Buckeye Offensive Coordinator Discussion (merged)

[ohiostate=life]

"...how are we going to protect when it comes to the run game, everyone's involved, because the quarterback has to decide what run we need to get out of if we've made a poor selection from the sideline."
There in lies the problem. I could tell from the way Troy runs the offense that most off the horrible plays we run when he stands back there and either gets sacked or spins then gets a gain of two on third and 10 weren't plays from the sideline. The guy is calling his own plays from the line of scrimmage. And I think we all agree he is not a very good offensive coordinator. Tressel knows what plays to run. Smith is the problem.

 

[Bucklion]

I think you're probably right.... One thing that bugs me about CFB today is you get the lable of "Great Game" when the score is 42 - 38... to me, that's not a "Great Game" but, as I've said before, I'm more in to a crushing D. I think most people, as you indicate, are all about Big Offensive Numbers.

On the other hand, I see no reason why we can't have an awesome D (our current one) and a high powered O too. I'm the kind of fan that would still sit through each minute of a 84 - 0 ass whoppin, and I'd love every minute of it.

Yeah, and you know, talent like we have on D, top-to-bottom, doesn't come along too often as a group. The thing that pisses me off about the philosophy I was talking about earlier is that despite that, instead of enjoying our defensive dominance, there are plenty of "fans" who would rather we have NW/Wisconsin games all the time...which I personally can't stand.

 

[BayBuck]

I never thought I would come away with the impression that Tressel was not willing to do a little self-assessing. I'm sure I was reading too much into it, but this time I felt he wasn't really open to a little introspection.

You honestly think you could tell how much introspection a guy called Senator been doing from the transcript of a presser? I agree you were reading too much into it.

 

[BuckeyeTillIDie]

Something I'm having a problem with understanding is why sometimes 2 wideouts are lined up in the back-field, which starts them off 5 yards away from the line of scrimmage. To me, this seems like they either take too long to get out into the open field, or are running just short hitch or out routes.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

On the other hand, I see no reason why we can't have an awesome D (our current one) and a high powered O too. I'm the kind of fan that would still sit through each minute of a 84 - 0 ass whoppin, and I'd love every minute of it.

I could not possibly agree with a single post more. After the 2002 season was over, I'd watch my game DVDs during the off-season to tide me over to the next season. The three games I watched the most (in fact, almost exclusively) were the Kent State, San Jose State, and Indiana games...games we won 51-17, 50-7, and 45-17 respecively (don't have a copy of the Texas Tech game). I never got tired of watching us beat the shit out of the opposition.

Our offense and defense have absoluely nothing to do with each other, so there is no reason why we can't have both...those who think having both a punishing defense and an explosive offense is expecting too much should just look at USC.

 

[jwinslow]

mili I agree, but I'm guessing you're referring to last year's USC team, cuz this year ain't that great on D.

"...how are we going to protect when it comes to the run game, everyone's involved, because the quarterback has to decide what run we need to get out of if we've made a poor selection from the sideline."
There in lies the problem. I could tell from the way Troy runs the offense that most off the horrible plays we run when he stands back there and either gets sacked or spins then gets a gain of two on third and 10 weren't plays from the sideline. The guy is calling his own plays from the line of scrimmage. And I think we all agree he is not a very good offensive coordinator. Tressel knows what plays to run. Smith is the problem.

um, first of all, the quote you used involves tressel not knowing what play to run, or at least making a mistake. second, Tressel & Bollman's extremely slow delivery of playcalls results in very little time to audible, which is probably why TS had to call a TO on that last drive. third, I'm glad you're able to tell that Troy is calling all of his own plays, and that the bad plays prove when Troy is making a call. I'm not even sure I understood taht second sentence, but you're stretching a bit man. I'm not defending smith's ability to read defenses, cuz that is lacking, but I have no idea how you watch a bad play and know it was TS' fault for checking off at the line.

 

[sandgk]

I could not possibly agree with a single post more. After the 2002 season was over, I'd watch my game DVDs during the off-season to tide me over to the next season. The three games I watched the most (in fact, almost exclusively) were the Kent State, San Jose State, and Indiana games...games we won 51-17, 50-7, and 45-17 respecively (don't have a copy of the Texas Tech game). I never got tired of watching us beat the shit out of the opposition.

Our offense and defense have absoluely nothing to do with each other, so there is no reason why we can't have both...those who think having both a punishing defense and an explosive offense is expecting too much should just look at USC.

Or (and I would argue these next are closer to great on the Defensive side of the ball than USC, yet still with productive offenses)

Texas

OR

Georgia
EDIT - and to avoid confusion I am talking of this year's edition of both teams.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

mili I agree, but I'm guessing you're referring to last year's USC team, cuz this year ain't that great on D.

You're right...should've been more specific.

 

[JXC]

we've found that if we can score 24 points and our defense can reach their goal is let 14 points or less, we have a good chance to win.

WOW, really? If we score 24 or more, and they score 14 or less we may have a chance to win? I don't like having a number of points to score as a goal. Just score as many points as you can.

Our offense and defense have absoluely nothing to do with each other, so there is no reason why we can't have both...those who think having both a punishing defense and an explosive offense is expecting too much should just look at USC.

That's not true. Offense and defense do go together. The less points a defense gives up, the less points an offense is going to score. The more points a defense gives up, the more points an offense is going to score. Not just with Tresselball, but with all football. Now i'm not saying that our offense doesn't score because our defense isn't good. I think our offense needs to be and should be a lot better than it is. But offense and defense work together to win games. They are not independant at all...and you have to look at what the other side of the ball is doing or not doing when deciding what to do on that side of the ball.

 

[UGABuck]

I wish the immediate follow up question would have been "If a lack of execution is the issue, then does that essentially mean that you have failed as coaches since 3rd, 4th, and 5th year players cannot consistently execute plays, and have not been able to do so for going on 4 seasons?"

I tried this bit of logic and got dinged, cursed and told I knew nothing about football. But it stands the test. Great idea.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

That's not true. Offense and defense do go together. The less points a defense gives up, the less points an offense is going to score. The more points a defense gives up, the more points an offense is going to score.

Sheesh, I'm talking about defense and offense on the frickin' same team...

 

[UGABuck]

You know, our goal is to score 24 points or more

I have not been involved in football for some time but is that a new trend? I thought the defense's goal was to prevent a score on each drive and the offense's goal was to score every drive? Thus, doing this over the course of a game should equal a win.

 

[sandgk]

XC - I disagree on this part of what you said.

You could more correctly say that the more points a defense gives up the more more you have to score. It is far from a given that a porous defense produces a studly offense.

I do agree that an offense and defense can and do work together (or on occasion against one another). Classic case in point is when you have the offense departing stage left too frequently or too quickly. This can leave the defense out on the field for longer than is desirable.
Conversely a good, productive offense can help the defense in the following ways:
A - Keeps the opponents offense off the field, limiting scoring opportunities (Time of Possesion),
B - Makes the barrier to success for the opposing offense higher - tends to lead them into a quick catch-up game. In this day and age that means passing - so you make the opponent more predictable, easier to defend; and;
C - Gives the defense time to rest so they have lots of speed and strength left for the 4th quarter.
D - Does the opposite for the opponents defense.

The best defense is a good offense.

So I guess I differ on this from both Mili and you on this one now that I scan the thread -

 

[buckzip]

He is the head coach. He should have a hand in the offense. However, he shouldn't be the primary hand in the offense.

I am sure he has a hand in the defense too.

 

[jwinslow]

That's not true. Offense and defense do go together. The less points a defense gives up, the less points an offense is going to score. The more points a defense gives up, the more points an offense is going to score. Not just with Tresselball, but with all football. Now i'm not saying that our offense doesn't score because our defense isn't good. I think our offense needs to be and should be a lot better than it is. But offense and defense work together to win games. They are not independant at all...and you have to look at what the other side of the ball is doing or not doing when deciding what to do on that side of the ball.

I'm not sure where this is coming from. In the NFL, where there are elite offenses that are rebuilt (and coaches are fired) if teams don't produce, then giving up points means more chances ot score points.

But in tresselball, especially with this type of offense, we are going to score more points if Hawk & Co stop the opponent and give us good field position. If they don't stop them, and we start on our own 20, we have a much harder task ahead of us. If the defense keeps giving up points, then we have to abandon the run somewhat to get quick points, and we are far from a great passing team.

So I'm not sure wehre you are getting the above statement. In the nfl, I would agree with you. In tresselball, that statement is completely backwards.