HC Ryan Day (B1G Coach of Year, B1G Champion, National Champion)

[OHSportsFan]

If we don’t score then who cares you’ll get the ball back anyway for another swing.

I think this assumptiom is the potential flaw. We know this is a very sound, solid defense. No doubt. But what happens if other teams get more cracks at it? Do you throw in another busted run? An Iggy PI? Do they get worn down from their base, not many subsitute defense? Does an OC figure something out?

I have pretty good faith they’d be okay. And who knows the flip side is - what if an aggressive, tempo offense does score and we let the defense play with a lead?

At this point, all the “resting” goes out the window. It’s time to go all out now - so if the offense needs to hit the gas pedal, I think Day goes for it now.

At the very least, maybe we need more Endzone shots from the 30-40 range if short fields are an issue. Easier said than done.

 

[Jaxbuck]

You needlessly operate on razor thin margins with that philosophy. We have the best D in the country while our O has major redzone and kicking issues. Limiting our possessions harms us more than helps.

The margins are not razor thin. You are confusing the, one recent, result with the process.

Day has built a machine that puts his NFL system and NFL skill players against college defenses that can't handle the scheme or talent gap. He has a huge per play margin, not a razor thin one.

When you have a skill margin, you suppress the luck piece and the opponent has the worst possible odds of success. You are advocating increasing your opponents lifeline (luck).

 

[jwinslow]

I think this assumptiom is the potential flaw. We know this is a very sound, solid defense. No doubt. But what happens if other teams get more cracks at it? Do you throw in another busted run? An Iggy PI? Do they get worn down from their base, not many subsitute defense? Does an OC figure something out?

I have pretty good faith they’d be okay. And who knows the flip side is - what if an aggressive, tempo offense does score and we let the defense play with a lead?

At this point, all the “resting” goes out the window. It’s time to go all out now - so if the offense needs to hit the gas pedal, I think Day goes for it now.

At the very least, maybe we need more Endzone shots from the 30-40 range if short fields are an issue. Easier said than done.

It's also more sound than it is disruptive. They don't pile up sacks and turnovers, particularly not against a top 2 QB who will be the first QB drafted next spring.

Sat in a group chat recently with much smarter football minds than myself, and while they dislike the tight end extravaganza too, they didn't think the play calling should be the target. Julian was just way off his game, and not usually because he was facing pressure.

 

[Onebuckfan]

A real simple thing you can also do to increase your chances of winning is RUNNING THE GODDAMN BALL on 3rd and 1.

Running left not right.

 

[Jaxbuck]

Running left not right.

I prefer they run forward but I am not an X & O guy

 

[Captain Buckeye]

I think this assumptiom is the potential flaw. We know this is a very sound, solid defense. No doubt. But what happens if other teams get more cracks at it? Do you throw in another busted run? An Iggy PI? Do they get worn down from their base, not many subsitute defense? Does an OC figure something out?

I have pretty good faith they’d be okay. And who knows the flip side is - what if an aggressive, tempo offense does score and we let the defense play with a lead?

At this point, all the “resting” goes out the window. It’s time to go all out now - so if the offense needs to hit the gas pedal, I think Day goes for it now.

At the very least, maybe we need more Endzone shots from the 30-40 range if short fields are an issue. Easier said than done.

I see your point. I just think this defense is the best unit in the country for both offense and defense.

I think they’d hold up personally. But to your point who knows maybe not. I just think they would repeat their success with more reps.

 

[OregonBuckeye]

I think this assumptiom is the potential flaw. We know this is a very sound, solid defense. No doubt. But what happens if other teams get more cracks at it? Do you throw in another busted run? An Iggy PI? Do they get worn down from their base, not many subsitute defense? Does an OC figure something out?

I have pretty good faith they’d be okay. And who knows the flip side is - what if an aggressive, tempo offense does score and we let the defense play with a lead?

At this point, all the “resting” goes out the window. It’s time to go all out now - so if the offense needs to hit the gas pedal, I think Day goes for it now.

At the very least, maybe we need more Endzone shots from the 30-40 range if short fields are an issue. Easier said than done.

This is a historically great defense. It is not a vulnerability. If you're playing the odds, our offense is more likely to peter out than our D is to give up a lot of scoring drives.

 

[OregonBuckeye]

The margins are not razor thin. You are confusing the, one recent, result with the process.

Day has built a machine that puts his NFL system and NFL skill players against college defenses that can't handle the scheme or talent gap. He has a huge per play margin, not a razor thin one.

When you have a skill margin, you suppress the luck piece and the opponent has the worst possible odds of success. You are advocating increasing your opponents lifeline (luck).

They became razor thin when we were deep into the second half. We had an opportunity to go up tempo to give us another drive if we didn't score or only tied it. Instead we put everything on that last drive. There is an argument for it, but given the earlier redzone struggles, I didn't agree with it real time nor do I now. That was a poorly managed game and it cost us. We should've been far more aggressive in the middle 8 too. If we come away with scores on the last possession of the 1st half and first possession of the second half, it's game over

 

[Jaxbuck]

They became razor thin when we were deep into the second half. We had an opportunity to go up tempo to give us another drive if we didn't score or only tied it. Instead we put everything on that last drive. There is an argument for it, but given the earlier redzone struggles, I didn't agree with it real time nor do I now. That was a poorly managed game and it cost us. We should've been far more aggressive in the middle 8 too. If we come away with scores on the last possession of the 1st half and first possession of the second half, it's game over

You have convinced yourself that "going up tempo" = successful. If they couldn't execute well Saturday night at normal pace, why are you assuming they would at a faster pace?

Their problem was in execution, not opportunity.

What happens when you speed up and still don't execute? You just gave them the ball back faster, gave them more opportunity for their luck to overcome your skill. You voluntarily put an extra round in the chamber to play roulette with.

It's the exact opposite of what you want to do when you are the better team.

 

[RugbyBuck]

Every play has an outcome. That outcome is skill + luck.

If you have more skill, you want to suppress opponents luck. You give them fewer plays, not more. You don't want to play Russian roulette (pure luck, no skill) with more bullets, you want fewer.

What you don't trust, especially hard to do after a loss, is our skill gap as we get deeper into the playoffs.

The correct strategy is to do better, not do more. We just saw a failure of execution, not of design.

I understand and agree to disagree. We're not good enough to only have a few bites at the apple and our defense is good enough to minimize what the other side can do. I think that given enough bites at it we will execute. We are that good on offense. I simply, at this point trust the defense more than the offense. Within reason, I don't think this defense needs to be protected with time of possession.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I understand and agree to disagree. We're not good enough to only have a few bites at the apple and our defense is good enough to minimize what the other side can do. I think that given enough bites at it we will execute. We are that good on offense. I simply, at this point trust the defense more than the offense. Within reason, I don't think this defense needs to be protected with time of possession.

There is no getting around odds so feel free to believe whatever you want. The cold reality is that in football, every possession you give your opponent without increasing your lead is a gift of win probability to them. Even if you have the better offense, defense, athletes and coaching.

“more plays” is not universally good—it is good only when:
they are offensive plays
they are efficient
they consume clock
and they turn into points

Anything else is just giving the opponent another coin flip—and upset math lives off of coin flips.

Again, the problem Saturday night was not a lack of opportunity to make plays. It was a lack of execution. They did not produce points.

Going forward, nothing else needs change. Day has beaten talented teams before with the exact same fundamental structure. His approach is not the problem, it was just one outcome.

 

[Jaxbuck]

This is a historically great defense. It is not a vulnerability. If you're playing the odds, our offense is more likely to peter out than our D is to give up a lot of scoring drives.

So you want to give a sputtering offense more chances?

That's like gamblers who bet more once they start losing. You are pouring gas on the fire of odds going against you.

 

[RugbyBuck]

Yes, because it can be an efficient and explosive offense. I'll take eight chances rather than four with this offense. In between, I'm playing the odds that this defense will minimize the potential damage of our extra possessions. That's what we did last year in the playoff. I think our regular season strategy this year gets us bounced out of the playoff.

 

[Jaxbuck]

Yes, because it can be an efficient and explosive offense. I'll take eight chances rather than four with this offense. In between, I'm playing the odds that this defense will minimize the potential damage of our extra possessions. That's what we did last year in the playoff. I think our regular season strategy this year gets us bounced out of the playoff.

I think we are just conflating terms. Plays and possessions.

Going fast in a possession just to get more plays doesn't equal better odds of success. That is simply a framing error.

We run lots of 8-10 play drives that produce points. Going faster in those drives does not increase odds of success. It's not linear like that. We win those drives with efficiency.

Empty drives are the devil, not fewer plays

 

[1926Buckeyes]

We should've been far more aggressive in the middle 8 too. If we come away with scores on the last possession of the 1st half and first possession of the second half, it's game over

They ran the clock at the end of the 1st half because Sayin was flustered and they were likely to give the ball back to Indiana rather than score. I can’t remember the 1st drive of the 2nd half but I think it failed due to OL rather than aggressiveness.

I’ve wanted more tempo, but @Jaxbuck is right, uou don’t want to be too knee jerk after a close loss against #2. Especially when your star QB had his first ‘bad’ game where he was hesitating and not seeing the field well. They’ve used situational tempo and will probably use that more, but it’s not who they are and we won’t see a ton of it.

The key is getting Sayin to understand what Indiana was doing and go to work with the OL. Their defense put a lot on tape and I think that can be of great benefit to a smart, young QB. We already saw good 2nd half adjustments against their great game plan, so it’s up to Sayin and the OL to now be ready from jump.