-
New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.
- Thread starter cincibuck
- Start date
the above quote was in response to someone saying "2002 w/out a healthy clarett was not more talented"
2002 scores: @Wisconsin W, 19-14, Penn St 13-7, @Purdue 10-6, @ Illinois 16-16 (before OT), Michigan 14-9
Only difference is we got some lucky breaks on huge plays in all of those games, and we haven't had those this year. We didn't even score a TD against Penn St. on offense.
The coach from Friday Night Lights put it best: "Losing is a lot like winning. only difference is how everyone treats you."
I'm the last to suggest we don't need to make changes, but there's no way that 2002 team (for most of the year - ie clarett gimpy) was any better talent wise than the 2005 one, at least not on offense (and our D is pretty comparable to that one).
Upvote
0
Well, if you feel that way, please explain. I'm honestly willing to listen to an analysis which would indicate that my assessment is incorrect.
Upvote
0
BrutusMaximus
I Heart Boobs
I really dont see how anybody can see more talent in the 02' team. Jenkins, Gamble.......? I cant even think of anybody else on offense to even bring up.
Now look at 05. Holmes, Ginn, Gonzo, Pittman, Hall, Smith.........and the sad thing is, with all that even said, I would kill for Krenzel back right now :)
Krenzel would take nothing, and just make something out of it, because he is smart, and made no mistakes. I mean was he a great QB? Hell no. But that didnt matter. Smith is 10 times the athlete, has a much stronger arm, but he looks lost in this offense.
It is pointless to compare the 2 teams. My point in the matter is that even that team looked bad on offense more than it looked good. We need an OC. Anybody who just completely disagrees with that, needs to seek help.
Now look at 05. Holmes, Ginn, Gonzo, Pittman, Hall, Smith.........and the sad thing is, with all that even said, I would kill for Krenzel back right now :)
Krenzel would take nothing, and just make something out of it, because he is smart, and made no mistakes. I mean was he a great QB? Hell no. But that didnt matter. Smith is 10 times the athlete, has a much stronger arm, but he looks lost in this offense.
It is pointless to compare the 2 teams. My point in the matter is that even that team looked bad on offense more than it looked good. We need an OC. Anybody who just completely disagrees with that, needs to seek help.
Upvote
0
QB: Krenzel vs. Smith or Zwick - strong edge Krenzel (2002)
TB: Clarett vs. Pittman - strong edge Clarett (2002)
FB: Joe vs. Johnson - edge Joe (2002)
WR: Jenkins vs. Holmes - edge Jenkins (2002)
WR: Gamble vs. Ginn - even
WR: Vance vs. Gonzalez - edge Gonzalez (2005)
TE: Hartsock vs. Hamby - strong edge Hartsock (2002)
OC: Stepanovich vs. Mangold - edge Stepanovich (2002)
OG: Clarke vs. Downing - even
OT: Olivea vs. Barton - edge Olivea (2002)
OL: Bishop vs. Datish - even
OL: Sims vs. Sims - edge Sims (2005)
PK: Nugent vs. Huston - edge Nugent (2002)
Am I missing something here? IMO, the only debateable match-up is Gamble vs. Ginn; Teddy clearly has the better potential, but he hasn't shown it this year. Even if we give the edge to Ginn, the 2002 squad still "wins" 8 out of 13 match-ups (three by a wide margin), and "ties" on 2 others. The 2005 squad only "wins" 3, and two of those are questionable - Ginn over Gamble (based on potential only); and Sims 2005 over Sims 2002 (Rob hasn't shown much progression since his freshman year); the third "win" is the 3rd wide-out position, not exactly the most key member of the offensive unit. But I'm probably "seeing" things incorrectly.
BTW, 2002 back-up QB Scott McMullen might have been better than either Smith or Zwick....
Upvote
0
BearBuck27
Game Day!!!
Good analysis LJB. Not that it really matters, but I think he was talking about that the 2005 team vs. 2002 Clarettless team. Am I wrong?
Upvote
0
It was a bit difficult to discern his actual comparison, but even without Clarett, the 2002 offense had more talent than the present squad (although I admit that Clarett was probably a component necessary for the NC).
I think that many people really underestimate the 2002 team, especially the offense, and most especially Craig Krenzel.
Upvote
0
BrutusMaximus
I Heart Boobs
Now you are talking about results, not talent, right? Cause if you're talking talent, I completely disagree here.
Not a prayer. Again, if you are talking about results so far, yes, talent, no.
Disagree here too. Was never impressed with Gamble as a receiver. Liked him much better as a DB.
Now of course the 2 places I do agree is at RB, no doubt, and I said with Clarett, I'd take the 02' team anyday. Also agree on the line, much better in 02.
Both teams have talent on them.........and both teams saw most of that squandered because of a lousy offensive gameplan/scheme/execution, whatever you wanna call it.
By the way, it may seem like I am stubborn and just like to argue, but that is not the case. I am sayin what I see. I do enjoy a good debate though. Grad is a blast to debate with, because he plays nice in such a sarcastic way.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
LJB, here is my assessment (looks like the breakdown favors your opinion):
I gave 1 point for a better player, 2 points for a much better player. I still think a solid QB with this offense is more potent, due to Clarett's injuries. Therefore, I believe there is a little more firepower and talent, however our lack of a QB drives that into the ground.
A few key players tipped the scale, like that dominant DL. This is far from a fair assessment, just some interesting individual grades that produced a measureable result.
<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 583pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="777"> <col span="4" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <col style="width: 81pt;" width="108"> <col style="width: 310pt;" width="413"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt; width: 48pt;" height="17" width="64">
</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" x:num="" align="right" width="64">2005</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" x:num="" align="right" width="64">2002</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" x:num="" align="right" width="64">2005</td> <td style="width: 81pt;" x:num="" align="right" width="108">2002</td> <td style="width: 310pt;" width="413">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">QB</td> <td>Smith</td> <td>Krenzel</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2
</td> <td>Self-explanatory</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RB</td> <td>Pittman</td> <td>Clarett</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1
</td> <td>Clarett far better, but healthy clarett was rare.</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">FB</td> <td>Johnson</td> <td>Joe</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2</td> <td>
</td> <td>Punishing lead blocker, joe often hurt.
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">WR1</td> <td>Holmes</td> <td>Jenkins</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Tough contest, but Mr. Clutch wins</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">WR2</td> <td>Gonzalez</td> <td>Gamble</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Gamble dropsies + less used on offense = gonzo</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">WR3</td> <td>Ginn</td> <td>Vance</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2</td> <td>
</td> <td>If you put Ginn on Krenzel's team, he wouldn't be slumping, as a WR</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">TE</td> <td>Hamby</td> <td>Hartsock</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2 </td> <td>Night and day</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LT</td> <td>Datish</td> <td>Douglas</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LG</td> <td>Sims</td> <td>Clarke</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Sims has been a flag machine</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">C</td> <td>Mangold</td> <td>Stepanovich</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2</td> <td>
</td> <td>soph Mangold replaced sen Step. Senior version is even better.</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RG</td> <td>Downing</td> <td>Bishop</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RT</td> <td>Barton</td> <td>Olivea</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LE</td> <td>Committee</td> <td>Smith</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2 </td> <td>One fo the best DEs ever at OSU. Carp not there enough to help grade.</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DT</td> <td>Green</td> <td>Anderson</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2 </td> <td>Not even close, tho Green is coming on</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DT</td> <td>Pitcock</td> <td>Peterson</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Tough battle, but KP takes the cake</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RE</td> <td>Kudla</td> <td>Scott</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Kudla has been dominating since getting healthy</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">WLB</td> <td>Hawk</td> <td>Grant</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Grant was special, but Hawk is #2 behind Spiels</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">MLB</td> <td>Schlegel</td> <td>Wilhelm</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Wilhelm had more big plays</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">SLB</td> <td>Carp</td> <td>Reynolds</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2</td> <td>
</td> <td>Not a very close battle here</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LCB</td> <td>Youboty</td> <td>Gamble</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Gamble made big plays, but Youboty is a better pure shutdown corner</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">FS</td> <td>Salley</td> <td>Nickey</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>A few more intangibles, bigger impact than Nickey</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">SS</td> <td>Whitner</td> <td>Doss</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>So hard. Doss is more talented, but Whitner has been unreal all year.</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RCB</td> <td>Everett</td> <td>Fox</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Fairly even, fox INT on the road. Ty's wide blitz yielded 2 big PSU gains</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">NCB</td> <td>Jenkins</td> <td>Allen</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Most of allen's impact was later in year, in time this grade might switch</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">K</td> <td>Nugent</td> <td>Huston</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Huston's been solid enough that Nuge only edges him by 1</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">P</td> <td>Groom</td> <td>Trapasso</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>2 most athletic P's I've seen; too soon to criticize Trapasso more than 1</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">PR</td> <td>Ginn</td> <td>Gamble</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Gamble had space, and chances. Ginn has had space once (TD).</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">KR</td> <td>Ginn/Hol</td> <td>Gamble</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Ginn & Holmes as a team trump Gamble's KR prowess</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>Off</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(D2<img src=" http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" smilieid="4" class="inlineimg">8</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(E2:E13)" align="right">9 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>Def</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(D14<img src=" http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" smilieid="4" class="inlineimg">6</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(E14:E25)" align="right">9 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>ST</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(D24<img src=" http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" smilieid="4" class="inlineimg">2</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(E24:E29)" align="right">4 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>Overall</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(D2<img src=" http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" smilieid="4" class="inlineimg">16</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(E2:E29)" align="right">20
</td> <td>
</td> </tr></tbody> </table>
I gave 1 point for a better player, 2 points for a much better player. I still think a solid QB with this offense is more potent, due to Clarett's injuries. Therefore, I believe there is a little more firepower and talent, however our lack of a QB drives that into the ground.
A few key players tipped the scale, like that dominant DL. This is far from a fair assessment, just some interesting individual grades that produced a measureable result.
<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 583pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="777"> <col span="4" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <col style="width: 81pt;" width="108"> <col style="width: 310pt;" width="413"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt; width: 48pt;" height="17" width="64">
</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" x:num="" align="right" width="64">2005</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" x:num="" align="right" width="64">2002</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" x:num="" align="right" width="64">2005</td> <td style="width: 81pt;" x:num="" align="right" width="108">2002</td> <td style="width: 310pt;" width="413">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">QB</td> <td>Smith</td> <td>Krenzel</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2
</td> <td>Self-explanatory</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RB</td> <td>Pittman</td> <td>Clarett</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1
</td> <td>Clarett far better, but healthy clarett was rare.</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">FB</td> <td>Johnson</td> <td>Joe</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2</td> <td>
</td> <td>Punishing lead blocker, joe often hurt.
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">WR1</td> <td>Holmes</td> <td>Jenkins</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Tough contest, but Mr. Clutch wins</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">WR2</td> <td>Gonzalez</td> <td>Gamble</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Gamble dropsies + less used on offense = gonzo</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">WR3</td> <td>Ginn</td> <td>Vance</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2</td> <td>
</td> <td>If you put Ginn on Krenzel's team, he wouldn't be slumping, as a WR</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">TE</td> <td>Hamby</td> <td>Hartsock</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2 </td> <td>Night and day</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LT</td> <td>Datish</td> <td>Douglas</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LG</td> <td>Sims</td> <td>Clarke</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Sims has been a flag machine</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">C</td> <td>Mangold</td> <td>Stepanovich</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2</td> <td>
</td> <td>soph Mangold replaced sen Step. Senior version is even better.</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RG</td> <td>Downing</td> <td>Bishop</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RT</td> <td>Barton</td> <td>Olivea</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LE</td> <td>Committee</td> <td>Smith</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2 </td> <td>One fo the best DEs ever at OSU. Carp not there enough to help grade.</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DT</td> <td>Green</td> <td>Anderson</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2 </td> <td>Not even close, tho Green is coming on</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DT</td> <td>Pitcock</td> <td>Peterson</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Tough battle, but KP takes the cake</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RE</td> <td>Kudla</td> <td>Scott</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Kudla has been dominating since getting healthy</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">WLB</td> <td>Hawk</td> <td>Grant</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Grant was special, but Hawk is #2 behind Spiels</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">MLB</td> <td>Schlegel</td> <td>Wilhelm</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Wilhelm had more big plays</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">SLB</td> <td>Carp</td> <td>Reynolds</td> <td x:num="" align="right">2</td> <td>
</td> <td>Not a very close battle here</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LCB</td> <td>Youboty</td> <td>Gamble</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Gamble made big plays, but Youboty is a better pure shutdown corner</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">FS</td> <td>Salley</td> <td>Nickey</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>A few more intangibles, bigger impact than Nickey</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">SS</td> <td>Whitner</td> <td>Doss</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>So hard. Doss is more talented, but Whitner has been unreal all year.</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RCB</td> <td>Everett</td> <td>Fox</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Fairly even, fox INT on the road. Ty's wide blitz yielded 2 big PSU gains</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">NCB</td> <td>Jenkins</td> <td>Allen</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Most of allen's impact was later in year, in time this grade might switch</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">K</td> <td>Nugent</td> <td>Huston</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>Huston's been solid enough that Nuge only edges him by 1</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">P</td> <td>Groom</td> <td>Trapasso</td> <td>
</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1 </td> <td>2 most athletic P's I've seen; too soon to criticize Trapasso more than 1</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">PR</td> <td>Ginn</td> <td>Gamble</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Gamble had space, and chances. Ginn has had space once (TD).</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">KR</td> <td>Ginn/Hol</td> <td>Gamble</td> <td x:num="" align="right">1</td> <td>
</td> <td>Ginn & Holmes as a team trump Gamble's KR prowess</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>Off</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(D2<img src=" http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" smilieid="4" class="inlineimg">8</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(E2:E13)" align="right">9 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>Def</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(D14<img src=" http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" smilieid="4" class="inlineimg">6</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(E14:E25)" align="right">9 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>ST</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(D24<img src=" http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" smilieid="4" class="inlineimg">2</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(E24:E29)" align="right">4 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> <td>Overall</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(D2<img src=" http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Big Grin" smilieid="4" class="inlineimg">16</td> <td x:num="" x:fmla="=+SUM(E2:E29)" align="right">20
</td> <td>
</td> </tr></tbody> </table>
Upvote
0
BrutusMaximus
I Heart Boobs
Even though I disagree to an extent, that is one hell of a breakdown there. Like the point system, they need to replace the BCS with that
Upvote
0
I don't think we underestimated them. They simply could not put up any points. They were just as inefficient as this offense, they just pulled a couple big plays out of nowhere and I don't think we faced a defense close to Texas & PSU. They also were better at protecting against turnovers.
Cinci (23-19) We had no business winning at Cinci. That was pure luck that they dropped the tds. We managed a meager 23 points against such little talent.
Wisky (19-14) that was with clarett. we eeked that one out.
PennSt (13-7) no offensive TDs. 179 yds of offense. sound impressive?
Purdue (10-6) one bomb to win the game. great play, but awfully lucky.
Illinois (16-16, 23-16 OT) not very pretty either on O
Michigan (14-9) some big plays by clarett, defense, and just enough offense
The 2002 squad would have lost to Texas, IMO, and beaten PSU.
Upvote
0
I guess my point would be without a healthy clarett, that offense could not put up points like this one can. however, this one also turns the ball over way more. I'd take the 02 offense anyday, but with a QB this offense puts up much bigger numbers, which is why I tend to view it as more talented. Pittman is definitely good enough at TB for 15 runs a game, which would be plenty if we knew how to throw the ball.
Upvote
0
V.O.R
Rookie
While its interesting and fun to compare the 2 teams, the real issue here is that for the last 3 1/2 years now, how many times can you think of where you really felt that we were efficient and in control of the game on offense ? How many times have you really thought we had rhythm on offense?
2002-Texas Tech, WSU (#13 shows both), Minnesota? (overmatched)
2003-Washington, NC State (for a half anyway), Kansas State (maybe the most well rounded offensive performance in the Tressel era)
2004-Michigan (TS show), OSU (overrated)
2005-Iowa (TS show), Miami,OH was overmatched so I don't count that (and honestly I didn't think we were all that impressive overall).
I'm sure I missed a couple, but not many. Also, I don't know the exact national rankings offensively for this time period, but I do know they were pretty pitiful, near the bottom of the Big 10 and the nation. Argue 2002 vs. 2005 all you want, but I think we all can agree there is has been enough talent on the field for the last 3 1/2 years to say that ALL those teams have underperformed offensively, and yes, it has cost us games, most recently last night. That, my friends, is a trend. Now let me say, I am a big fan of JT, he is an excellent coach and leader, prepares the players well mentally, etc., but for some reason, he does not seem to be able to find any kind of rhythm with his play calling. The proof is in the pudding, I'm becoming more and more convinced that we need an offensive coordinator with REAL influence in the gameplan and play calling, or I'm afraid we will continue to be mediocre ( at best oftentimes) offensively, and it will cost us games.
PS: FWIW, I'll take the 2002 squad, they put up when it counted, a skill the 2005 team hasn't mastered yet, but hopefully will before too much longer.
2002-Texas Tech, WSU (#13 shows both), Minnesota? (overmatched)
2003-Washington, NC State (for a half anyway), Kansas State (maybe the most well rounded offensive performance in the Tressel era)
2004-Michigan (TS show), OSU (overrated)
2005-Iowa (TS show), Miami,OH was overmatched so I don't count that (and honestly I didn't think we were all that impressive overall).
I'm sure I missed a couple, but not many. Also, I don't know the exact national rankings offensively for this time period, but I do know they were pretty pitiful, near the bottom of the Big 10 and the nation. Argue 2002 vs. 2005 all you want, but I think we all can agree there is has been enough talent on the field for the last 3 1/2 years to say that ALL those teams have underperformed offensively, and yes, it has cost us games, most recently last night. That, my friends, is a trend. Now let me say, I am a big fan of JT, he is an excellent coach and leader, prepares the players well mentally, etc., but for some reason, he does not seem to be able to find any kind of rhythm with his play calling. The proof is in the pudding, I'm becoming more and more convinced that we need an offensive coordinator with REAL influence in the gameplan and play calling, or I'm afraid we will continue to be mediocre ( at best oftentimes) offensively, and it will cost us games.
PS: FWIW, I'll take the 2002 squad, they put up when it counted, a skill the 2005 team hasn't mastered yet, but hopefully will before too much longer.
Upvote
0
WyoBuck
Hall of Fame
I've been saying the same thing in other threads. There needs to be an OC. The talent that is being wasted on this team is sickening. The offense just looks confused. There is little direction it seems. There is sufficient offensive personnel to have whatever look you want, none of that ability is being utilized though. There is no excuse to lose a game when your D has only given up 22 pts in the last 3 games and 10 of those were last night.
Upvote
0