I was talking with an Auburn fan tonight about the difference in how Tressel and Tubberville use second and third string players in the second half of a game that they're dominating. Tressel will start using reserves after the first possession in the third quarter, and use a large number of second and third teamers. Auburn doesn't do this, only throwing in reserves for a few plays here and there.
The end result is that late in the year, we have a deeper team. It's not just building for next year, it's building for the same year. A classic example I'll use is that Hawk and Mangold were able to contribute in the NC game their Freshman year. Certainly, that helped both our OL and LB rotation in that game.
You guys longing for the days of John Cooper hanging 72 point on Rice are welcome to your view, but try on the idea that there's more to be gained in a game like this one than simply impressing some assclown reporters in polyester suits with your "explosive" offense. Preparing your team, coaching, teaching, getting young players on film, showing recruits that your Freshmen and Sophomores PLAY, building your rotation, and yes, building the future are all goals that can be achieved in the second half of a game that's well in hand.
IMO, during most seasons, the Tressel method works. His teams get better top to bottom from late August through January. By the bowl game, guys who started the year on third team have worked their way into the rotation, and Freshmen are playing like upperclassmen. A big part of that growth is putting them on the field for a full half (or close to it) in games like this one.
The cost is having a final score that's less "impressive" than it could have been. When you understand the intent, it's a lot easier to accept what you're seeing on the field.
Personally, I think Telekinesis' comments about the Washington game are over the top, and he's mixing two entirely different situations. Tressel didn't "blame" Saine for scoring. He simply showed class by making it clear that it wasn't a deliberate Spurrier-like play call meant to humiliate Washington at home. In that circumstance, it's about winning with class. Games like this one are about putting in your younger players to get them some experience with a conference opponent.
As has been pointed out in numerous posts, polls and beauty contests no longer matter this season, so there's no reason to get back to the same old Bucknuts 2002 season arguments about Tressel being opposed to scoring or offense out of some kind of religious beliefs.
Win the games, win the conference, win the Rose Bowl and it's a successful season.
