Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
2002UNC is using the actual player performances of 2002, and not their potential going into the 2002 season, thus the 10 in kicking.
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter bigtenbadboy
- Start date
2002UNC is using the actual player performances of 2002, and not their potential going into the 2002 season, thus the 10 in kicking.
FMI
Freshman
point#1:
NFBuck and Illinois Buck make Great points on the second page here. I remember reading about the team taking a roadtrip in the summer of 02 to B. Hartsock's farm. That is the kind of teambuilding stuff that can't be duplicated. The TEAM wins games. I've never watched an OSU team that played together better than 02 group. Ranking the individual players is nice and all, but can you duplicate the team feeling from 02? They might have had sex with each other, I don't know.
Tressel really did earn his paycheck in 02.
point #2:
Can you really say Smith over Krenzel, or Krenzel over Smith? It is apples and oranges. What would Krenzel do in a five wide formation? What would Smith do in a predominately FB based offense? Does the Shot-Ginn suit Smith more than the I formation suited Krenzel? I think the real question is the 02 offense vs. the 05 offense. The D will be a step below but how much more will the offense be improved?
I expect one or two more TD's per game out of the offense.
This is a geat thread.
NFBuck and Illinois Buck make Great points on the second page here. I remember reading about the team taking a roadtrip in the summer of 02 to B. Hartsock's farm. That is the kind of teambuilding stuff that can't be duplicated. The TEAM wins games. I've never watched an OSU team that played together better than 02 group. Ranking the individual players is nice and all, but can you duplicate the team feeling from 02? They might have had sex with each other, I don't know.
Tressel really did earn his paycheck in 02.
point #2:
Can you really say Smith over Krenzel, or Krenzel over Smith? It is apples and oranges. What would Krenzel do in a five wide formation? What would Smith do in a predominately FB based offense? Does the Shot-Ginn suit Smith more than the I formation suited Krenzel? I think the real question is the 02 offense vs. the 05 offense. The D will be a step below but how much more will the offense be improved?
I expect one or two more TD's per game out of the offense.
This is a geat thread.
Upvote
0
NewYorkBuck
Do not read this title
I agree with what Carmen said above. Not a fair comparision b/c you are comparing post 2002 players w pre 2005 players.
I think if you think back to June 2002, you would paint a very different picture. We didnt know who our starting TB was going to be, we had no clue about or OL, and we didnt know what our defensive backfield was going to look like, and our QBs won a total of one game as starters. Yes, these were ultimately answered, but they were huge questions at the time nonetheless.
For my money, we are going into 2005 with FAR less questions than 2002. In June 2002, how many of us would have said we'd be nat'l champs? I dont think too many. If you take that survey now, I bet at least half would say we have a pretty damn good shot at being there.
I think if you think back to June 2002, you would paint a very different picture. We didnt know who our starting TB was going to be, we had no clue about or OL, and we didnt know what our defensive backfield was going to look like, and our QBs won a total of one game as starters. Yes, these were ultimately answered, but they were huge questions at the time nonetheless.
For my money, we are going into 2005 with FAR less questions than 2002. In June 2002, how many of us would have said we'd be nat'l champs? I dont think too many. If you take that survey now, I bet at least half would say we have a pretty damn good shot at being there.
Upvote
0
martinss01
blissfully stupid
couldn't agree more. tim anderson was without question the unsung guy on the d-line. if it isn't for him, the rest of the d-line has a significantly less stellar year and we drop atleast one game over the year. i think pitcock has the talent, but those are massive shoes to fill.LordJeffBuck said:
wilhelm was the "name" lb from lb U and won the nc. hard to not make him an AA. sorry but i gotta disagree with you here. do i honestly think schlegal is better? i consider them a wash honestly. though i would give schlegal the edge if i had to pick between them. i honestly never understood what everyone saw in wilhelm. he was good yes, but he wasn't spectacular. he wouldn't have started on the 98 squad had that been his senior year. i doubt he would beat out schlegal or d'andrea if he were a senior going into 05. but then im the same guy who whined and moaned about cie grant starting over hawk so... take that for what its worth.
ay is better period. raw talent wise and "impact for the overall team"? thats a different story. but if you compair them head to head specifically on the position of cb. ay wins 9/10. in fact, if ay were at the point in his career he is today in 02. gamble starts offense only and doesn't see a down on d. you have to remember, gamble didn't even know the defense. so that alone puts him a step ahead of gamble. ay is a little better in run support, cover skills are pretty close, ay knows the d very well, gamble has better big play ability. end result is ay is my #1 corner and gamble goes back to being my #2 receiver.
Upvote
0
Fungo Squiggly
Mortal enemy of all things Bucky
Yahoo Pickem Champ
Former Game Champion
'18 BPCFFB II Champ
'18 Keeper League Champ
Not this year he doesn't. I hear we have a couple of pretty good guys over there already.
Upvote
0
martinss01 said:
Gamble wouldn't be the #3 WR today, let alone #2. He was an OK receiver at best in 2002. Holmes, Ginn, and Gonzalez are all better WRs. I'd have Youboty at one corner and Gamble at the other if I were able to combine players from 2002 and 2005 rosters. Tell me Youboty and Gamble at the corners wouldn't flat out kick ass...
Upvote
0
martinss01
blissfully stupid
i was actually placing ay on the 02 team and not gamble on the 05. clearly gamble would be the perfect compliment to the 05 d. but if we put ay on the 02 team, id put fox and ay on d and play gamble on offense. that would have made gamble the #2 wr behind jenkins.MililaniBuckeye said:
i completely agree that gamble was an average wr. but he was worlds better than vance.
Upvote
0
I sort of bought into your reasoning until you said you'd take Fox over Gamble. I'd still take Gamble over Youbouty, but the two are close enough for a decent argument. But Fox? Nope.martinss01 said:
Upvote
0
LordJeffBuck said:
Totally agree. While I think Youboty will be better this year than Gamble was in 2002, they are about equal at this juncture, and both are better cover corners than Fox.
Upvote
0
martinss01
blissfully stupid
thats not what i ment. i said i would take ay over gamble. though i can completely see your disagreement. they are very close in ability. but if im recreating the 02 team and ay happens to be on that team. i would put ay at cb over gamble. this would put ay and fox at cb. just like fox played cb during the 02 season. that would allow gamble to play full time offense. this would help to round out the offense a little more. not saying fox is/was better than gamble. simply stating he was already the starter on that side and having ay on the team would shift positions on more than just the defensive side of the ball.LordJeffBuck said:
fox isn't part my who is better arguement. i shouldn't have brought him up, sorry about that. :(
Upvote
0
bigtenbadboy
3rd Rate Lurker
Now that we have the 2005 season to look back on I thought it might be interesting to see how your preseason assessment in this thread stacks up against your post season assessment.
I feel pretty good about my selections vs 2002. In retrospect I'd probably take Holmes over Jenkins and the 2005 reciever group as a whole over the 2002 bunch. My selection of Smith over Krenzel was validated in my eyes, although I know many with argue with that simply over the NC factor. I may still be willing to cede some intangibles to Krenzel, but does anyone really want to argue that CK is a better runner or passer than TS at this point? The bottom line is that it's a team game. In 2003 the Krenzel led Buckeyes lost two games a year after going undefeated the year before and I certainly don't believe Krenzel's abilites diminished from '02 to '03. This past season OSU only lost one game in which Troy started. Offensive line play as a whole was better in 2005 than 2002. So now we are down to Clarett vs. Pittman. Pittman proved durable throughout the season, proved he could get tough yardage in critical situations, and proved he could break the long one. He accomplished all of this minus the baggage of Mo C. Preseason I said Clarett over Pittman, postseason I change my mind.
Overall: Advantage '05 offense.
I'll post my thoughts on defense a bit later.
I feel pretty good about my selections vs 2002. In retrospect I'd probably take Holmes over Jenkins and the 2005 reciever group as a whole over the 2002 bunch. My selection of Smith over Krenzel was validated in my eyes, although I know many with argue with that simply over the NC factor. I may still be willing to cede some intangibles to Krenzel, but does anyone really want to argue that CK is a better runner or passer than TS at this point? The bottom line is that it's a team game. In 2003 the Krenzel led Buckeyes lost two games a year after going undefeated the year before and I certainly don't believe Krenzel's abilites diminished from '02 to '03. This past season OSU only lost one game in which Troy started. Offensive line play as a whole was better in 2005 than 2002. So now we are down to Clarett vs. Pittman. Pittman proved durable throughout the season, proved he could get tough yardage in critical situations, and proved he could break the long one. He accomplished all of this minus the baggage of Mo C. Preseason I said Clarett over Pittman, postseason I change my mind.
Overall: Advantage '05 offense.
I'll post my thoughts on defense a bit later.
Upvote
0
If I were putting a team together using these two seasons I would first start on offense and using the playbook from this season I would go with three receivers except for late in the game and on short yardage some during the game. With that offense I'm using Clarett, Jenkins, Holmes, and Ginn with Hartsock my TE. The QB situation is kind of up for grabs because they are both good at what they do, Smith is still coming on. Would have to see him in his senior season. Short yardage Ginn goes out and Brandon Joe comes in to block for Clarett, maybe even the second TE or Tyree at TE ala scum game '05.
Defensively you've got 02's entire front line, because they were that damn good! LB'ers make you drool with Hawk, Wilhelm and Carpenter-what athleticism and flexibility. DB's you cant take out Gamble. In 02 he was our best DB, period. At safety I might play Whitner/Salley instead of Nickey with Youboty my nickel back. What a defense! Nugent and Groom were possibly the best kicking combination in the history of Ohio State football so you leave that one alone.
Defensively you've got 02's entire front line, because they were that damn good! LB'ers make you drool with Hawk, Wilhelm and Carpenter-what athleticism and flexibility. DB's you cant take out Gamble. In 02 he was our best DB, period. At safety I might play Whitner/Salley instead of Nickey with Youboty my nickel back. What a defense! Nugent and Groom were possibly the best kicking combination in the history of Ohio State football so you leave that one alone.
Upvote
0
ScarletBlood31
Buckeye in Blacksburg
Our Offense is far better in 05, but our d-line and then Doss and Gamble from the defensive backs are superior. Hawk, Carpenter, and Schlegal are too irresistable to break apart as a linebacking group.
Upvote
0