Immediate Results from our 2005 Class

[blufftonbuck]

Just reviewed this and our class which many believed to be average (not me or most on this board...not closing strong, etc) is going to have quite an effect on our lineup next year.

2005 Class Ranking
Rivals - 12th
Scout - 7th
SGN - ??? (Could not find it )

I could see the following in our starting lineup next year (assuming Whit and Youboty leave)

Jenkins - CB (Will Start)
Boone - OT (I assume that Datish slides over for departing Simms)
Cordle - C (All indication to him starting)
O'Neal - FS (I have to believe this athlete is not kept off the field)
Wilson - DE (Almost certainly will take over for Kudla)
Laurinaitis - LB (Was the backup this year and started Fiesta)
Amos - CB (I remember fall camp and he was being mentioned with Jenkins)

Not too mention Worthington, Robiskie, and Wells getting time this year.


So that is 40% of 2005 class that would be starting as either Sophmores or Redshirts. Not bad at all for a class.

[crazybuckfan40]

Originally Posted by blufftonbuck

Just reviewed this and our class which many believed to be average (not me or most on this board...not closing strong, etc) is going to have quite an effect on our lineup next year.

2005 Class Ranking
Rivals - 12th
Scout - 7th
SGN - ??? (Could not find it )

I could see the following in our starting lineup next year (assuming Whit and Youboty leave)

Jenkins - CB (Will Start)
Boone - OT (I assume that Datish slides over for departing Simms)
Cordle - C (All indication to him starting)
O'Neal - FS (I have to believe this athlete is not kept off the field)
Wilson - DE (Almost certainly will take over for Kudla)
Laurinaitis - LB (Was the backup this year and started Fiesta)
Amos - CB (I remember fall camp and he was being mentioned with Jenkins)


So that is 40% of 2005 class that would be starting as either Sophmores or Redshirts. Not bad at all for a class.

Nice list, but don't forget Robiske. I think he will be playing a major role next year as maybe the third or 4th reciever.

Also Mo Wells, should continue to get time at rb.

[EdDantes22]

Originally Posted by crazybuckfan40

Also Mo Wells, should continue to get time at rb.

Mo Wells is a gimmick back, at best. Antonio Pittman is strictly better than Wells--same shiftiness, but he can actually break a tackle. Wells is too small. Maybe he could fit into a Bam Childress role. But Erik Hawk, even, is clearly a better all around RB than Wells. My guess is he would have been listed as second string if it wasn't for the marijuana incident. And with Chris Wells coming in next year, I doubt Mo Wells will see any significant time in our backfield.

Now, on returns, who knows. However, he's shown a big case of the fumbles, so maybe not there, either. Can he punt?

[wadc45]

Originally Posted by EdDantes22

Mo Wells is a gimmick back, at best. Antonio Pittman is strictly better than Wells--same shiftiness, but he can actually break a tackle. Wells is too small. Maybe he could fit into a Bam Childress role. But Erik Hawk, even, is clearly a better all around RB than Wells. My guess is he would have been listed as second string if it wasn't for the marijuana incident. And with Chris Wells coming in next year, I doubt Mo Wells will see any significant time in our backfield.

Now, on returns, who knows. However, he's shown a big case of the fumbles, so maybe not there, either. Can he punt?

Your guess is that Haw would have been listed as second string if it wasn't for the marijuana? I know for an undeniable fact that Wells and Haw aren't even listed on the same depth chart. Do you think the staff has one depth chart they use for every formation? Of course not. Wells was listed ahead of Haw in several formations and it was because his talents were better suited to those formations than Haw. Would you call and NFL 3rd down back a gimmick back? They create different match-ups in certain situations. Haw barely saw the field because he could only contribute in situations where we were not going to take Tony out of the game. Wells saw the field because he was able to pick up the blocking scheme faster in two months than Erik was in two years. Both Haw and Mo are extremely talented...but the one thing you got right is that Tony is strictly better than Mo. However, I am confident Mo sees significant time this year and I know Bill Conley would agree with that statement. And I doubt he is saying that solely because he is the one who first recruited Wells.

[OSUBuckeye4Life]

Originally Posted by wadc45

Your guess is that Haw would have been listed as second string if it wasn't for the marijuana? I know for an undeniable fact that Wells and Haw aren't even listed on the same depth chart. Do you think the staff has one depth chart they use for every formation? Of course not. Wells was listed ahead of Haw in several formations and it was because his talents were better suited to those formations than Haw. Would you call and NFL 3rd down back a gimmick back? They create different match-ups in certain situations. Haw barely saw the field because he could only contribute in situations where we were not going to take Tony out of the game. Wells saw the field because he was able to pick up the blocking scheme faster in two months than Erik was in two years. Both Haw and Mo are extremely talented...but the one thing you got right is that Tony is strictly better than Mo. However, I am confident Mo sees significant time this year and I know Bill Conley would agree with that statement. And I doubt he is saying that solely because he is the one who first recruited Wells.

I agree with pretty much all of this. I guess this is a co-sign.

The depth we have is incredible at RB. With the addition of C. Wells we have the full spectrum of backs you could possibly need on one team.

[EdDantes22]

Originally Posted by wadc45

Your guess is that Haw would have been listed as second string if it wasn't for the marijuana? I know for an undeniable fact that Wells and Haw aren't even listed on the same depth chart. Do you think the staff has one depth chart they use for every formation? Of course not. Wells was listed ahead of Haw in several formations and it was because his talents were better suited to those formations than Haw. Would you call and NFL 3rd down back a gimmick back? They create different match-ups in certain situations. Haw barely saw the field because he could only contribute in situations where we were not going to take Tony out of the game. Wells saw the field because he was able to pick up the blocking scheme faster in two months than Erik was in two years. Both Haw and Mo are extremely talented...but the one thing you got right is that Tony is strictly better than Mo. However, I am confident Mo sees significant time this year and I know Bill Conley would agree with that statement. And I doubt he is saying that solely because he is the one who first recruited Wells.

You make some good points, and I don't think we disagree as much as it seems. Your point that Haw and Wells aren't even on the same depth chart is a valid one; it speaks to my point that Wells isn't, and will likely never be, an adequate feature back. Haw may never get that chance either (at least not at tOSU), but he's a more traditional back. However, we definitely saw Wells line up in formations this year, even the I (I think, not 100%), where Haw clearly could have been in the game to spell Pittman. So I don't think Mo and Haw's roles were always mutually exclusive. They overlapped some and Mo got the time when they did.

Mo's future playing time, in my mind, depends on a few things:

1. His receiving ability. I haven't seen anything that makes me think he's a better receiver, on 3rd down or any down, than Pittman is.
2. His pass protection: he may know the schemes, but at his size he better know them.
3. Reducing his fumbling problem: Tressel won't play you if you continually put it on the ground.
4. Getting stronger.

We're really blessed at RB right now. Someone will be the odd man out. Right now it looks like Haw. You're right; Mo at least brings a different skill set to the table, whereas I don't see Haw ever overtaking Pittman or CWells.

[wadc45]

Excellent post...and I agree, that our thinking may not be that far apart. However, I think where we do disagree is that in the situations or formations where Erik and Mo's responsibilities or abilities overlapped Mo got the PT because of the marijuana incident. I think Mo got the playing time, even in situations like that dreaded one carry against Michigan, because he is much more dangerous with the ball in his hands than Erik and is better suited to the kind of offense we were running last year and will probably run next year. When you are running draws, counter draws, QB option-draws, etc. out of the shotgun, it is great to have a small, shifty back who can get in behind those big blockers and pick his holes. Kind of like Fred Russel did at Iowa. Also, there have been rumors of Erik moving to the defensive backfield (and not just on Internet message boards), and while mostly unfounded, it is an indication of the difficulty Erik has had adjusting to the college game. I am fairly certain that he would tell you himself that the speed of the game was not what he was prepared for coming out of the City League...where as Mo came from a little tougher competition where he was better prepared for the jump to D1 college football. I certainly am not putting Erik down...but his struggles both on the field and off the field are well documented. The Spring Game will probably tell us a little bit about where we can expect to see each RB next season. I think that while you are right that Mo may never be a feature back at any level, he does have the ability to become a heck of a change of pace from guys like Tony, Erik and eventually Chris Wells.

[EdDantes22]

Originally Posted by wadc45

Excellent post...and I agree, that our thinking may not be that far apart. However, I think where we do disagree is that in the situations or formations where Erik and Mo's responsibilities or abilities overlapped Mo got the PT because of the marijuana incident. I think Mo got the playing time, even in situations like that dreaded one carry against Michigan, because he is much more dangerous with the ball in his hands than Erik and is better suited to the kind of offense we were running last year and will probably run next year. When you are running draws, counter draws, QB option-draws, etc. out of the shotgun, it is great to have a small, shifty back who can get in behind those big blockers and pick his holes. Kind of like Fred Russel did at Iowa. Also, there have been rumors of Erik moving to the defensive backfield (and not just on Internet message boards), and while mostly unfounded, it is an indication of the difficulty Erik has had adjusting to the college game. I think that while you are right that Mo may never be a feature back at any level, he does have the ability to become a heck of a change of pace from guys like Tony, Erik and eventually Chris Wells.

Very true, Mo's clearly best suited to running draws and things out of the shotgun. He hasn't had too many great carries yet, but he is certainly fast and I can see him in this role. However, I still believe we might have been better off snagging Fred Russell, now at Minnesota, or maybe even Sutton from Northwestern. Both were Ohio kids; Sutton is a smaller, quicker back while still not being as diminuitive as MO, and Russell is a pounder who may have helped us in the red zone in the Texas game, among other things. Of course, with CWells coming in now, Russell becomes more of a moot point.

As for Haw switching to the defensive back field, one of our most crowded position right now is safety. I wouldn't think he could play corner. So he'd be even more buried there. I know you called the rumors "unfounded"; I hope you're right. I don't see how that would help anyone, unless he was an absolute defensive prodigy. Did he even play there in HS?

[NightmaresDad]

If he can field the kicks, I would love to see Haw get as shot at returning kickoffs.
I honestly was not at all impressed with Gonzo in that up-back role last year, and Holmes is gone. We need two new returners back there.

Or put Jam-O and TG II back as a duo.

[BearBuck27]

Originally Posted by blufftonbuck

Not too mention Worthington, Robiskie, and Wells getting time this year.

Don't forget Anderson Russell. Alum82 on BN (the most reliable poster on BN, imo) feels that Russell is the best safety on the team, and he will start with O'Neal as our two safeties. He also mentioned that Mitchell will be the nickelback because of his struggles against the run.

Edit here's the link.

[MililaniBuckeye]

Originally Posted by EdDantes22

Mo Wells is a gimmick back, at best. Antonio Pittman is strictly better than Wells--same shiftiness, but he can actually break a tackle. Wells is too small. Maybe he could fit into a Bam Childress role. But Erik Hawk, even, is clearly a better all around RB than Wells. My guess is he would have been listed as second string if it wasn't for the marijuana incident. And with Chris Wells coming in next year, I doubt Mo Wells will see any significant time in our backfield.

Now, on returns, who knows. However, he's shown a big case of the fumbles, so maybe not there, either. Can he punt?

Wells is by no means a gimmick back. Keep in mind that most of his carries came in garbage time and were clock-killing draws up the middle. The few times he did get to run early in the game and was given plays other than running into the pile, he did well. And no one is comparing Wells as a freshman to Pittman as a sophomore. As for Wells being too small, I think you'd better check your facts first:

Pittman: 5'11", 195
Wells: 5'10", 190

One inch and five pounds isn't much.

Finally, I don't know where you get "he's shown a big case of the fumbles" from...he's fumbled once (Michigan) that I can recall.

[Taosman]

There's nothing wrong with Mo Wells that a year or so in the weight room won't fix. He could become something like Calhoun at Wisconsin.
He's got all the tools.

[MililaniBuckeye]

Originally Posted by blufftonbuck

Cordle - C (All indication to him starting)

And where would those indications be? Most that I've seen have Datish at center. Boone and Barton at tackle. Downing and Rehring at guard.

[wadc45]

Originally Posted by EdDantes22

However, I still believe we might have been better off snagging Fred Russell, now at Minnesota

that's Gary Russell...I'm talking about the diminutive Fred Russell who was at Iowa (I think his last year there was 2003). he was 5-8 190 and was great at getting in behind his lineman and picking his way through the smallest holes that his line opened up.

[wadc45]

Originally Posted by MililaniBuckeye

And where would those indications be? Most that I've seen have Datish at center. Boone and Barton at tackle. Downing and Rehring at guard.

I agree...I think that is the most logical starting line going into next year. A lot can change between now and then, but that seems the most practical option at this point.

I also agree with Mili about the term "gimmick back"...they have another name for that in the NFL: third-down back. guys with that job still make a pretty penny...