Jim Bollman (Stay calm and run Dave)

[Dryden]

And against LSU, the O-line wasn't the problem. I think the Buckeye O-line did a pretty respectable job in that game

Ricky Jean Francois was the player of the game. Being able to pick Cordle up and carry him back to Beanie had a lot to do with it.

Just sayin'...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX1T5VW30E8]YouTube - LSU Football - Ricky Jean Francois Blows up OSU O-Line[/ame]

 

[BuckeyeRob]

They may be putting in the extra prep time for the scUM's the PSU's and the USC's but it isnt translating onto the field in the big games. The lack of execution, discipline and overall nastiness that the OL has shown for several years now is not acceptable. I honestly cant remember the last time that the OL went out and dominated an opponent. You cant tell me we dont have the talent, as noted above with the number of OL in the NFL right now. So that just leaves one thing to blame : Coaching. Bollman might be a great guy but that doesnt translate into being able to get your players to perform at the highest level possible. I just think that people are getting sick and tired of hearing about the excuses about the lackadaisical OL play. We can see other schools with lesser talent have dominating OL, why cant OSU? I dont think anyone can truly give any answers to this, but the only constant there has been over the years is the coaching. Thats why I think Bollman gets so much heat is that he is the constant when it comes to the OL. The players change, and the play calls change, but the lack of execution and nastiness still remains the same.

Wow... what ever happened to giving credit to a quality opponent? Navy is the toughest opener OSU has had under Tressel and yes, that includes Texas Tech in 2002.

The talking heads say "OSU outweighs Navy up front by 40-50 pounds." and it becomes unquestioned gospel truth. Well, go check the depth charts for both teams and what you will see is the differential ISN'T as big as the talking heads say.

More importantly, once I take an non emotional, during the game view of things, Navy is a good football team and has had a great deal of success. Navy has not won less than 8 games a season every season for 7 straight seasons.

This game SHOULD have been 32-14 if the staff follows the chart. You know the one that says on 4th and .25yards you take the FG and go up 3 scores. They do that and it completely changes the complex of the game. Down 3 scores Navy is toast. They didn't do that and to Navy's credit they capitalized.

You all need to STOP looking at Navy like they are Youngstown State or Ohio. This is a VASTLY superior opponent. OSU DOMINATED the game for the better part of 50 Minutes.

Sure, there are things that need to be addressed and THEY WILL BE.

That said, as a fan, I MUCH prefer the boys KNOWING they need to make improvements happen than if they had beaten Navy 40-14 thinking they are all that..... THIS IS A GOOD THING GUYS!

 

[Jaxbuck]

The problem with comparing coaches is that each one has a different level of talent - both quality and quantity - with which to work. Would any of you seriously suggest that another OL coach could have turned guys like Steve Rehring, Ben Person, Kyle Mitchum, Jon Skinner, and Jim Cordle into All Americans? Conversely, don't you think that Bollman might have had a little bit more success with USC's lineman the past few seasons?

When you look at Bollman's track record, he turned guys who were not considered to be stud OL - Rob Sims, Doug Datish, T.J. Downing, and Kirk Barton - into first team All Big Ten players (and Barton was also AA), and of course he is responsible for the development of Nick Mangold, who was a first team All American, a first round draft pick, and one of the best centers in Ohio State history.

Let's reserve judgment for another couple of years, to see what Bolls can do with some true talent (and depth) along the OL, with guys like Boren, Brewster, Shugarts, Adams, Mewhort, Linsley, Hall, Longo, and Norwell. If the OL is still having "issues" in 2010 (and I'm really not sure exactly what "issues" they have right now, as it's still too early to judge for this season), then maybe we should question his approach and results.

Isn't Bollman responsible for the talent level of the Olinemen he recruits? I don't see how he gets a pass for not having the same level of talented players USC has had when he's the guy who's supposed to be out there identifying and recruiting the talent. That's part of his job description.

Also, its been 8 years. I think that's plenty long enough to be safe from over reacting to a short term trend.

So how do these stats relate to Jim Bollman and the O-line when Jim Tressel calls the plays and sets the offensive tone for the team, and is clearly not as interested in racking up stats all four quarters as some of those other teams? I think you've seen enough OSU football to know JT can put his offense in chew-the-clock mode when he feels a game is in hand, and that affects an overall yards/play statistic.

I don't know the stats, so I'm not saying this rhetorically, but I'd think there are better stats you could use to criticize the OL play specifically, like sacks allowed and yards/rush and false start penalties for example. Not that I think that a statistical argument will go too far here, as stats can be used to prove any point and the criticism on this thread seems to be mainly an emotional response.

The guy asked for stats so I gave him the one I think shows the true issue with the offense the best. Efficiency stats are always more informative than counting stats imo.

If I had the data handy I would have used points per play. That discounts everything and just lays it on the line. #1 job of the offense is to score points, no one is ever going to convince me that Tressel isn't interested in scoring points when we are on offense.

If you really wanted to do it right you'd break out the drive charts for each and every game and measure how they perform "when it matters" ie take away garbage time and end of half kneel downs etc. Somewhat subjective but worth the work imo.

The larger point remains unchanged. It takes zero work to pick pretty much any offensive stat and see OSU's biggest weakness has consistently been the offense.

 

[Poe McKnoe]

Ricky Jean Francois was the player of the game. Being able to pick Cordle up and carry him back to Beanie had a lot to do with it.

Just sayin'...

YouTube - LSU Football - Ricky Jean Francois Blows up OSU O-Line

Do I see the guard pulling on a short yardage handoff? And the fullback having nobody to block? Just sayin'.

 

[strohs]

Here you go.

ESPN.com - ESPN - ESPN Message Board Index Message Board

That argument is suitable over there. You can disparage all the accomplishments you want.

Seriosuly what accomplishments are you talking about?
Do you consider going 1-6 in bowl games last year an accomplishment?
How about blow out losses by multiple big ten teams to USC? Is that an accomplishment? How about OSU vs UF? vs LSU? vs Texas?
When was the last time the big ten won a BCS game???
At least provide a logical reason to disagree with me please.

Obviously this isnt the right thread...

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Isn't Bollman responsible for the talent level of the Olinemen he recruits? I don't see how he gets a pass for not having the same level of talented players USC has had when he's the guy who's supposed to be out there identifying and recruiting the talent. That's part of his job description.

I just KNEW that this specious argument would rear its ugly head. First, Bollman is not the only one responsible for recruiting OL. It is my understanding that JT personally has to sign off on each recruit, regardless of position, and of course each coach has geographic territories in which he is the primary recruiter. So, Bollman is certainly not the only one responsible for bringing in offensive linemen.

Second, recruiting high school players is not like drafting college players - you can only get the guys who actually want to play for you. And most of the OL who have wanted to play for Ohio State have been Ohio kids. And most of them haven't been all that talented, to be quite frank. Granted, Ohio State did a fine job of recruiting OL nationally in 2008, but you can't rely on signing two 5-star OOS O-linemen every year.

Also, its been 8 years. I think that's plenty long enough to be safe from over reacting to a short term trend.

You mean seven OL (Stepanovich, Mangold, Barton, Boone, Sims, Datish, Downing) who have been either All Big Ten or All American or both is some kind of bad trend? In my opinion, at least three guys on that list didn't have All Big Ten talent, so either the coaches/media are biased in favor of Ohio State, or Bollman coached those guys up to that level.

The larger point remains unchanged. It takes zero work to pick pretty much any offensive stat and see OSU's biggest weakness has consistently been the offense.

So, what's your point? Would you rather have the defense be OSU's biggest weakness? I'll take a great defense any day, and take my chances with a mediocre but opportunistic offense that doesn't make many mistakes.

 

[zincfinger]

Ricky Jean Francois was the player of the game. Being able to pick Cordle up and carry him back to Beanie had a lot to do with it.

Just sayin'...

According to this site, he was voted Defensive MVP of the game, rather than player of the game, but maybe the tv station called him player of the game. In any event, and regardless of any individual, informal awards, I think the OSU offense was reasonably effective moving the football in that game, in part due to decent play from the O-line, and that it was the OSU DT's consistent inability to control gaps which proved the fatal liability in that game. In short, I think LSU won that game not by dominating defensively (OSU moved the football, with more total yardage than LSU had), rather they won it by being able to dial up 3+ yards up the gut whenever they wanted, giving them an astronomical 3rd down conversion rate and control of the game clock.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

According to this site, he was voted Defensive MVP of the game, rather than player of the game, but maybe the tv station called him player of the game. In any event, and regardless of any individual, informal awards, I think the OSU offense was reasonably effective moving the football in that game, in part due to decent play from the O-line, and that it was the OSU DT's consistent inability to control gaps which proved the fatal liability in that game. In short, I think LSU won that game not by dominating defensively (OSU moved the football, with more total yardage than LSU had), rather they won it by being able to dial up 3+ yards up the gut whenever they wanted, giving them an astronomical 3rd down conversion rate and control of the game clock.

...and a series of catastrophic mistakes starting with the dropped pass in the endzone, missed field goal, personal fouls to extend drives (I think 3 of them at the end of the 2nd beginning of the 3rd quarters). Not to mention LSU was a very good team.

I am excited to see how the OL performs against USC, I have said it numerous times already, but my gut is feeling good about this game, which means the OL controls the line of scrimmage.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

The problem with comparing coaches is that each one has a different level of talent - both quality and quantity - with which to work. Would any of you seriously suggest that another OL coach could have turned guys like Steve Rehring, Ben Person, Kyle Mitchum, Jon Skinner, and Jim Cordle into All Americans? Conversely, don't you think that Bollman might have had a little bit more success with USC's lineman the past few seasons?

When you look at Bollman's track record, he turned guys who were not considered to be stud OL - Rob Sims, Doug Datish, T.J. Downing, and Kirk Barton - into first team All Big Ten players (and Barton was also AA), and of course he is responsible for the development of Nick Mangold, who was a first team All American, a first round draft pick, and one of the best centers in Ohio State history.

Let's reserve judgment for another couple of years, to see what Bolls can do with some true talent (and depth) along the OL, with guys like Boren, Brewster, Shugarts, Adams, Mewhort, Linsley, Hall, Longo, and Norwell. If the OL is still having "issues" in 2010 (and I'm really not sure exactly what "issues" they have right now, as it's still too early to judge for this season), then maybe we should question his approach and results.

then again i hear that counter argument every year...

and to the flip side you folks are late, it typically starts even before the season starts.

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

I know CFN had some very, very positive things to say about Navy's Front 4.

FWIW, their preview was written while NT Nate Frazier, Navy's best d-lineman, was still on the team.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I just KNEW that this specious argument would rear its ugly head. First, Bollman is not the only one responsible for recruiting OL. It is my understanding that JT personally has to sign off on each recruit, regardless of position, and of course each coach has geographic territories in which he is the primary recruiter. So, Bollman is certainly not the only one responsible for bringing in offensive linemen.

Fine. Tressel, Bollman whoever. Like I have said from the beginning, I don't care who's fault it is, just fix the problem.

Second, recruiting high school players is not like drafting college players - you can only get the guys who actually want to play for you. And most of the OL who have wanted to play for Ohio State have been Ohio kids. And most of them haven't been all that talented, to be quite frank. Granted, Ohio State did a fine job of recruiting OL nationally in 2008, but you can't rely on signing two 5-star OOS O-linemen every year.


You mean seven OL (Stepanovich, Mangold, Barton, Boone, Sims, Datish, Downing) who have been either All Big Ten or All American or both is some kind of bad trend? In my opinion, at least three guys on that list didn't have All Big Ten talent, so either the coaches/media are biased in favor of Ohio State, or Bollman coached those guys up to that level.

1 guy has been recruited, developed and turned into something beyond a journeyman NFL OL under the current regime that I can recall and that's Mangold. Compared to the numbers put in the NFL by the other positions on the same team that's very low. Why does the position with the largest number of players on the team have a low success rate in terms of NFL talent production?

I can't be the only one who sees this and asks the question. Why do we put so many WR's, LB's, DB's in the NFL and only one or two OL?

So, what's your point? Would you rather have the defense be OSU's biggest weakness? I'll take a great defense any day, and take my chances with a mediocre but opportunistic offense that doesn't make many mistakes.

Poor offense doesn't equal winning. Find one place I have ever said I want the defense to suffer so we can have a better offense. That's just ridiculous.

Other elite programs don't have the year in and year out struggles we do on offense why then do we continue to do it? They play great defense and win championships and at the same time manage to score points and take some pressure off the defense.


My point is the same now as it has been. The offense has been the weakest part of this team for the entire Tressel era. There is no reason for it. The offense should be able to be just as good as the defense and special teams over time. We don't have to be bad on offense to win games.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

Seriosuly what accomplishments are you talking about?
Do you consider going 1-6 in bowl games last year an accomplishment?
How about blow out losses by multiple big ten teams to USC? Is that an accomplishment? How about OSU vs UF? vs LSU? vs Texas?
When was the last time the big ten won a BCS game???
At least provide a logical reason to disagree with me please.

Obviously this isnt the right thread...

that's taking it too far. 4 straight Big Ten Championships is an accomplishment. Getting to back-to-back NCs is an accomplishment. That last Texas game is an accomplishment. Who gives a fuck about USC blowing out Illinois and Penn State? Who gives a fuck about the "Big Ten" winning a bowl game. Is that why we're losing them.....because other conferences are putting together a Conference All Star team and we're not?

 

[OregonBuckeye]

Dude we are in the Big 10, thats why we are in the BCS every year...

Oh sorry, I guess I was just imagining the weakness of the Big Ten and its poor performance in bowl games, etc., over the last few years

Seriosuly what accomplishments are you talking about?
Do you consider going 1-6 in bowl games last year an accomplishment?
How about blow out losses by multiple big ten teams to USC? Is that an accomplishment? How about OSU vs UF? vs LSU? vs Texas?
When was the last time the big ten won a BCS game???
At least provide a logical reason to disagree with me please.

Obviously this isnt the right thread...

If you were an SEC fan, you'd be treading a McNeiling. I'm really not going to get into a discussion about conference strength that turns into something 20 pages long. All I'll say is this:

-The conference isn't as bad as you think.
-Saying our success is pretty much solely because of the conference we play in is pure horseshit.

 

[ant80]

I just KNEW that this specious argument would rear its ugly head. First, Bollman is not the only one responsible for recruiting OL. It is my understanding that JT personally has to sign off on each recruit, regardless of position, and of course each coach has geographic territories in which he is the primary recruiter. So, Bollman is certainly not the only one responsible for bringing in offensive linemen.

Second, recruiting high school players is not like drafting college players - you can only get the guys who actually want to play for you. And most of the OL who have wanted to play for Ohio State have been Ohio kids. And most of them haven't been all that talented, to be quite frank. Granted, Ohio State did a fine job of recruiting OL nationally in 2008, but you can't rely on signing two 5-star OOS O-linemen every year.

Well, going by that argument, the schools that are in so-called weak recruiting states, like Oklahoma or Nebraska should have the same problem. They don't. The way I understand it, you're saying luck (meaning things like kids not coming here, kids not panning out, 2003-2004 MoC scandal) played a large part in the OL travails. If you said that about safeties, I would understand. It was definitely unlucky. Who would've thought kids like O'Neal would've gone bust? But luck had a very small part in OL performance, IMO.

And another part of the problem is the number of OL that we bring in. Too few, according to Mili's analysis. The argument given is that if the OL don't pan out, they can't be moved to another position, so we recruit few. But that is the nature of the position. If you bring in too few OL because they might not pan out, that means fewer still will play well. And the converse is also true. You can't move many players (other than TE, who are also a recruiting problem for OSU) to the OL. And yet we continue to recruit so few OL.

 

[zincfinger]

I can't be the only one who sees this and asks the question. Why do we put so many WR's, LB's, DB's in the NFL and only one or two OL?

You're certainly not the only one. In my opinion, the answer to that boils down very simply to the "fact" that OL is one of two positions (DT being the other) where recruiting was not up-to-snuff for a period of 3-4 years. Whether that recruiting shortcoming was principally attributable to Bollman, to a number of coaches, or to sheer dumb luck, I won't pretend to know. But now that back-to-back, above average O-line recruiting classes are in place, I agree with LJB that it makes sense to see what Bollman makes of that raw material before arriving at any firm conclusions about his ability to develop O-line talent.