Ideal distribution of scholarships

[MililaniBuckeye]

Some comments in prospects' threads started me thinking about what would be the ideal distribution of scholarships at each position on our team. Since we have a maximum allowed of 85, and we have 22 positions on the team, I started by allotting four scholarships at each position for a total of 88 and then trimming some off.

You should have both a scholarship place kicker and punter, and should have 2-3 ships available to give to senior walk-ons, plus one for "contingency" purposes (player on some other athletic scholarship playing in a game, thus switching that scholarship to the football pool). For now, I'm setting my target for the standard 22 positions at 80 scholarships.

OFFENSE:

Using the initial method of four ships per position and using the old-school formation of single tight end, two receivers, and two running backs (TB and FB), you get 44 ships broken down as follows:

QB: 4
RB: 8
WR: 8
TE: 4
OL: 20

Let's now look at how we can pare these numbers down a bit, with a target of 40 ships (half our overall target of 80).

QB: I'll let this number stand. We have four scholarship QBs now. We had three last year and almost had to burn TB's redshirt because an injury and a suspension. While suspensions won't (hopefully) happen again, multiple injuries at a position are possible. Four seems like the right balance.

RB: Woody said "A pair and a spare" at tailback. I like having four, just in case (injuries, resting starters in blow-outs). I also would have only two scholarship fullbacks. Our fullbacks right now are little more than blocking backs, and aren't even on the field 2/3 of the time. Now, I'm not belittling their importance, but rather saying that two should suffice. Six scholarships for running backs should work (a reduction of two from the initial calculation of eight).

WR: We've been fairly lucky since Tressel has been here in not losing too many starting receivers to injury (Carter in 2003 was the last I can remember). Still, with us running up to 5-wide sets, and running 4-wide sets very often, injuries can cut into our available pool quite quickly. Keep in mind that your number of scholarship depends not only on being able to have players ready for game time, but also for development. By my count, we have nine receivers on scholarship (Holmes, Ginn, Gonzo, Hall, Dukes, Robiskie, Hartline, Lyons, and Jordan), and none of them are seniors eligibility-wise (although Holmes has declared). Add in the fact we have at least one receiver coming in from this recruiting class, and as many as four total, we could have up to 12 receivers on scholarship. Granted, a couple may move to defense, but still a scholarship is a scholarship. My opinion is eight receivers on scholarship should be enough, but with the way we shift players around and also the fact we have some receivers on special teams, I'll say that 10 scholarships at receiver is the target (increase of two from the initial calculation of eight).

TE: We don't use the TE in passing formations much, but that could change with the right kind of TE. We also use the TE extensively in run blocking and near the goalline. I would think "a pair and a spare" would apply here. Three scholarships is about right (a reduction of one from the initial calculation of four).

OL: This is the key area of the offense in my opinion. You can have the best QBs, RBs, and WRs in the world, but they won't mean [censored] if they QB can't the ball off and the RBs don't have holes to run through. The way we rotate OL, as many as 10 OL will see game time. We've been lucky in that we haven't lost many OLs to injury, but we can't count on that (see Michigan's OL). I want at least 3-deep across the line (15), within and additional backup at main position (center, guard, tackle). That gives 18 scholarships at offensive line, which I think is a good number (a reduction of two from the initial calculation of 20).

So now we have a breakdown that looks like this:

QB: 4
RB: 6
WR: 10
TE: 3
OL: 18

That's 41 scholarships, one over our target of 40 for offense. Not bad. Now let's look at the defense.

DEFENSE:

Using the initial method of four ships per position, we get a breakdown like this:

DL: 16
LB: 12
DB: 16

Let's see how we can get this down to 40 ships, or maybe even less:

DL: Like on offensive, the line is what makes it all happen. While we do rotate the line a bit during game time, being three-deep at each position, plus an extra end and tackle, for a total of 14, should be sufficient (which is our current roster total). Fourteen scholarships at DL gives us a reduction of two from our original calculation of 16.

LB: Ohio State has always produced great linebackers, and as we've seen since Tressel's arrival, linebackers can be the missing link to a dominating defense. You want to be deep at linebacker for three reasons:

1.) Injury buffer
2.) Rotation/relief (hot climates, rest starters during blowouts, etc.)
3.) Bench linebackers are a huge part of special teams (Kerr, Terry, Hoobler, Laurinaitis off the top of my head)

Being three-deep at each position plus a rover-type linebacker (one who can play either of the three) gives us 10 scholarships at linebacker, which is two less than our initial calculation of 12.

DB: Tressel seems to recruit DBs by the truck load, so there must be a reason for it. Still, 16 DBs (and actually we had 15 on scholarship this past season) seems to be a lot. Being three-deep at each position plus an extra corner and safety give us 14, which easily allows us to cover nickle and dime package requirements, along with special teams slots (DBs fill out or special teams as much as linebackers do), even with some injuries. Fourteen DB scholarships are two less than the original calculation of 16.

After our adjustments, we have:

DL: 14
LB: 10
DB: 14

That's 38 scholarships, two under our target of 40 for defense.

Coupling that with the 41 ships on offense gives us 79 scholarships total on offense and defense. This would allow us to gives ships to a kicker and punter, and up to four ships to senior walk-ons. My totals came out to two more scholarships than we had on roster this past season (77).

In summary, I think the ideal distribution of scholarships (sans kickers) goes as follows:

QB: 4
RB: 6
WR: 10
TE: 3
OL: 18
DL: 14
LB: 10
DB: 14

TOTAL: 79

[ohiostate=life]

Good stuff Mili. I do have one comment. Since walk-on tryouts are before the recruiting process is over it very rarely results in a scholarship given to any walk-ons (senior or not). Usually the process is you walk-on and you aren't on scholarship but then the following year they can offer you one if they want you back. If it is up in the air you have to re-tryout with all the new walk-ons. This would free up those four senior walk-on scholarships. They would probably be spent on one of those positions you can never have to many of (lineman, running backs). They would be unlikely to waste a scholarship on a walk on unless he was a highly preferred walk-on (such as a guy like Drew Parry last year). Good breakdown though.

[MililaniBuckeye]

You still want to "bank" a few scholarship for senior walk-ons just in case anyway. I'm not 100% certain, but I don't think Tressel was failed to give out at least two scholarships to senior walk-ons each year he has been here. The fact we had only 77 total on scholarship last season (which included both our place kicker and our punter) shows how much he values having extra scholarships for those senior walk-ons who have stuck it out for the previous 3-4 seasons.

[wadc45]

great effort Mili...GPA.

[Jagdaddy]

Originally Posted by MililaniBuckeye

In summary, I think the ideal distribution of scholarships (sans kickers) goes as follows:

QB: 4
RB: 6
WR: 10
TE: 3
OL: 18
DL: 14
LB: 10
DB: 14

TOTAL: 79

I agree with most of that, and the reasoning behind it, but would tweak it just a little bit: My allocation:

QB: 5 (+1). I agree that 4 is sufficient, but this is a position where the afterthought guy just might develop to make a huge impact so let's increase the odds of getting lucky
RB: 6
WR: 10 I could drop to 9, but don't see a need to.
OL: 15 (-3): The way OSU uses one guy to back up multiple OL positions, I think a full 3-deep is plenty.
TE: 4 (+1) I want two all-around solid guys, a speedy slot receiver type, and a great big "extra tackle" type.
DL: 13 (-1): 6 DT and 6 DE is a full 4-3 three-deep + 1 spare makes 13.
LB: 12 (+2): Given the increased use of some 3-4 type formations (really more 3-3-5 I suppose) and the value of LBs on special teams, I'll take a full 3-4 3-deep.
DB: 15 (+1): The Bucks have been playing a lot of nickel and these guys are useful on special teams so give me a full nickel three-deep. I also see a great cover corner as a huge impact position, so I'm going to increase the odds of getting one.

3 Specialists (+1): 1 kicker, one punter, and one guy who's adequate at both in case a starter gets hurt. Edit: I could easily be convinced to use a walk-on as the back-up and save one more for the walk-ons.

That makes 83/(82 with my specialist edit) and I'll leave two/three open (+ inevitable attrition) for deserving walk-ons).

[WoodyWorshiper]

Guess Milwood didn't get laid on his recent birthday.

[censored] like this doesn't just "pop" into your mind. Obviously, alot of thought went into this.

EXCELLENT breakdown.