Which CB Will Replace Fox?

[martinss01]

No offense without Ginn- hogwash. What we needed last year was an experienced QB and a better O-line. At the end of the season we had that and the offense got rolling. Of course Ginn is a great receiver and he helped the offense in a time of need. I believe that time has passed and the offense will be productive this year with or without Ginn. If I am right then Ginn is not needed on offense and should switch to defense. If I am wrong then we will need Ginn to bail us out on offense this year as well and there is no way in hell we can risk him on D. I haven't seen any posts to the contrary. I guess some people watch too much ESPN and don't believe that OSU has an "O" in it. Since this is February, my Scarlett colored glasses are hard to knock off. I my mind we win the NC and we win it with style. I have been looking forward to 2005 since before I knew that Ginn was coming to Ohio State. This is our year. 4 Road games and a experienced QB. I was also planning on Clarrett's senior season but that ship has sailed.:!

As for special teams I want TGII to learn how to pooch kick as well as kick returns. I liked the Qb pooch kicking and setting up the potential fake play that we ran a couple of times last year. Not only could TGII pickup the first down on the fake he could take it to the house. I bet he wouldn't make a half bad punt either.

You dare post that so close to Woody's birthday:) I think Tressel would say you are half right but no the offense part.

Smithlabs

with ginn at corner last year instead of wr we loose another 2 games easy. to say that we have no one but ginn to fill the 2nd cb spot is a whole lot of pessimistic. ginn turns every single play we run with him in the game on o as a possible 6 period. his impact on the offense is massive even when you remove his point scoring ability. he's the kind of guy who gets a qb with no backup and a bad hammy to throw a block on a guy with 100+ lb's on him. he's a guy who after catching a 5 yrd pass gets linemen to run 30+ yrds down field hoping for a chance to throw a block. he has the ability to lift the guys on offense up and propell them to play better because they know all he needs is a seem.

secondly, there isn't another player in the country i wouldn't rather gameplan for on d. his abilities as a decoy are second to none. with a sub 4.4 guy running a sweep and ginn fakes the reverse... easy 6 baby.

to think the d is going to fall apart unless ginn shifts over is beyond laughable. with the safties, lb's, and d-line we have coming back... we can most certainly afford to have a non lockdown corner on one side of the field. 2 lock down corners is a benefit, not a requirement. we have MORE than enough playmakers on d. leave ginn where he is, and that is in a position to win games nearly single-handedly.

 

[BIATCHabutuka]

i don't know if teddy will play any D or not honestly, but i would never ever doubt that he could play it if he and JT want him to. betting against teddy is a losing proposition.

 

[smithlabs]

with ginn at corner last year instead of wr we loose another 2 games easy.

Absolutely right. Tressel is a great coach and he made the correct personel call last year. This year he might make a different call depending on what he sees in practice. I hope he sees the offense looking good and has the opportunity to move his playmaker to a position of need.

However, to even imply that our offense was fine without Ginn is ludicrous

Our offense was horrible without Ginn last year. It was even horrible with Ginn since he played the first half of the season. This year I believe it (the offense) will be different. The key words are "was" vs "will be".

to say that we have no one but ginn to fill the 2nd cb spot is a whole lot of pessimistic.

Why is there a long thread about who fills the the end cb spot and not about who will be our wr? Because it is a position of need for next year. I love OSU's chances next year. Our defense is stout, our offense has great potential. I believe we would win it all without Ginn. That being said, I wouldn't trade him for another player in football today.

Smithlabs

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Our offense was horrible without Ginn last year. It was even horrible with Ginn since he played the first half of the season. This year I believe it (the offense) will be different. The key words are "was" vs "will be".

Uh, sorry to burst your bubble, but Ginn essentially didn't play the first half of the season. He wasn't yet polished in his route running. Here's his total offensive contributions in the first part of the season:

Cincinnati: Two catches for -1 yard, no rushes.
Marshall: One catch for 10 yards, no rushes.
NC State: No catches, no rushes.
Northwestern: No catches, no rushes.
Wisconsin: No catches, no rushes.
Iowa: One catch for 19 yards, no rushes.
Indiana: One catch for 59 yards (TD), no rushes.
Penn State: Two catches for 23 yards, one rush for 5 yards.

In the first eight games, he had seven catches and one rush...he was hardly a part of the offense's woes. Once we started using Ginn more often, the offense significantly improved (he won us the MSU game, and was key in our offensive outbursts in The Game and the Alamo Bowl). Even though the offense should be improved this season, the fact is that Ginn is the most explosive offense player in college football.

You don't take the engine out of a Lamborghini and put in a Dodge Hemi just because the car will still be sort of fast.

 

[osugrad21]

Why is there a long thread about who fills the the end cb spot and not about who will be our wr? Because it is a position of need for next year.

If Teddy was a CB and he and AY were returning next year as starters, the thread topic would be about another primary threat at WR since it would be the unanswered position of need...

 

[OilerBuck]

I think too many people are comparing this to the Gamble situation when, in reality, they are very different scenarios. Gamble was used primarily defense and his offensive reps were limited because it hampered his effectiveness. Teddy Ginn with the ball in his hands is a proven commodity, he has not yet played a defensive down in college and people are thinking about limiting his effectiveness on offense to try him out?

TGII will not play defense during the first few games (high temps). I would venture to guess that the only chance you will have of seeing him on D is in special situations, Nickle or Dime sets.

Think of it this way, Ted Ginn on Offense will produce anywhere from 1-3 TD a game...do you think he is singlehandedly THAT large of an upgrade on corner that he would prevent 1-3 Touchdowns by his presence on D? Gamble was moved to defense primarily because what he prevented on defense outweighed anything he could do for us on offense. It just isn't realistic to think someone could play EVERY down and still be as effective...especially when their biggest talent advantage is in speed.

 

[smithlabs]

I have watched enough games to pose the following question. If we get a lead and our running game is effective how many times will Tressel call plays to the WR? I wager just a little more than he calls the reverse. Tressel ball is at its heart conservative. How effective will Ginn be if we are playing with a lead? Plenty if he is a CB. If we were up two touchdowns would you really want Ginn to get a lot of touches? Perhaps we will be up enough next year to put in the second team but that would pull Ginn from WR or CB so that isn't really the question.

Smithlabs

 

[jwinslow]

You've never seen Tressel with an explosive WR corps that has 3 studs and a few other upandcoming guys... you've seen Jenkins + some ok guys (Gamble = ok when he's playing 125 plays a game). In 02 we had Clarett, whose dominance will not be matched on the ground this year. In 03 our line did not protect well enough to pass regularly.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

I have watched enough games to pose the following question. If we get a lead and our running game is effective how many times will Tressel call plays to the WR? I wager just a little more than he calls the reverse. Tressel ball is at its heart conservative. How effective will Ginn be if we are playing with a lead? Plenty if he is a CB. If we were up two touchdowns would you really want Ginn to get a lot of touches? Perhaps we will be up enough next year to put in the second team but that would pull Ginn from WR or CB so that isn't really the question.

Smithlabs

If I fart in Arizona, will a desert frog catch a cold? This question makes about as much sense as your "If we get a lead and our running game is effective how many times will Tressel call plays to the WR" query. Even when our running game is working, you will still need the pass to keep the defense honest. With that, who else do you want at WR than Ginn and Holmes?

You also ask, "If we were up two touchdowns would you really want Ginn to get a lot of touches?" Well, the TD pass to Holmes against Michigan came when we were up 27-14 (uh, that's being up by two TDs in case you didn't catch that).

Just frickin' give it up already. There is no way that Ginn could contribute at corner to the degree he can (and does) on offense. Go back to the labs and whip yourself up a fresh batch of crack...

 

[martinss01]

Just frickin' give it up already. There is no way that Ginn could contribute at corner to the degree he can (and does) on offense. Go back to the labs and whip yourself up a fresh batch of crack...

he could intercept and run back like 3 td's per game... because no one would stop throwing at him just like no one has attempted to not punt to him. :p

to add to the "tressel is to conservative to do anything agressive with a lead" bit. i do recall seeing ginn getting the ball a whole lot in the 3rd and 4th in the alamo bowl including a reverse... we might have been winning at the time. i don't really remember... :p

tressel strikes me as the kind of coach who leads with his strength. i doubt he will mismanage the team to the point of ignoring the nightmares our wr's cause for defenses. i think the gameplan we saw for scum and oosu are examples of this. i also think the offensive plays we saw against scum and oosu are prime examples of what we can expect throughout next year. expect atleast 1 reverse to ginn per game. scum and the bowl game will get fake reverses, double reverses, and reverse passes. they will also get single back looks with ginn at "qb" where he will actually throw the ball.

 

[smithlabs]

It seems like some people just like to contradict me and make personal attacks. That's ok but it doesn't really advance the conversation. I'll quote College Football News and hopefully lend some credibly to my point of view. I assume they have watched a couple of games before publishing their predictions.
http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2005/Spring_Preview/Springlooks_BigTen.htm

"What needs working on ... Improving the consistency of the offense and holding on to the ball. The attack exploded over the final two games of the year hanging 27 on Michigan and 33 on Oklahoma State. Now the Buckeyes have to do that from game one with enough potential to have the best offense yet under Jim Tressel. The turnovers need to slowdown after giving up 23 last year. Tressel ball relies on ball security"

Lets see, they mention potential to be the best offense yet, need to reduce turnovers and Tressel ball releying on ball security. The best offense yet statement is predicated with the idea that Ginn will contribute on offense. However, without Ginn I doubt the best offense yet turns into chopped liver. Ball security will certainly be aided with a power running game more so than throws to the wide receivers. The consistency of the offense would certainly improve with Ginn's help and that is the first point to be worked on. This blurb can be interpreted either way.

I guess the bottom line for me is all the third and longs we gave up last year and the skid we went on with Fox hurt. If anybody wants to see how pass coverage can change a game just look at Purdue's last drive against us. We have the potential for the best offense yet under Tressel and a need at defense. Defense wins championships and I think our offense will be effective without Ginn.

Smithlabs

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

It seems like some people just like to contradict me and make personal attacks. That's ok but it doesn't really advance the conversation. I'll quote College Football News and hopefully lend some credibly to my point of view...

The reason why folks may seem harsh (at least in your mind) with you is that you flat out refuse to see anyone's view point but your own, or just can't comprehend what we're saying. Also, your quote of CFN lends nothing, at all, to your stance that Ginn isn't needed on offense and would better contribute to the team on defense. As for ball security, we lost more fumbles (14) than interceptions (9), so your claim that relying more on a power running game will minimize turnovers doesn't wash. Another way-off-the-mark statement is this: "If anybody wants to see how pass coverage can change a game just look at Purdue's last drive against us." Uh, it wasn't the fault of the coverage, it was the fault of the scheme. Snyder had us go into soft/prevent coverage which allowed Orton to pick us apart. The previous second half drives, Purdue didn't do squat...they had a grand total of 77 yards of offense in six drives. As soon as Snyder moved the coverage back, Purdue was able to move the ball on us. Ginn's being out there would've done absolutely nothing to stop Purdue.

 

[OilerBuck]

It seems like some people just like to contradict me and make personal attacks. That's ok but it doesn't really advance the conversation. I'll quote College Football News and hopefully lend some credibly to my point of view. I assume they have watched a couple of games before publishing their predictions.

Lets see, they mention potential to be the best offense yet, need to reduce turnovers and Tressel ball releying on ball security. The best offense yet statement is predicated with the idea that Ginn will contribute on offense. However, without Ginn I doubt the best offense yet turns into chopped liver. Ball security will certainly be aided with a power running game more so than throws to the wide receivers. The consistency of the offense would certainly improve with Ginn's help and that is the first point to be worked on. This blurb can be interpreted either way.

I guess the bottom line for me is all the third and longs we gave up last year and the skid we went on with Fox hurt. If anybody wants to see how pass coverage can change a game just look at Purdue's last drive against us. We have the potential for the best offense yet under Tressel and a need at defense. Defense wins championships and I think our offense will be effective without Ginn.

Smithlabs

This "powerhouse" of an OSU offense that you speak of didn't do much early in the season without Ginn.

Take into consideration that we scored 31 touchdowns this year (11 rushing, 14 passing, 5 on special teams, 1 on defense). Ginn's first TD didn't come until our 5th game this year (at Wisconsin) and his first offensive TD didn't come until the 7th (vs Indiana). I would even argue that he was not used offensively to his full potential until the MSU game. Most Buckeye fans would tell you that Ted Ginn's potential use for his first year was limited to a half season.

In that time he scored 8 touchdowns or 26.6% of our offensive/spec. teams touchdowns for the season and didn't get effective use in any of our non-conference schedule (which usually includes a couple "lighter weight" teams). You may also want to note that we settled for 24/27 field goals on the season. With Nugent gone we CAN NOT afford to have 27 field goal attempts and only 25 offensive touchdowns. To think that we will be able to significantly increase these statistics after yet another QB change is unrealistic.

Ginn's impact on offense is a.) a proven commodity and b.) extremely valuable to it's success. Ginn's impact on defense is unproven and while he may be valuable, to win games you must score more points than the other team. If you think that Ginn will prevent more touchdowns on defense than he could potentially score on offense...I've got some real estate I'd like to sell you.

 

[brutus2002]

Tony Gonzales poses a huge threat against team next year. IMO his improvement was very important to establish a 3rd threat at WR.

 

[smithlabs]

This is a lot more fun. Instead of a rote reply of you're wrong and I'm write there is dialog.:tongue2:

As for ball security, we lost more fumbles (14) than interceptions (9), so your claim that relying more on a power running game will minimize turnovers doesn't wash.

How many of those fumbles were by QB's or receivers? Those would still have to be credited to a turnover on passing. As I remember, Zwick had more than his share of fumbles. Somebody once said that there are only three things that can happen when you pass the ball and two of them are bad. I wouldn't go that far but conventional wisdom is that running the ball has less chance of a turnover than throwing the ball. Given my druthers, I would choose a dominating running game over a dominating passing game for that reason.

Uh, it wasn't the fault of the coverage, it was the fault of the scheme. Snyder had us go into soft/prevent coverage which allowed Orton to pick us apart.

Granted I hate the prevent defense. I still have to think that Snyder would have chosen a different scheme if he had different personel. The question is direct vs indirect causes. A shut down corner will keep us out of soft coverage and allow us to play an attacking defense.

This "powerhouse" of an OSU offense that you speak of didn't do much early in the season without Ginn.

It didn't do much in the early season with Ginn either:) I listed my reasons why the offense will be effective next year without Ginn: O-line, experienced qb play, RB's, and deep receiver stables. I think that is my order. Which one in particular do you disagree with?

Take into consideration that we scored 31 touchdowns this year (11 rushing, 14 passing, 5 on special teams, 1 on defense). Ginn's first TD didn't come until our 5th game this year (at Wisconsin) and his first offensive TD didn't come until the 7th (vs Indiana).

Thanks, I was looking for this breakdown. Somebody said that TGII was good for 1-3 (offensive?) td's a game. I think he scored 4 on special teams and 8 total? That means that last year he scored 4 offensive touchdowns in games 7-12. That sounds like less than one/game to me even if we exclude his first seven games. Furthermore, he scored 4 of 25 total touchdowns. Statistically, in a weak offensive year he did not dominate the offensive stats. He has an influence on offense that doesn't show up on the stat sheet. The opposing defensive scheme has to change to acount for him and he brings a lift to all the players he plays with. He definately contributed to offense but our offensive flurry at the end of the season was caused by more than just Ginn. I hope he will play both ways in situational roles for the offense. Third and long comes to mind as well as plays around midfield where the offense can get more aggresive.

There were a lot of posts in this thread saying Ginn was a good corner and will be a good corner in college. I went out on a limb and said he would be the best corner in football. I assume that isn't why I should check into drug rehab. My truely original contribution to this thread is that we will be ok on offense. Apperently an offensive statement. I pulled in an experet quote for support that said not only will be be good on offense but the best offense that Tressel has had at OSU. Our offense started slow last year and has shown signs of being medicore to horrible at times so I prefeced my idea with a self ephasing quip to that effect - "other than our anemic offense..." I think this year we are loaded offensively about everywhere but TE and fullback and perhaps Johnson and Frost will prove me wrong there. I think that Holmes and Gonzo make a darn good 1/2 punch and either Hall and Lyons will develop into our #3 guy. Based on our personel next year does anybody disagree that our offense without Ginn will be good?

Smithlabs