Back on the rollercoaster?

[Jaxbuck]

I don't like the constant comparisons to '02 but I'll opine anyway.

'02 DL > '07 DL by the size of CW's circumference.

'07 offense > '02 offense(especially sans MoC) by the magnitude of the embarrassment for the B12 on 9/29.

'02 schedule difficulty > '07 schedule difficulty by the size of that Auburn kickers cajones.

 

[buckeyes_rock]

It reminds me of '02 in that it's a war of attrition. I know it's still early, but all we have to do is win ball games. Thanks to all the losses this weekend, now we just have to hope USC or LSU slips up somewhere between now and December. What a crazy weekend. Now maybe the rest of the world will start realizing that it's not about how pretty you win...just that you win baby. That reminds me of 2002. Long way to go, but somehow, I like our chances.

 

[Cicero]

I love how the schedule stacks up. People tend to under rate our up coming competition but I think we will get tough games from here out with the possible exception of Kent State. If we win out we are battle tested and unlike last season when we we were just unceremoniously plopped at the top of the mountain we have the climb to remember and draw upon going into the bowl game. Nothing is a given, but we do have the opportunity to strive for something great.

 

[AFrost20]

I have been pleasantly suprised by our Offensive production tis year. Sure, it could be better.....and the first couple games were a bit ugly (especially the Akron game) but they seem to have hit their stride a bit. I still seem t osee too many unblocked defenders on running plays....not sure if that is an Oline issue, or just facing a lot of run blitzes. They were talking about Boeckman's stats on Gameday after the game......for first year starters, he is right up there with the best in the country, ratings wise (according to them). And I am elated with Brian Robiskie. I said last year he would be one of the greats.....and it sure looks like he is on his way to being mentioned with the Carters, Galloways, Holmes, Ginn and Bostons of OSU past....maybe even surpassing them. not being a homer, but i havent watched a better receiver this year.

 

[OSU Rob]

i agree with the offense being surprisingly decent- better than the '02 version that won the NC. however, we have yet to face a defense that will test us, especially with a great pass rush, since boekman has had all kinds of time to throw up till now. we all remember how good the o-line looked last year until the florida game where their d-ends were in our backfield all day.

 

[Zurp]

I think another part of it is that Ohio State hasn't really played any difficult teams, yet, this year. It may become a rollercoaster. But I think that this Buckeye team is actually better than the 2002 version (Offense is better, overall, and the defense is comparable, though special teams may not be). And with the Big Ten being down, in my opinion, I don't fore-see any more of a rollercoaster than that tram that drives you from the exit to your car in the parking lot that's bigger than the actual park was.

 

[Ttown]

After we whip Purdue thewre won't be any roller coaster.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

This team is no-where near as good as 2002. Not yet...

I disagree. Our defense is playing as well as 2002's (statistically) and has been out to punish people ever since Russell's PF penalty at Washington. Offensively we're far more balanced than 2002...when Clarett was out we couldn't do jack shit, while now even if Beanie is hobbled we can still move the ball.

 

[Bleed S & G]

I disagree. Our defense is playing as well as 2002's (statistically) and has been out to punish people ever since Russell's PF penalty at Washington. Offensively we're far more balanced than 2002...when Clarett was out we couldn't do jack shit, while now even if Beanie is hobbled we can still move the ball.

I agree, this defense is looking as good as the 02 so far..

the 07 d-line isn't as good, but they are nothing to sneeze at. If Wilson wouldn't of been hurt..

IMO, the 07 linebackers are far better than the 02 linebackers and much deeper. As a unit, the 07 lbers are better than the 02 linebackers.. and IMO, it's not even close.

DBs.. the corner backs as a unit are better IMO, Gamble was awesome.. but Jenkins is shut down, Washington has been solid this year, and our younger guys are all very good looking as well. The 02 safteys were better than 07, but Coleman has a diffrent style of play and keeps everything in front, rather than lighting a ball carrier up.

I've been high on this defense since preseason, so far so good. But now we get to go play some competiton, so we'll see how it shakes out when its all said and done with.

 

[Zurp]

Our defense is playing as well as 2002's (statistically)

You may be right about the "statistically" part. But the entire weight of the 2002 team rested upon their defense. (Sure, maybe special teams, too, but without a strong defense, I don't care if your punter averages 70 yards net - you aren't going to win games.) The 2007 defense is able to play much more agressively, which can make the numbers look better than they really should be.

Although... crap. To counter that arguement, one might say that the 2002 defense tended to be first-teamers for more of the game, whereas backups get to be in the game much more in 2007. Sure, that means that the starters can play even more agressively when they're in, but even the backups are helping the statistics in 2007.

I guess it really doesn't matter. No one can intelligently argue that 2002 defense won the National Championship for Ohio State. And anytime you have another defense that can be mentioned in the same sentence as the 2002 defense is, there isn't going to be much you're allowed to complain about.

 

[BrutusBobcat]

I don't see the comparison to 2002 at all. For one thing, we haven't played in a close game yet. Second, we have a deeper corps of running backs. Third, we have vastly more talent at WR. Fourth, this team is MUCH deeper at the DB and S positions, and has better pass coverage. Gamble got moved to CB primarily because he was needed there, and proved to be a fortunate revelation. Fifth, Boeckman is more effective than Krenzel. He's just as conservative in terms of not making mistakes, and he has a stronger, more accurate arm. Krenzel was a great leader, no doubt, and had very high efficiency numbers. Really, if you look at the stats, you'll see a lot of similarities. The difference is TB's strength on the deep ball, and the velocity of his throws on out routes. Sixth, Beanie 2007 is more durable than Clarett 2002, and Saine adds and element that the 2002 team would have killed to have.

The 2002 team had a better DL; the 2007 team has a far better OL in terms of unit effectiveness (yes, I do know how many of the 2002 guys have played on Sundays). At LB, a strong nod goes to 2007, especially with the emergence of Freeman. This is a deep unit, and lead by a player who will be remembered as one of the all-time great LBs here. Our defensive scheme under Heacock is better and even more effective than Dantonio's 2002 version, and the offense is clearly more balanced and varied. Groom versus Trapasso is pretty close, but I'll give the edge to Groom. He was phenomenal that year. AJ is fantastic, but the team isn't relying on his leg the way 2002 did with Groom. The Nuge is the best, period. If there's one place where the 2002 team was vastly better than in 2007, it's in the kicking game. Few college kickers ever have had a season like Nugent did -- it's the gold standard (here, anyway).

Now, if we're talking about putting both teams in a game where we're down by 6, on our own 20 with :45 left, then I want the 2002 squad. If we have to play outmatched and as a two touchdown dog, then I'm taking 2002 also. That team had a character that you just can't measure. However, for any normal game, Central Ohio cardiologists agree -- take the 2007 version and the points.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

'02 schedule difficulty > '07 schedule difficulty by the size of that Auburn kickers cajones.

No way 2002's schedule is that much tougher than this year's.

First, let's look at the OOC schedule:

2002 - Texas Tech, Kent State, Washington State, Cincinnati to start the season, with San Jose State in mid-season (7th game)
2007- Youngstown State, Akron, Washington to start the season, with Kent State in mid-season (7th game)

Texas Tech was not nearly as great as hyped but still was a tougher test than YSU, but you can say Akron was as tough this year as Kent State was in 2002 and playing Washington out in Seattle was as tough, if not tougher, than playing surfer boy at The Shoe. The 2002 mid-season game against SJSU probably won't prove to be any tougher than our mid-season game this year against a pretty good Kent State squad. That leaves the extra game against Cincinnati...can't help that we have only 12 games this season vice 13.

No, let's look at the conference schedule:

Instead of listing each team for both years, let's look at significant differences. We played Penn State and Michigan at home in 2002, whereas we have to play them on the road this year. Granted, both so far are down compared to what they were in 2002, but playing at their place always seems to negate records. We didn't play MSU in 2002 but play them this year (and they may be th best team in the state of Michigan this year). We're playing Purdue at their place tomorrow just like we did in 2002, but this year's edition (5-0) is much better--on paper at least--than 2002's (4-5). Now, we did play Wisconsin on the road in 2002 while we have them at home this year, but overall the conference schedule is about as tough this year as it was in 2002.

Even if 2002's schedule was indeed tougher than this year's, it isn't by much.

 

[Yertle]

Wow...

The biggest roller coaster for this season has been the analysis done on the Buckeyes season so far. Let's chill out. But, if you want to compare 2007 to 2002... fine. This year's team hasn't needed a last minute INT to beat a .500 Cincinnati team. This year's team didn't beat a crappy NW team by a slim 11 point margin. This year's team hasn't had to rely on the legs of a true freshman for it's only consistent offense. This year's team has given up fewer points after 5 games than the 2002 team did after 3!!! I'm not suggesting that the 2007 team is better, but I am suggesting that this season has not been a roller coaster. It's been one systematic pounding after another. Even the closest game of the year had 13 consecutive 3 and outs forced by our defense.

How many of us would have thought that 5 weeks into the season we'd be a top 5 team??? Sure, we might be a weak top 5 team, but who is below us that deserves to be above us??? No one. We're legit at #4. College football is having a wacky season - probably wackier than any that I can remember. And the last time I checked, we haven't had a nail-biter yet this year. Or did I miss something? USC can't say that. Besides, would you rather be Florida, Oklahoma, West Virginia, or Texas right now?

I'd say this season has been more of a Merry-go-Round. Doesn't get me all worked up but still effective at bringing a smile to my face.

 

[Zurp]

I'd say this season has been more of a Merry-go-Round. Doesn't get me all worked up but still effective at bringing a smile to my face.

The Merry-Go-Round at Geauga Lake kicks ass.

 

[Saw31]

You guys are all nuts. But there's no use in arguing about it. The rest of the year will tell the story. I'm not drinking that kool-aid until at least the end of October...