2009 Team Rumblings

[buckiprof]

Originally Posted by corwinator3407

Finishing #9 in the AP, where do you guys think the Bucks will fall in the preseason poll for next year?

The highest ranked 3 loss team too. IIRC, OSU was the highest ranked 2 loss team after the State Penn loss. Which has me wondering if there were this media bias against OSU, why isn't it reflected in the rankings?

[Steve19]

Originally Posted by buckiprof

The highest ranked 3 loss team too. IIRC, OSU was the highest ranked 2 loss team after the State Penn loss. Which has me wondering if there were this media bias against OSU, why isn't it reflected in the rankings?

If there wasn't media bias against us, we'd be ranked #1. Our uniforms just look that much better to me and I am unbiased.

[NightmaresDad]

Originally Posted by billmac91

I'm going to take a crack at the starting line up:

QB: TP
RB: Boom
LT: Mike Adams
LG: Boren
C: Brewster
RG: Cordle
RT: Shugarts
TE: Ballard
WR: Posey
WR: Sanzenbacher
WR: Small

I'll preface the above by saying, I think Lamaar Thomas has a real chance of cracking the starting line-up depending on who the OC is. If it is an innovative and attacking OC, I think Lamaar cracks the line-up as a player that puts the pressure on the defense. If we stay conservative I'd imagine our receivers are the above. I'll also say I think a lot of spread teams would have already used Ray Small in a scat-back type role. I could see an innovative OC motioning Ray Small or Lamaar Thomas into the backfield.

Defense:

DE: Williams/Wilson
DT: Worthington
DT: Heyward
DE: Gibson
OLB: Homan
MLB: Spitler
OLB: Sabino
CB: Washington
SS: Kurt Coleman
FS: Anderson Russell
CB: Chimdi Chekwa

Linebacker is tough because I think Spitler brings maturity to the position and he's proven he's a hard hitter. I think Sabino has a lot of talent, but I'm not sure he overtakes a Senior in Austin Spitler. If not my initial line-up at LB, I'd say Sabino starts at MLB and Dorian Bell comes in and takes an OLB position. I hate putting a true freshman in over a guy like Brian Rolle but I think Brian provides depth and continues to be a special teams warrior (our LB version of Shaun Lane....a side-note, but did anyone ever have back-to-back bang up Spring games at DB like Shaun Lane?)

DE will be interesting as well. Assuming Lawrence Wilson is 100% I don't see how he doesn't get the nod opposite Thaddeus Gibson. It sucks to say, but I also think Lawrence's character and dependabilty come into play as well. But a solid rotation at DE when Nathan can sub in. My wild-card in all of this is Rob Rose. If the guy could ever get into camp in good health, stay healthy, and be the force we thought he would be, where does he play??? The guy was Army All-American Defensive MVP for a reason. Is it too late for him to really make a stamp on this defense? I hope not.

I'd say of all positions I'm most concerned about are WR and Linebacker. I see the potential in players like Posey, Thomas, and Sanzenbacher. I think my hesitancy comes in how they're used and the offense we run. Was the lack of seperation this year due to speed, scheme, or both?? Bad QB play?? Bad offensive line protection?? I really like Robiskie as a Wideout. I think he is a steal in the draft. Not having a #1 like Teddy or Santonio really hurt his production b/c he is a great #2 in any system.

It will be interesting to see how Jake Stoneburner is used. TE hasn't been a position of pressure in the past, but putting a guy like Stoneburner out there would force defenses to take notice. Stoneburner would look great lined up off the line, just outside of the tackle. I think Stoneburner could become an Aaron Hernandez type player. Just an absolute mismatch that exploits LB's trying to key on the QB. If you haven't seen Hernandez much this year, watch for him tomorrow night against OU. He is slick...

I'm interested in seeing what happens to this offense. A new OC with experience in the spread could make this offense deadly with Terrelle at his disposal. I'd like to see the offense force defenses to play in space, and defend Terrelle on the perimeter. Play action, and read option is nice, but for Terrelle to really exploit a defense it'd be nice to see him get some run/thorw reads. It'd be great to see him run some fake option - throws. There are a lot of plays/schemes that would better utilize Terrelle's talents better than what we saw this year.

I'd just love to see the production out of an attacking offense. It was either Jax or NF that made a great statement: "Having a great defense doesn't mean you need a bad offense." How nice would it be to see an offense that averages around 40 a game and a defense that is stout as usual.

Nice post, Billmac.
IMHO, you might want to make a small change to your lineup.

And I think Rolle is going to play alot next year (and Sabino, too)

[cincibuck]

Originally Posted by Oneshot

I'm worried about Chekwa.

I'm sure it was mentioned 10000 times over in the Texas thread (but I'm sure as hell not going through that).

If DWash leaves, then we're looking at a Chekwa-Amos tandem... with possibly Devon Torrance getting involved.

Chekwa was absolutely targeted in the Fiesta bowl. Colt 90% of the time was throwing right at Chekwa, knowing that Chimdi doesn't have the ball skills necessary to stop the passes over the top, nor the agility to stop the slant.

It was very surprising - I really thought Chekwa would be a great, standout corner by himself. He has good tackling skills, and he had a great interception at USC. But he was really exposed in the Fiesta bowl in a way a corner like Malcolm had never been.

I've only seen a corner get picked on that much one time - Syd'Quan Thompson of Cal two years ago at Tennessee. But Syd made a ridiculous improvement and is now an all pac-10 level performer, so who know how much one summer can help Chimdi.

Only time this year the kid faced a QB and receivers with as much talent as Texas had at those two positions and that includes USC. He'll be fine, especially if the Bucks find someone who can put pressure on the QB other than the LBs and safties.

My concern remains the o-line and Jim Bollman.

[buckeyes_rock]

Originally Posted by cincibuck

Only time this year the kid faced a QB and receivers with as much talent as Texas had at those two positions and that includes USC. He'll be fine, especially if the Bucks find someone who can put pressure on the QB other than the LBs and safties.

My concern remains the o-line and Jim Bollman.

I think Chimdi will be fine next year. He's not Jenkins...but who is right? If D Wash stays, then I think that combo will be pretty good.

As a side though, I went back and skimmed through the Amos thread...man did this kid get some great reviews coming in. Comparisons to Gamble, shutting down Manningham in the all star game, great speed and all kinds of talk back in the day about he and Jenkins being the two corners for us. I know he's battled through some injuries, but I can't help but wonder if he might be one to break through and be next years Nadar Abdallah?

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by NFBuck

If I were to guess right this moment...

Adams-Boren-Brew-Cordle-Shugarts

Originally Posted by billmac91

I'm going to take a crack at the starting line up:


LG: Boren
RG: Cordle

MLB: Spitler
OLB: Sabino

My only 2 comments:

1) I think Boren plays on the right side
2) I think Sabino will play in the middle

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

2) I think Sabino will play in the middle

My money's on Ross Homan.

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by Buckeyeskickbuttocks

My money's on Ross Homan.

So would this mean Spitler at S and Sabino at W?

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

So would this mean Spitler at S and Sabino at W?

Hard to say... It seems to me a good problem to have, but I'm thinking Spitler ends up behind Homan in the middle as I think Rolle will get a very long look on the weak side

[exhawg]

Originally Posted by buckiprof

The highest ranked 3 loss team too. IIRC, OSU was the highest ranked 2 loss team after the State Penn loss. Which has me wondering if there were this media bias against OSU, why isn't it reflected in the rankings?

I think playing Texas like we did helped soften the bias a little and explains why we moved up in the AP even though we lost. No one expected us to be within 10 pts of the mighty Longhorns and we all but beat them. IMO the Sooners are going to be the media whipping boy for a while. I think the Big 12 has been exposed more than the Big 10 by bowl season this year. If the Big 10 had only sent 1 team to the BCS the conference record might be very different. I think we beat Georgia and everyone else plays a lesser opponent. That way possibly everyone but Penn St. wins.

[Ahiacitian]

Originally Posted by exhawg

If the Big 10 had only sent 1 team to the BCS the conference record might be very different. I think we beat Georgia and everyone else plays a lesser opponent. That way possibly everyone but Penn St. wins.

As it played out, the only way that Ohio State would have missed the BCS is if Oregon State would have won the Pac-10 by beating Oregon. If that would have happened, then Oregon State would have had a rematch with Penn State in the Rose Bowl and USC would have probably played Texas in the Fiesta Bowl. In this scenario, possibly all Big Ten teams win out. This seems to be the scenario every year, the Big Ten sends two to the BCS, thus forcing every other Big Ten team to "play up" a bowl game. Unfortunately for the Big Ten the last few years, the league hasn't had the depth to sustain success under this scenario...

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Originally Posted by Ahiacitian

As it played out, the only way that Ohio State would have missed the BCS is if Oregon State would have won the Pac-10 by beating Oregon. If that would have happened, then Oregon State would have had a rematch with Penn State in the Rose Bowl and USC would have probably played Texas in the Fiesta Bowl. In this scenario, possibly all Big Ten teams win out. This seems to be the scenario every year, the Big Ten sends two to the BCS, thus forcing every other Big Ten team to "play up" a bowl game. Unfortunately for the Big Ten the last few years, the league hasn't had the depth to sustain success under this scenario...

While this is typically the case, the Big Ten "playing up" I'm not sure that argument really holds this season. To be sure, there was some "playing up" but I don't think it was as "bad" as some years....

Thus far the Big 10 (1-6) has:

• Played a higher ranked team (nationally) 3 times and is 0-3 in those games (W: L: Georgia (16) over Michigan State (19), USC (5) over Penn State (6), Texas (3) over Ohio State (10))
• Played a lower ranked team (nationally) 1 time and is 0-1 in that game (W: L: Missouri over Northwestern)
• Played a opponent who finished higher in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: ; L: Florida State over Wisconsin, Missouri over Northwestern)
• Played an opponent who finished lower in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: L: Kansas over Minnesota, Texas over Ohio State)
• Played an opponent who had an equal rating in their conference 3 times, and are 1-2 in those games (W: Iowa over South Carolina; L: Georgia over Michigan State, USC over Penn State)

The higher ranked teams nationally weren't extreme cases (the largest being Ohio State v. Texas) and the conference only played out of position in terms of conference standings in two games. In fact, 3 times, it was equal rating in terms of conference rank.

[Jaxbuck]

Originally Posted by Buckeyeskickbuttocks

While this is typically the case, the Big Ten "playing up" I'm not sure that argument really holds this season. To be sure, there was some "playing up" but I don't think it was as "bad" as some years....

Thus far the Big 10 (1-6) has:

• Played a higher ranked team (nationally) 3 times and is 0-3 in those games (W: L: Georgia (16) over Michigan State (19), USC (5) over Penn State (6), Texas (3) over Ohio State (10))
• Played a lower ranked team (nationally) 1 time and is 0-1 in that game (W: L: Missouri over Northwestern)
• Played a opponent who finished higher in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: ; L: Florida State over Wisconsin, Missouri over Northwestern)
• Played an opponent who finished lower in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: L: Kansas over Minnesota, Texas over Ohio State)
• Played an opponent who had an equal rating in their conference 3 times, and are 1-2 in those games (W: Iowa over South Carolina; L: Georgia over Michigan State, USC over Penn State)

The higher ranked teams nationally weren't extreme cases (the largest being Ohio State v. Texas) and the conference only played out of position in terms of conference standings in two games. In fact, 3 times, it was equal rating in terms of conference rank.

BKB beat me to it. I know it feels like we play up a slot a lot when we put 2 teams in the BCS but when you go look at it its nowhere near that bad. I keep track of the AP rankings for B10 Bowl games in the BCS facts for your SEC friends thread.

We have almost the same record when we have the higher ranked team as we do when we are the lower ranked team.

[Ahiacitian]

Originally Posted by Buckeyeskickbuttocks

While this is typically the case, the Big Ten "playing up" I'm not sure that argument really holds this season. To be sure, there was some "playing up" but I don't think it was as "bad" as some years....

Thus far the Big 10 (1-6) has:

• Played a higher ranked team (nationally) 3 times and is 0-3 in those games (W: L: Georgia (16) over Michigan State (19), USC (5) over Penn State (6), Texas (3) over Ohio State (10))
• Played a lower ranked team (nationally) 1 time and is 0-1 in that game (W: L: Missouri over Northwestern)
• Played a opponent who finished higher in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: ; L: Florida State over Wisconsin, Missouri over Northwestern)
• Played an opponent who finished lower in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: L: Kansas over Minnesota, Texas over Ohio State)
• Played an opponent who had an equal rating in their conference 3 times, and are 1-2 in those games (W: Iowa over South Carolina; L: Georgia over Michigan State, USC over Penn State)

The higher ranked teams nationally weren't extreme cases (the largest being Ohio State v. Texas) and the conference only played out of position in terms of conference standings in two games. In fact, 3 times, it was equal rating in terms of conference rank.

Very true. I guess my point goes back to my last statement that the Big Ten depth is not good enough to sustain the fact that the conference loses its best two teams to the BCS. Even though Georgia was third in the SEC and Michigan State third in the Big Ten, unfortunately it proved out that the third best Big Ten team wasn't as good as the third best SEC team.

"Played an opponent who finished lower in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: L: Kansas over Minnesota, Texas over Ohio State)"

So are you implying that since Texas wasn't in the Big 12 championship game and that Missouri was, that Missouri in fact finished second in the Big 12 and Texas tied for third with Texas Tech? With the quirky nature of the Big 12 this year, I find that a little bit of a stretch even though I guess technically it would be the truth. Good data though, it is interesting to see it broken down like that...

[BayBuck]

Originally Posted by Buckeyeskickbuttocks

While this is typically the case, the Big Ten "playing up" I'm not sure that argument really holds this season. To be sure, there was some "playing up" but I don't think it was as "bad" as some years....

Thus far the Big 10 (1-6) has:

• Played a higher ranked team (nationally) 3 times and is 0-3 in those games (W: L: Georgia (16) over Michigan State (19), USC (5) over Penn State (6), Texas (3) over Ohio State (10))
• Played a lower ranked team (nationally) 1 time and is 0-1 in that game (W: L: Missouri over Northwestern)
• Played a opponent who finished higher in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: ; L: Florida State over Wisconsin, Missouri over Northwestern)
• Played an opponent who finished lower in their conference 2 times and are 0-2 in those games (W: L: Kansas over Minnesota, Texas over Ohio State)
• Played an opponent who had an equal rating in their conference 3 times, and are 1-2 in those games (W: Iowa over South Carolina; L: Georgia over Michigan State, USC over Penn State)

The higher ranked teams nationally weren't extreme cases (the largest being Ohio State v. Texas) and the conference only played out of position in terms of conference standings in two games. In fact, 3 times, it was equal rating in terms of conference rank.

These stats are all very true, and clearly demonstrate that the BigTen wasn't "playing up" in terms of poll-rankings or conference-rankings, and yet with OSU getting that BCS at-large it did shift all the conference's bowl opponents to "play up" one slot higher than otherwise. Not that I would trade a BCS spot for a better conference bowl record, but this is a much more appealing bowl lineup for the BigTen:

PSU vs. USC
OSU vs. Georgia
Michigan State vs. South Carolina
Iowa vs. Missouri
Northwestern vs. Kansas
Minnesota vs. Florida St.
Wisconsin vs. C.Michigan

I can easily see 3-4 wins in that group, certainly not great, but better than 1-6.