• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

2026 tOSU Offense Discussion

Jump to latest Follow Reply
plum diamonds buckeye planet
Sort by date Sort by votes
lvbuckeye said:
Why TF would he want to go to a school that doesn't even have a dedicated special teams coach? Illinois does. Texas A&M does. Ohio State does not.
Click to expand...

This is holding us back big time when it comes to getting quality special teams guys. Until Day gets it in his head that special teams do indeed actually matter and hired a dedicated coach, we are screwed here.
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
Going back to my fundamental model of an outcome (skill + random variance = outcome)

My issue is (and this is what's changed for me as a football observer over the years), I don't care how good the defense is, RV/"luck" is asymmetrical on the defensive side of the ball. When that skinny tail variance expresses itself on defense, the opponent scores. Springs slips.

As a general strategy (not talking about in game tactical uses of tempo) therefore, I would always optimize to play as few defensive snaps as possible if I had the better team. The surest path to victory in football is to have the per play points advantage because of your skill and to have more offensive plays relative to your opponent...not just absolute, volume more plays because you are actually increasing your odds of winning by limiting their chance at luck.

In general, every offensive snap is a chance for you to express skill and suppress luck. Every defensive snap is an elevated chance for the lesser skilled team to get lucky. It's like giving them more lottery tickets or playing Russian Roulette with more bullets, not fewer.

So anyway, you clearly understand it so that's my only actual point on the risk mitigation/constraint/game theory side of it.

My main argument is that people are confusing the undesirable outcome with the approach and this is the real mistake. Not once have I seen anyone who says "go faster" give equal mind share to the very real possibility that you fail and just end up punting faster.

It's a very common cognitive bias buy essentially it's if they just did this we would have won.
they get x = desired outcome anchored and give zero credence to the possibility of failure of x

It's why the Spinal Tap bit on "these go to 11" is so funny, it hits close to the mark on the truth of the human existence.

NT: "If we sped up, we'd have more chances"
Marty: "What if you sped up and just punted faster?"
NT (long pause): "If we sped up we'd have more chances"
Click to expand...
I totally agree. Pretty much on every point you made. I do, however, think that the strategy deployed is situational by game / opponent and potentially within a game depending on the score. I don’t think that you’re suggesting otherwise, but just to put it out there.
 
Upvote 0
sparcboxbuck said:
I totally agree. Pretty much on every point you made. I do, however, think that the strategy deployed is situational by game / opponent and potentially within a game depending on the score. I don’t think that you’re suggesting otherwise, but just to put it out there.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Problem is you can’t be all things all times. It’s hard to deviate from what you primarily do no matter what it is.

But in-game with the skill advantage I’d go faster at first build the lead, grab an “extra” possession before the half etc if my team could do it well. I’d consider the possibility of it failing and weigh the risk /reward.

In 2025 I don’t think Sayin could do it well. Kid just wasn’t ready to be that guy yet no matter what.
 
Upvote 0
Jaxbuck said:
Agreed.

Problem is you can’t be all things all times. It’s hard to deviate from what you primarily do no matter what it is.

But in-game with the skill advantage I’d go faster at first build the lead, grab an “extra” possession before the half etc if my team could do it well. I’d consider the possibility of it failing and weigh the risk /reward.

In 2025 I don’t think Sayin could do it well. Kid just wasn’t ready to be that guy yet no matter what.
Click to expand...
Yup. I think that the pace of play was dictated by Day not wanting to destroy a QB. It will be very interesting to see what happens next year. Sadly, there’s too many variables in play to really determine if it was related to Sayin being young or if it was the OC or what.
 
Upvote 0
Overlooked in all this: Carson Beck is in his sixth year of college football. He’s been in 2 nc games, four ccgs, had 47 starts, is 6’3”, weighs in at 220 something, and can run the ball.

wonderful as he is, this is still just Sayin’s second year, his first CCG and his first start in a CFP game, he’s barely 6’ and I’m guessing weighs about 180. Yet to show an inclination to run with the ball.

thats a lot of advantage to Beck and Miami.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeneye said:
Miami has sent this open/weak side nickel pressure, SIM or 5th man. either c or b gap, all damn year.

The Ole Miss coaching staff had their answers & their players ready.

Not to beat a dead horse, but the lack of offensive preparation for the Miami game is only becoming more glaring watching things like this.

Click to expand...

Yes the team with no coaches was better prepared than our team and the only thing that seems to help is mentally checking out on the season and saying they are happy we beat UM with a pscyopath coach so who cares
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top