• 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!

Head Coaches that don't call plays

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes

budbuck

Newbie
A lot of people here and elsewhere think we'd be better off if we had an O.C. calling the plays for the offense. I know that Pete Carroll has an OC call the plays, but he calls the D. I don't know that Joe Pa makes any play calls, at least it didnt seem like it last week.

What coaches out there utilize an OC to make play calls?

Would Tress even be willing to give up that much power?

What calls does a HC make if he's not calling plays? Go for two? Onside kicks? 4th and short?
 
It's pretty clear Tress doesn't want to give up that power. Give him a decent line with a good QB, and Tressel's offense will become decent enough to quiet many critics.

Ever notice the headset? HC's spend a lot of time discussing everything with the coaches in the booth. Even if they aren't making playcalls, they usually are involved in the process of what type of play is run when.
 
Upvote 0
We've played against some teams this year (Miami comes to mind) whose HC is the OC. (Joe Pa's OC is Galen Hall, so no he doesn't call his own plays).

There are many schools (not a majority, but a significant number) whose HC runs the offense.
 
Upvote 0
Galen Hall joined the PSU staff, I believe last year. I wasn't impressed. This year with more speed to work with, he's done a much better job!

Are we convinced that most of the problem on offense is just play calling?

If we didn't have so many turnovers would we not look much better on offense?

We are 113th in the nation in fumbles lost! That to me says much.

But , it probably wouldn't hurt to have more imput on play calling!
 
Upvote 0
I don't know if this is the case, but I do wonder if opposing teams use this as a negative recruiting tactic against us. One coach could use the OC vs. no OC argument to get better offensive recruits. Again, I'm not sure this is the case, but if I were trying to get a good WR or QB to come to my school instead of OSU I might use that argument.

(And I'm not saying that we don't get good offensive recruits.)
 
Upvote 0
It's up the the HC to realize that he isn't getting the job done calling the plays if he isn't doing a good job. Personally, I have major problems with the way OSU does a lot on offense. I don't think the routes are designed very well and I think some of the pass protections are extremely stupid (that has been a problem before JT was even the coach). Many times the pass protection will call for the line to slide one direction and have the RB block a DE. It is very hard for a 200 lb RB to block a 280 lb DE and do a good job. Every drop back protection should have the oline block big on big with the RB responsible for a LB if they blitz. This allows for the RB to run a route if his LB doesn't blitz.
 
Upvote 0
agreed, but this past week the routes were somewhat better. We saw double moves by WRs. We saw routes actually draw defenders away from other WRs (Holmes TDs). we saw a freaking screen.

I too have a HUGE beef with the way Pittman is asked to block a DE. On Ginn's first TD, poor Maurice Wells was asked to pick up a DE. Miraculously he did so, and Todd got the ball off. But that is just a recipe for disaster.

If our line play improves, it will change everything. we can even play predictable football more effectively if we were to shift techniques up front, IMO.
 
Upvote 0
Fans usually blame playcalling for poor offensive performances, but I've never bought into that much. Certainly, there are down, distance and game situations where a particular play call is boneheaded, and other times where a call is brilliant. Those excellent calls are usually more the result of preparation, game planning and in-game adjustments than anything else.

OSU has had issues with offense that are manifested on game day, but are formed much earlier. It's been beaten to death how uncertain Smith looks against zone defenses -- that's not playcalling. There are blocking scheme and pass patterns that have design issues, as exhawg has pointed out. Last season, we had running backs with serious fundamental issues that never seemed to get coached out of them (thankfully Pittman is not showing any of those tendencies).

I was going to point out in the OC thread in Rumor Mill that what's needed is some tuning and adjusting rather than some sort of Urban Meyer-esque remaking of the system. Tressel needs to follow his philosophy of figuring out what the team does well as the season moves on. One thing I think that we should see more of (and have been) is I formation running. Pittman looks great running with a lead blocker to help him get to the second level of the defense. Our passing game under Smith seems to do better with fewer attempts and deeper routes. Zwick was solid with a quick read, short route game. Smith needs fewer receivers and longer developing routes. Stretching the field out vertically also makes him more dangerous when he does take off by pulling the safeties deeper to help out on Ginn and Holmes. The staff is getting this stuff figured out, it's just been frustrating for a couple of games. Changing QBs in-season was NOT a good move, and I think Tressel knows that now.

The turnover issue is the one big mystery on this season. Take better care of the ball and I think that we're undefeated, even with the same personnel, coaching, schemes, play design and play calls. I DON'T think that it's impossible to ask an offense to NOT throw an INT when backed up against your own goal line. I DON'T think that it's impossible to ask a QB to NOT fumble the ball when you're faced with a two-minute drill. If the QBs hold on to the ball on final drives, both the Texas and Penn State games are winnable. Yes, you're going to turn the football over sometimes. However, when you do it with the game on the line, you lose. That seperates winning teams and losing teams in college football. The game is too close and too competitive to expect to get away with that against teams of Texas' and Penn State's caliber.
 
Upvote 0
in every game we have lost this season turnovers have not been the major cause. against texas we actually had a very positive turnover margin. against psu we turned it over twice. once was very early in the game and the other was on the last drive of the game. those two turnovers cost us 7 points. considering it was 14-10 psu at halftime and psu scored their last points (3) with 11 something left in the 3rd qtr... that gave us an entire half to get off our asses and do something about it offensively. the fact that we were in a position where we had to depserately claw our way back into the game on the final drive is a far bigger problem than A. turning the ball over on that particular drive or B. turning the ball over very early in the game.

the biggest impact turnovers have had in any of our games was against msu. that doesn't mean that turnovers are not important. clearly they are very important in any game. but in the very specific situations as the psu and texas game, turnovers imo were not the leading factor in either loss. so if your looking for a scapegoat for those losses... keep looking. this one isn't it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
martinss01 said:
in every game we have lost this season turnovers have not been the major cause. against texas we actually had a very positive turnover margin. against psu we turned it over twice. once was very early in the game and the other was on the last drive of the game. those two turnovers cost us exactly 7 points. considering it was 14-10 psu at halftime and psu scored their last points (3) with 11 something left in the 3rd qtr... that gave us an entire half to get off our asses and do something about it offensively. the fact that we were in a position where we had to depserately claw our way back into the game on the final drive is a far bigger problem than A. turning the ball over on that particular drive or B. turning the ball over very early in the game.

the closest turnovers have come to impacting any game we have been in 1 way or another was against msu. as i recall we won that one... granted you should do everything in your power to limit them. but if your looking for a scapegoat... keep looking. this one isn't it.
Click to expand...
It's never 1 play that costs you the game. Turnovers are so expensive and they really hurt this team worse than some others.

Our D has only let the opposing team march the length of the field 3 or 4 times this season. You throw a pick that's returned to the 1.5 yard line, it totally negates your defense, takes your offense of the field, frustrates the players, motivates the other players, eats up the game clock and on top of all that, oftentimes the other team will score.

With that said, turnovers clearly aren't the only reason we lost to teams like PSU and Texas - but you can't say they weren't significant...
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top