safety 15 yards away from the slot.


That picture I screen capped of the 4 wide look is just begging for an RPO to the slanting inside receiver and it's kiss the baby time for the defense. Sort of like what Minny was doing to OSU only with infinitely more talented athletes.


just my .02
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
If I may here, and please note the size of the grain of salt I am advising you to take with my limited X & O expertise, I think you are both right.

@bukIpower is right in that you want to take people out of the box, not bring extra defenders in with extra blockers. This is why the I formation died.

@Hstead is right that body type doesn't really matter. What does matter is exploiting the cushion/soft spot they create by having a LB in close to LOS and a safety 15 yards away from the slot.


That picture I screen capped of the 4 wide look is just begging for an RPO to the slanting inside receiver and it's kiss the baby time for the defense. Sort of like what Minny was doing to OSU only with infinitely more talented athletes.


just my .02
Click to expand...
Which I agree with.. That's what I'm saying in that you put another WR out there and then see what they do.

My point is to maximize our strength to an exponential degree and force them to be honest with our WRs. IMO you do this better with a 4th WR and with wider splits.

I understand they can still have numbers in the box regardless but make enough plays out wide and that'll change.

Also yes in that photo you posted its also begging for a quick swing pass to the inside WRs with how much space they have.

Just dont like having a TE in the box who cannot stress a defense in any shape or form.
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
If I may here, and please note the size of the grain of salt I am advising you to take with my limited X & O expertise, I think you are both right.

@bukIpower is right in that you want to take people out of the box, not bring extra defenders in with extra blockers. This is why the I formation died.

@Hstead is right that body type doesn't really matter. What does matter is exploiting the cushion/soft spot they create by having a LB in close to LOS and a safety 15 yards away from the slot.


That picture I screen capped of the 4 wide look is just begging for an RPO to the slanting inside receiver and it's kiss the baby time for the defense. Sort of like what Minny was doing to OSU only with infinitely more talented athletes.


just my .02
Click to expand...

Hopefully we see a bit more of that against Purdue. Pitch and catch until the D says no mas. I think that and better defense in the first half is what this team is missing. Then hopefully the running game can take hold if teams relent and start defending in a different way.

It does feel a bit odd though that all of a sudden OSU has a reinvent the wheel when it comes to running the ball just because they don't have a mobile QB. I'm sure this is partially because of what the staff is used to scheming and teaching, but teams have continued to have success running the ball without ever having mobile threats. Doesn't seem like there should have to be radical changes.
 
Upvote 0
1926Buckeyes said:
Hopefully we see a bit more of that against Purdue. Pitch and catch until the D says no mas. I think that and better defense in the first half is what this team is missing. Then hopefully the running game can take hold if teams relent and start defending in a different way.

It does feel a bit odd though that all of a sudden OSU has a reinvent the wheel when it comes to running the ball just because they don't have a mobile QB. I'm sure this is partially because of what the staff is used to scheming and teaching, but teams have continued to have success running the ball without ever having mobile threats. Doesn't seem like there should have to be radical changes.
Click to expand...

Other teams run it out of the shotgun with a non running QB about like OSU is doing this year; somewhat successfully but it isn't their primary attack.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top