• 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.

The Advantages of a High-Powered Offense?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
jwinslow said:
There were no offensive players of the week after the SDSU debacle. There also were no OL players of the week.
Click to expand...
Was just about to post the same for those who missed the press conference. I'm glad to hear it too ... nobody deserved to be an offensive player of the week either. Tressel flat out said he expected the offense to score at least 40 points, and not having a player of the week illustrates that he is just as frustrated as all of us are.

Roy Hall, however, did win the Jack Tatum Hit of the Week for blowing up the SDSU gunner on the big punt return. Tressel did mention that everyone was relieved that the SDSU kid got up on his own power.
 
Upvote 0
Misguided Logic

jwinslow said:
Ryan Hamby is well known for being fond of false starts. Rob Sims has one-upped him in this department. Our WRs have taken five steps back in the dropsies dept. Our line couldn't give Troy enough time to pass against SDSU, which is pretty pathetic. We don't have a backup TE to spell Hamby. Smith caught some nice passes, but we hardly have a good situation at TE in terms of depth.

All of that suggests that we have a lot more problems than us homers want to accept. It may be very possible that conservative offense is better for this team.

I think short throws to our playmakers would be a good idea, but Ginn and others have been dropping those passes.
Click to expand...

Winsy,

These are all OC issues. If this group of talent cannot get it done, then you are right, a conservative offensive strategy is needed, however it always will be under the current regime.

And that is no longer good it enough to ge it done in CFB.
 
Upvote 0
Penn St. was the ONLY team in the nation NEVER to give up 21 points/game last year. Great Defense. What bowl game did they play in last year? Defense wins championships.... if you have an effective offense.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
BrutusMaximus said:
This team has twice the talent that the 02 team had, and just cannot show it.
Click to expand...
That statement is blatantly untrue - if you truly believe that, then you are a lunatic.

However, I am a believer in continual improvement.

And we are not getting better, so that is my problem. And it IS yours as well.
Click to expand...
Not my problem, dude. I'm just a fan, I don't get paid to win games.

jwinslow said:
Our WRs have taken five steps back in the dropsies dept.
Click to expand...
Agreed. In the last two weeks, Ginn, Gonzo, Hall, and even Holmes have dropped at least one pass; of course, Hamby has dropped a couple as well.

WprHis said:
If I may amend.... Holmes and Gonzo are playing like men posessed.
Click to expand...
Sort of true - as mentioned above, even Holmes dropped one last week, and Gonzo had a huge drop on third down of the opening drive against Texas; a completion would have kept the drive alive, given the offense some confidence, and might have changed the whole outlook of the game.
 
Upvote 0
I hope my sarcasm sonar is off today...

Anyway, the first thing about coaching offense is you need 7 men on the LOS. I'll bet he knows that.

Convinced?
Click to expand...

Well no you are not catching sarcasm, because there is none. I am fairly serious. Been a Buckeye fan since the womb, have watched alot of good teams and bad teams. I understand that some people still have the Woody syndrom and believe we need to forget that the forward pass was invented, and win every game 6-3. I love Defense. I love our Defense.........I like enough offense to win games. We got beat by Texas. We shouldnt have gotten beat by Texas. Now whether the problem is the players, the execution, the referees, the grass being too high, I dont really care. Point is, we are on year 5 of JT's reign, and I have seen this same pathetic offense each year. The odds of it being coincidence are going down rapidly.

Think me a bad fan if you want. Even with all this, I still love the Buckeyes. I will watch and root for them everyweek. That will never stop.

That statement is blatantly untrue - if you truly believe that, then you are a lunatic
Click to expand...

Ok that may be a little harsh. Lemme rephrase.......take MoC out of the equation, and this team has twice the athletes.

Keep in mind I am not your usual douchebag "the sky is falling" fan. You dont see me calling people names, saying how bad the team sucks, etc. I am simply saying what's on my mind.
 
Upvote 0
I agree with anyone who is blaming execution for being the problem. Holmes and Gonzo are doing just fine IMO...it's Ginn and Hamby whose hands are giving us some problems. It's also Smith's choice in receivers...always having one to go with and if he isn't open, just duck and run. Our OL is not holding up their end of the bargain...not creating holes long enough for our RB's to hit them and for Smith to have time to look down field for a 2nd or 3rd receiver. I know that we have the names to get it done, but we aren't. I don't know what the problem is...maybe mental? Fact is that we have the plays and personnel to be a high-powered offense, but we're not getting it done on game day.
 
Upvote 0
SCBuck said:
Penn St. was the ONLY team in the nation to give up 21 points/game or less last year. Great Defense. What bowl game did they play in last year? Defense wins championships.... if you have an effective offense.
Click to expand...

I believe you meant to say that they were the only team that never gave up more than 21 points in any game last year. The way you stated it looks like an average of 21 per game, and several teams accomplished that.
 
Upvote 0
Cowherd had a comment on his radio show today while discussing Notre Dame and Weiss.

He basically said you need the athletes to have a great defense. You can coach to have a good offense without the greatest athletes and Weiss and Notre Dame exemplified that.

I wonder if most people here agree with that? I of course think you want to have the great athletes on both sides of the ball, but I do generally agree that the success of the offense is less dependent on great athletes than the defense.

I think the Tessel is a great head coach. This shows because of how consistantly good the recruiting, D, and especially the special teams are. He is an excellent manager of game situations usually. I think the offensive playbook is fine and in general the game planning is usually good as seen by the past bowl game stategies. However, I do think Tressel is a suspect game time offensive play caller and the continued execution problems year after year with many different players definitely points to something being wrong with the way the offense prepares in practice.
 
Upvote 0
Def said:
Cowherd had a comment on his radio show today while discussing Notre Dame and Weiss.

He basically said you need the athletes to have a great defense. You can coach to have a good offense without the greatest athletes and Weiss and Notre Dame exemplified that.

I wonder if most people here agree with that? I of course think you want to have the great athletes on both sides of the ball, but I do generally agree that the success of the offense is less dependent on great athletes than the defense.

I think the Tessel is a great head coach. This shows because of how consistantly good the recruiting, D, and especially the special teams are. He is an excellent manager of game situations usually. I think the offensive playbook is fine and in general the game planning is usually good as seen by the past bowl game stategies. However, I do think Tressel is a suspect game time offensive play caller and the continued execution problems year after year with many different players definitely points to something being wrong with the way the offense prepares in practice.
Click to expand...


Good post Def.
 
Upvote 0
Def said:
Cowherd had a comment on his radio show today while discussing Notre Dame and Weiss.

He basically said you need the athletes to have a great defense. You can coach to have a good offense without the greatest athletes and Weiss and Notre Dame exemplified that.

I wonder if most people here agree with that? I of course think you want to have the great athletes on both sides of the ball, but I do generally agree that the success of the offense is less dependent on great athletes than the defense.

I think the Tessel is a great head coach. This shows because of how consistantly good the recruiting, D, and especially the special teams are. He is an excellent manager of game situations usually. I think the offensive playbook is fine and in general the game planning is usually good as seen by the past bowl game stategies. However, I do think Tressel is a suspect game time offensive play caller and the continued execution problems year after year with many different players definitely points to something being wrong with the way the offense prepares in practice.
Click to expand...

Tressel would be a great Head Coach/Special Teams Coach.

Its the /Offensive Coordinator that makes him ineffective, relative his players' talents, that is.
 
Upvote 0
Def said:
the continued execution problems year after year with many different players definitely points to something being wrong with the way the offense prepares in practice.
Click to expand...
this is pretty much the way that i see it... i will defer to you guys who actually have experience in coaching, but IIRC, when ESPN was showing the practice, i didn't see any segments in which the whole offense as a unit was out there... it was O-line drills, 7-on-7 drills and 1-on-1 drills, but none with the whole team out there... i think that the problem with the offensive execution is that each smaller unit may be on the same page with each other, but the whole thing is not always on the same page... i think that the entire O needs to drill and drill and drill until they can run the plays in their sleep... of course, i will defer if i am mistaken...

another thing that i noticed, at least through the first three games this season, is that if a play does not go according to plan, the coaches seem to avoid it later on... there was a pass play to TG2 in the Texas game that looked like it had great potential, and Teddy dropped the ball... the coaches never called that play again... there was an option left to Pittman that went for 20 yards or so, but was called back on a hold, yet that play was never called again...

one thing that i noticed in USC's first game was a deep route to Steve Smith... he ran the route wrong, and it went incomplete... however, rather than abandon the play, the Trojans ran it again at least 4 more times in the next few series of downs until he had the route right... when he finally did get it down, it went for a TD...

IMHO, if nothing else, Bollman needs to be taking notes up there in the box, and telling Tressel what plays looked good except for the execution... Tressel has stated numerous times in the past that he wants the O to get to the point that he could tell the D what he was going to run and they still couldn't stop it... how can the O never get to that point if you never go back to a play that didn't work the first time? instead of running the same successful play 3 times in a row and giving the D the opportunity to figure out how to stop it, why not keep plugging away at the stuff we don't do as well, so that the O can get it down?

or is it a catch 22?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top