• 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!

Buckeye Offensive Coordinator Discussion (merged)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
As an example from the pros, look how good Brian Billick's offenses have been (not) since he left Minnesota and became a head coach. An OC could be a great move, even if he doesn't call the plays, but just works on the schemes, to take some pressure off of JC who has a bout a billion things to worry about each week as it is. Working in academia, I can say for sure that no one can do everything...and a lot of times people, espcially big-timers, try and do too much. SOme delegation could be helpful for players and coaches alike.
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye said:
Not neccessarily...look at Texas Tech.

My point is that having a great defense has nothing to do with having a great offense. Two totally different groups of personnel.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting example, Texas Tech is your prototypical wing and a prayer offense. As for their defense, last year was pretty poor. Right now they may have improved their defense over last year - though the toughest part of their schedule has yet to come. Part of what Texas Tech may teach is that it not enough to live by the pass - you also have to eat the clock - and that typically demands a good running game, something that they consistently lack.

As for the Buckeyes, they have always had good defenses in most years. This year, it is simply another great defense. Thank God.

What is frustrating is that both sides of the ball have speed, strength and talent. One is getting the most out of their personnel - -Defense. The other, Offense, is falling short of the Head Coaches goals, their capabilities, and the fans hopes and expectations.
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye said:
Not neccessarily...look at Texas Tech.
Click to expand...
Texas Tech is 6-0, and is ranked 4 spots higher than Ohio State... i don't know if you caught the Nebraska game this past week, but they needed a score late, and they GOT IT. granted, their D gave up 31, which by Ohio State standards is not acceptable, but they can move the ball when they need to...

anyway, to the real reason for the post, this is from the Presser:
Our goal isn't to be, I guess, knighted as a prolific. I don't know that we've ever sought that, we just want to do our part to help the team win.
Click to expand...
you don't want to be prolific? isn't that the hallmark of an excellent football team? if the term could be applied, we would have a prolific defense, right? i don't even know how to respond... i just can't believe it... this shit is fucking ridiculous. :smash: :hatepc:
 
Upvote 0
I completely disagree that the best Defense is a great Offense.

Ask yourself why it's cliche to say Defense wins Championships....

Ask yourself how many Championship teams have been based on outscoring their opponants (By that I mean, 51 - 48 type games, not simple scoring more points, which you obviously have to do to win at all), rather than shutting the opponant down (And I should mention, Just 'cause USC beat the shit out of people last year doesn't mean their of the "We gotta score more points" philosophy)

The best Defense is the D that can stop the run, and limit the pass to something approaching negligable. Take OSU, no one can run on them.. least not yet... and that's been true, by and large, since 1995. While OSU has given up some passing numbers, you have to keep in mind, they face a shitload of passing plays because no one tries to run (Yes, I know that there have been some big running games against OSU in the last 10 years, but they are few and far between) If you run 70 plays a game, and 20 of them are runs, and you hold the completion % to 40% you're still giving up about 20 Rec. a game which might seem like a lot, but isn't, really... I digress...

Point is, teams like the Colts.... they don't win championships, the Patriots do. Teams like the Chiefs don't make the playoffs, Baltimore does....

Teams like TTU don't win the Big XII, OU does (And they've had the best D in the Big XII up til this year, in my estimation)

The best Defense has NOTHING to do with your offense, nor should it. When you play that way, you're Purdue with it's "Basketball on Grass" You're Northwestern... you're Texas Tech.. You're an also ran.


Edit: If you're talking "ball control" offense, then the theory has some validity. I didn't address than as this thread seems geared towards "big play" offense.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
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"
Click to expand...

Yeah, how about that Northwestern-Wisconsin game last weekend.

"Defense? We don't need no defense!" :slappy:

badges.jpg

with apologies to Blazing Saddles!
 
Upvote 0
Kinda surprised no one has touched on this comment by Tressel yet...

Most of our decisions are made from a what are we going to attack with, from the week's preparation. And then you say, ‘OK, as we get into the game, what are they doing differently? What are they showing us that we haven't seen?’ Take Penn State, for instance, or, really, Iowa too, in the last two weeks, we've basically gotten what we expected. We've got the fronts and the coverages and got blitzed when we thought we'd get blitzed, so you go in and design what you think is the best thing against those situations...
Click to expand...

This is VERY scary to me. The coaches have done enough work to correctly predict what they will be getting from the opposing defenses. This would lead one to assume that the opposing defenses were playing right into our gameplan. OSU's gameplan presumably would be designed to work best against expected coverages, and forced to adapt if different defenses showed up. I could understand seeing a confused offense out there because they were getting something completely different from what they had studied and game-planned against. Sadly, this is not the case. PSU did exactly what our guys had been practicing against for two full weeks and the Bucks still couldn't move the ball at all. If we cannot execute against what we're expecting, I don't want to know the alternative...
 
Upvote 0
I remember when JT was hired, and the press was asking what kind of offense he would install. His response was something about building it to the to the players strengths. He also said he would put whomever gave us the best chance to win on the field. If he truely believes that, then he needs to start with the man in the mirror....(insert Michael Jackson song.)
 
Upvote 0
Bucklion said:
Honestly, though, I think the lack of offense draws the rope a lot shorter than a lack of defense. In other words, if we ran the score big on some people, but lost a couple of games 38-35, I think there are a lot of "fans" that would prefer that over having a world class defense, beating people 27-6 or 17-13, and losing a couple of games 20-17. Whether those are the people with the money or not, I don't know, but I think a perceived lack of offense is received more negatively than a perceived lack of defense, because many people think it isn't as "exciting".
Click to expand...

This is NOT directed toward any poster...but...

why do we have to pick? Everyone talks about having one or the other. There is absolutely no reason we shouldn't have both with the talent on this team. The offense has been mediocre for several years now and the defense has been stellar. That tells me, or any other rational human being, that there is a problem with offensive schemes and/or coaching...

and then I start wondering how this will affect offensive recruiting....*(but I'll save that for another rant.)
 
Upvote 0
lvbuckeye said:
Texas Tech is 6-0, and is ranked 4 spots higher than Ohio State...
Click to expand...

Yeah, and they've finished 9-5, 8-5, and 8-4 under their high-powered offense. They can't rely on out-gunning their opponents every game. If the saying "The best defense is a good offense" were true, then they should be on a 30-something game win streak. But when you lose games 51-48, 51-49, and 43-40 like they have over the past few seasons, you can clearly see that's not the case.
 
Upvote 0
You know what disgusts me, is the fact that Notre Dame has this highly explosive offense that can put up both yards and points.

Honestly, do you really think they have better overall talent than Ohio State? I tend to think not. Quinn is a better QB, which ultimately could be the reason for the difference in offenses.
 
Upvote 0
If Quinn were the difference then things would have been happy in South Bend last year.

It isn't Quinn - in large part, it is one fat man's mind that has improved ND's offense. (BTW, their defense still is holding them back, wonder if in a few years the Irish fans will be howling for Weiss to get another DC).

Oh, and back on topic - like Bucknut319 said, I want both our great defense and a good offense.

And UGA as for 24 points as a goal Tressel qualified that in his presser.
REPORTER: Why wouldn't your goal to be to score as many points as possible?
TRESSEL: It is. 24 or more. Not 24. I'm sorry if I mislead you. We enjoyed scoring 31 in our first Big Ten game and wish it would have been 38, that would have been wonderful, but we met our goal. I think if you look in the last -- I know our people study this, but I think in the last 15 years at Ohio State, if you score 24 points or more, you win like 96 percent of your games. And I know that's not our goal, our goal is to win 1 hundred percent of them, but I think it's a realistic thank you say 24 or more.
Click to expand...
Thing for me is that I wish he would be, ahem, more consistent in stating his goals.
Earlier it was 200 Rush, 250 Pass, 40 points per game. Stating that 24 number here and on the coaches website, lends the impression that he has dropped back from his original team goals. I doubt that is true and that the 24+ goal is what he says, a minimum hurdle to help ensure victory.

Though as for the questioning of his skills as play-caller and any sharing with an OC this quote jumps out also, it came just before the bit about thinking of sharing this

REPORTER: One last question on the same lines, there are some coaches who have intimate knowledge and are involved in the offense. Some in the defense and some are like overseers who don't really involve themselves in one side or the other. Would there ever be a point where you think maybe you might need to be more objective to stand back a little bit or is this something --
TRESSEL: So you're questioning my intimate knowledge, is that the way I heard the question?
REPORTER: Just wondering about your motivation, wondering whether there might ever be a time you might be an overseeing more so than being intimately involved in one side of the ball.
TRESSEL: I think that's a discussion you have at times, and -- but, you know, I'm not sure that that would interest me. Now, you know, we'll see, but I like being involved.
Click to expand...
..

Testy?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
As my new sig line would indicate, I agree 100% with all of those saying that a great offense and a great defense are not mutually exclusive. We can have both and the talents already in place, just tweak the coaching staff.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top