jackson said:
I'm sorry, but tell that to #29. you have to earn the right to play on and off the field. And if the priority for freshman is academics over playbook and the team is full of them then yes a conservative game plan does graduate more players.
The relationship between academics and playcalling is indirect, at best. Of course, not taking care of business in the classroom is a good way to end up on the bench. Tressel doesn't forsake the shotgun for the I-formation, or call more runs than passes because certain people may not be cutting it in the classroom. If he is doing that, there's some problems in this program. The only way that would be possible is if academic failure decimates the roster to the extent that it you simply don't have the personnel to run certain types of plays. That's a completely different thing from proactively cutting things back so a kid can spend less time studying the playbook and more time studying textbooks. If what you're proposing is the case, then I sure do feel sorry for what Urban Meyer is going to do to the academic reputation of the University of Florida - because I can assure you that that playbook is going to be loaded down there, and they're not going to go three and out so the freshmen can spend more time on their textbooks.
Besides, I thought Jim Tressel was recruiting smarter players, and that Admissions was raising standards. If all of this is true, then these kids are plenty smart enough to do their homework and learn the playbook at the same time. I really doubt Jim Tressel treats his players like babies. Going to class and earning good grades should be an expectation, as should learning and working hard on the football team.
Everytime somebody new comes into the Buckeye fold, some Buckeye geek anoints the kid a "Tressel-type kid". And this is supposed to mean that the kid is intelligent, athletically gifted, mature, and responsible. You know, the type that can handle all of the responsibilities that come with being a big-time scholar-athlete.
There's a disconnect here with this Saint Tressel image, and I think you're inflating his humanitarian attributes just a bit too much. If he's dumbing things down for the entire team in order for them to cut it in the classroom, what does that say about the quality of the kids he's recruiting? I'm gonna give the benefit of the doubt to the kids - I think they are good enough to be able to do both.
Jim Tressel though, (let's not kid ourselves) is a football coach first and foremost. I'm not saying that he doesn't care about the kids off the field, because he does - he goes the extra mile to make sure these kids succeed. But the plays he runs in practice and the plays he calls on the field are aimed at making this team successful on the field first and foremost. I think his approach is pretty evident when watching the game and when he speaks with the public. I think I captured part of that in my earlier post, and you captured some of that in the back half of the post I'm quoting here.
Freshmen are hardly ever asked to be major contributors out of the gate, even on a team as young and inexperienced as last year's. This thread was originally about playcalling, and playcalling affects the guys that are on the field, who in nearly every case, have at least one or two years under their belt. That being the case, do you mean to tell me that Jim Tressel was calling plays close to the vest because a bunch of redshirt sophomores and true juniors were still getting acclamated to doing homework? I don't think so.
Academics are important, and they do affect what players do get on the field. I think you have it the wrong way around though. Jim Tressel sets certain expectations for his players, and it's their responsibility to meet those expectations, not his responsibility to meet their level of achievement or effort. That is the reason #29 is in the doghouse, not because the playbook was too big for him to do his classwork.
jackson said:
More importantly than knowing who you are is knowing who you are not. The conservative game plan has more to do with learning to walk before learning to run...
I can agree with you on this point, strictly in and the on-the-field, football sense. This program lost 14 players to the NFL last year, and I don't think anybody, including Jim Tressel, knew quite what to expect out of them. The team was young and inexperienced. I think your analogy is apt in describing the play of last year's team. I don't think though, that the evolved gameplanning was a result of Jim Tressel being more comfortable with the academic performance of his team than he was at the beginning of the season.