I hope you guys like waffles, because my view on this debate doesn't fit neatly under either banner.
On one hand, Randy Gradishar was my hero when I was 10. No team will ever match what that 1973 defense did IMHO.
On the other hand, it was not uncommon for the top defenses to give up single-digits per game back then. The only team to do that since 2001 is the 2001 Miami Hurricanes (9.4).
On one hand, I agree that you can't compare eras.
On the other hand, that statement works both ways. You can't hold 2008 to the standard of 5.8 ppg when no one has approached that number in decades.
On one hand, the 1973 defense was more dominant than their stats showed. To those of us who actually saw them play, no defense has come nearly as close to controlling games the way they did.
On the other hand, well... this time there is no other hand. I will categorize the 2008 defense after I see them play. I have no expectation that they will approach the 1973 defense, statistically or historically; and certainly not in my mind.
My calls for dominance have as much to do with the state of our opponents as it does with the state of Ohio State football. There is no team on our schedule that compares with 1973 Michigan (We should have won that game by 2 TDs though). At least not in my opinion. The Trojans might, by the end of the season. But we don't play them at the end of the season.
But we've faced schedules like this before. Stronger than last years, but nothing like the 2005 schedule. Schedules like this are not uncommon, so clearly what I'm expecting to be special is the level of play from the Buckeyes.
And I stand by that expectation. Those of you who have been around for awhile know that I have Gigabytes of spreadsheets for every year of the Tressel Era. It is very clear to me that teams that bring back 3 of 4 defensive linemen almost always improve, usually by a significant margin. Teams that return all of their linebackers typically improve, unless they lost too many DL. Teams that bring back 3/4 DL and 2/3 LB (especially with the talent that OSU has waiting in the wings) always, always improve; almost always dramatically. Add to that the fact that the entire 2-deep returns in the secondary (minus one player who played 20 minutes of garbage time last year), and you have a recipe for a dramatically improved defense.
And it's not just my data. Phil Steele has collected data longer than I have, and he has found that teams that return >79% of their lettermen and 18 or more starters improve 80% of the time. Ohio State is one of only 5 schools in FBS that meet those criteria this year. Again, here are data that portend a dramatically improved team/defense.
The question is, dramatically improved over what? Were they perfect? Of course not. But no defense is. Almost every defense has a bad day or two. Not just every OSU defense, every defense. Even the '73 defense gave up 21 to USC, which was armageddon by their standards.
From where I sit, dramatic improvement over the #1 ranked scoring defense suggests a dominant defense is to be expected. When OSU gives up 38% as many points as our opponents typically score, and the second best Differential Scoring Defense (DSD) in the country gives up 57.2% as many points as their opponents typically scored; then it can be safely said that the defense is good. Not perfect, but damn good.
That defense had ONE DL that had more than 91 minutes played before last season, only two had more than 33 minutes. This year, the top 7 have at least 138 minutes each, most of them a lot more. That defense had similar experience issues at safety. This year, the entire 2 deep returns.
When you take a defense whose DSD was 50% better than the 2nd best defense in the nation and improve the experience level that dramatically; it is entirely rational to expect that a uniquely dominant defense could result.
Will it equal 1973? To say that I doubt it would be a gigantic understatement. But it is entirely possible that it will be the most dominant defense we've seen since then.
Didn't say anything about them being right. If even those looking to tear us a new one are giving us that kind of love, there may be something there. That is a painfully simplistic and pessimistic outlook right there.
j/k, Jax. I agree with your comments about the '73 team.
