• 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!

Tom Herman (Former Head Coach FAU Owls)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
jwinslow said:
I think Herman can improve as a play caller but I don't think that was a major factor in why the offense struggled last week. An average line walks away from that game plan with a win. Same thing with the wrs, or kicking game, or return unit. All of those areas were extremely rough and made any play calls unlikely to have consistent success putting up points.
Click to expand...

Just curious, after seeing ECU with their athletes, including their O line beat VTech in Blacksburg do you still feel this way? Hard to imagine that tOSU with their athletes including their O line losing to VTech in the shoe doesn't point to play calling on the offensive end being the biggest factor. I often say that I hold an opinion up until the point that new evidence might cause me to reevaluate my original position. Is that the case here?
 
Upvote 0
ShowMeBuck said:
Just curious, after seeing ECU with their athletes, including their O line beat VTech in Blacksburg do you still feel this way? Hard to imagine that tOSU with their athletes including their O line losing to VTech in the shoe doesn't point to play calling on the offensive end being the biggest factor. I often say that I hold an opinion up until the point that new evidence might cause me to reevaluate my original position. Is that the case here?
Click to expand...
I think he opposite. I think it's clear from that game that our oline was a huge issue. Yeah, I think ECU's oline outplayed ours. And as our line and WR play improves, so will our performance.
 
Upvote 0
ShowMeBuck said:
Just curious, after seeing ECU with their athletes, including their O line beat VTech in Blacksburg do you still feel this way? Hard to imagine that tOSU with their athletes including their O line losing to VTech in the shoe doesn't point to play calling on the offensive end being the biggest factor. I often say that I hold an opinion up until the point that new evidence might cause me to reevaluate my original position. Is that the case here?
Click to expand...
ECU, with a well known and polished passing offense, put up 7 more points.

What good are athletes if they can't catch and the very average OL talent can't block or protect?
 
Upvote 0
To each his own gentlemen. The O line and WR position groups clearly had their failings. But we were still outcoached. Specifically, the O line was outnumbered on many of the blitzes. A DC coordinator can always choose to gamble the responsibilities of his 11 players vs. your 11. As the OC it's your job to make him pay for it. Did the WR group drop way too many passes? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that we were outcoached. Hardly.

I'll just say this. There have been many winning teams that have dropped passes. There have been many winning teams with inexperienced O Lines.

But when you beat a team on the road like ECU did with FAR less talent than we have it only speaks to one thing - the coaches making the calls were beat. Not the players. Lots of men compete on Saturdays. Some of them wear helmets.

Josh, they put up enough points to win the game.....on the road no less. And that's what matters.
 
Upvote 0
The reason VT lost this game was the gameplans. VT Spent literally all spring/summer working on how to stop our offense and once our game was over they had to come at the next opponent with an equal footing in regards to preparation.

VT spent all off season on us and we spent it on Navy. Hell even if we wanted to plan for VT it wouldn't have done any good considering there was no useful tape with what we saw.

TH and Urban got frazzled IMO with that game. They just abandoned a large portion of our playbook and tried beat what they were seeing. Given a week to practice they did what I found to be a smart move and simply forced their opponent to get out of the double eagle. Given the time we knew how to combat it and that was by spreading them out and taking advantage of blitzing players as well as going off tackle. Also the pace seemed much faster as well.

Which is why NEXT year in Blacksburgh it's not even funny how badly they will be repaid. My best man in my wedding is a huge Hokie fan and we dreaded our impending games and also have agreed that whoever wins just needs to keep quiet. We lost and I'm not about to declare to him that I know what will happen next year.

Make no mistake about it I KNOW What will happen next year. We will return 9 on offense and 8 on defense including our special teams. It won't matter how crazy Lane stadium gets because now we have tape on them and as was proven in the 2nd half our defense knew exactly how to shut them down. It's just this time it will be for 2 halves and we will have our best offensive weapon. With a little luck we may even have Noah Spence too.

In short film on tech, pay back on our mind, and getting the most dynamic QB back lets me know that our back ups will he in as we are taking a knee in the 4th quarter.
 
Upvote 0
ShowMeBuck said:
To each his own gentlemen. The O line and WR position groups clearly had their failings. But we were still outcoached. Specifically, the O line was outnumbered on many of the blitzes. A DC coordinator can always choose to gamble the responsibilities of his 11 players vs. your 11. As the OC it's your job to make him pay for it. Did the WR group drop way too many passes? Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that we were outcoached. Hardly.

I'll just say this. There have been many winning teams that have dropped passes. There have been many winning teams with inexperienced O Lines.

But when you beat a team on the road like ECU did with FAR less talent than we have it only speaks to one thing - the coaches making the calls were beat. Not the players. Lots of men compete on Saturdays. Some of them wear helmets.

Josh, they put up enough points to win the game.....on the road no less. And that's what matters.
Click to expand...

The plays were there. A TD catch here, a couple of deep balls that were open get caught and it's an entirely different game.

Sure there were some play calls that left everyone scratching their heads, but let's not act like the execution of what was called was perfect in any way, shape or form.
 
Upvote 0
I basically feel the same as before, so I will not rehash all that. But I will add a slight asterisk here that there is no doubt VT planned the entire offseason to beat us and essentially put zero thought into what they would do after (see ECU). We always get everyone's best shot but in Game 2, the best shot comes with a specific game plan to beat what we do best. Meanwhile, we were spending all summer getting prepared for the triple option that we will not see again the rest of of the year. Stark contrast and who knows, maybe our offense really is just that bad but I tend to doubt that. I watched the VT vs. ECU game and VT looked like a different team (the team I expected us to beat handily in the Shoe).
 
Upvote 0
zincfinger said:
I don't think the OSU offense spent all summer getting ready for the triple option.
Click to expand...
Urban stated that we have been since the spring. We had practices built around how to stop the option but especially once fall practice started we got into prep mode for Navy.

Even if we wanted to prep for tech it wouldn't have done any good. New offense, and a defense that Urban says was very different than what he's ever seen. Which is why next year there is no smoke and mirrors for tech to win. We will repay them next year because of it
 
Upvote 0
jwinslow said:
ECU, with a well known and polished passing offense, put up 7 more points.

What good are athletes if they can't catch and the very average OL talent can't block or protect?
Click to expand...
I don't disagree. I just don't agree that the solution is 'chuck the rock deep' every play, or sticking with the play action.

I thought I read somewhere that Herman said they never tweaked the Braxton gameplan until J.T. failed against VT. If this is true, why are we even discussing this still?

I just dropped by to say I thought Herman did a much better job calling the game this week against KSU, and will hopefully continue to do better - we will find out with MSU and Penn State. The line will be a problem in those contests, I was very sad when KSU used a 'bear' front and got a sack against our O-line.
 
Upvote 0
Please just less play action. It really only works when you have a big powerful running game with an O-line that can create holes and protect the qb. If the d line can plug those holes then the backers don't have to respect the run and now there are fewer open receivers. It worked great last year. With our current skill set we win with motion in the backfield presnap. Force the backers to respect the perimeter run game. We had almost NO motion in the backfield against vt and only a little more against kent. Motions and potential jet sweeps and pulling a lineman here and there will set up the ability to play action. At least that's how I've been seeing Oregon do it.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top