Re-evaluate last game fairly

[jwinslow]

Were there serious problems? Sure. Troy Smith tried to force some passes and one pitch. Our receivers lost concentration on a couple catches and that unluckily resulted in two turnovers.

But keep this in perspective.

Our defense was playing without three of its starting DBs. The defensive coordinator didn't trust them at first and cost us two early touchdowns (I might have done the same at first as him tho; hindsight is 20-20). The defense rallied and played a great second half save one drive against an excellent QB. Snyder also had some great playcalling on D that really confused a previously unstoppable PU passing attack.

Troy Smith is a young quarterback. He missed some open looks, but didn't do too much to hurt us in the first half. Then, with our backs to the wall on the road and down by two scores, he tried too hard to produce points and cost us two turnovers. These are serious mistakes, but he did a lot right to get us into those two scoring opportunities. With the right coaching and video, he can learn from that throw to Holmes and the pitch is obviously an easy learning experience.

Also, most negative posts on here are refusing to acknowledge one key factor: Ted Ginn had a minimal impact on the game. He played well, and I think PU did well shutting him down on some of the short passes. What does that mean? In the 2nd half, OSU produced offensively without Ginn. Yes he set up one of the red zone opportunities, but he was a small part in the offense. Smith scrambled well and ran a pretty good option (obviously the one fumble near the end zone, but the other was just a monster hit by a linebacker).

Pittman was also back finally! He showed that same burst we saw weeks ago when we started begging for him to get play time. And Brandon Joe had a couple of good carries. Roy Hall also resurfaced, and Gonzalez finally held onto a ball after burning the secondary as usual.

The UM def coaches have a lot to worry about for next week. This was a totally new offensive package for us, yet we ran it fairly successfully (tho PU's defense isn't spectacular) in the 2nd half. We obviously have other formations we've run a lot and can use also against UM. And there is no way UM can try and neutralize Ginn alone. They have to worry about Holmes too obviously, but now Gonzalez and Hall have shown they can make big plays, and Pittman is still itching to prove himself this week after only having a few chances last game.

I think there is way too much to be positive about to be upset. If we were 7-3 and had just lost a shot at a bigger bowl, that would be one thing. But we were already going to a smaller bowl, and every buckeye fan knows that a meager bowl game is a fair trade for a UM victory anyday. I think UM is going to be a big challenge, but the way the buckeyes stepped up on both sides of the ball is exciting.

Oh, and while Breaston's newfound health is not encouraging, someone should tell him about Sirjo Welch :)

Edit: additionally, we have to recognize how well Carpenter finally played for us. He has been slightly disappointing in a number of games lately, but he really stepped up and was a force to be reckoned with against PU.

 

[cincibuckeyenut]

Oh, and while Breaston's newfound health is not encouraging, someone should tell him about Sirjo Welch :)

Just wanted to highlight this. Sirjo has been absolutely incredible this year as a gunner. Kid can freakin hit.

Did Sirjo get any time in the secondary yesterday with all the injuries? Can't recall seeing him in on safety at all this year.

Any word on if Fox will be back for the team up north?

 

[sandgk]

OK - here is what I believe is a fair assessment --

1st half - On D we gave Purdue too mcuh time to complete passes on 3rd and long - time after time. More frustrating it was 3rd and long often times as a result of previous decent to good defensive play on 1st and 2nd down.

On O -- we too often left ourselves in 2nd and long through ineffective 1st down plays. This more than anything else limited the range of options for 3rd down. Also no Pittman left one of the better players riding pine.
===================================================
2nd half -- Agree with you that they let the dogs loose. Purdue had less time to pass. Purdue became very limited. Our D stood tall all the way until Orton came in late in the game. Then Purdue's O-line stood taller than at any time in the game.

The turnovers on consecutive tOSU posessions hurt big time. Giving Orton his moment of fame hurt more.

ABSENT THE TURNOVERS overall Our O was much better in the 2nd half.

Enough though -- Right now though I'm re-focussing on The Game. Back in The Shoe -- AND ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.

 

[seed702]

I don't post here that much, but I want to know if I'm the only one thinking this...

I thought we played well (we actually played better than I thought we would) on both sides of the ball. The defense really shored up in the second half.

However the play calling inside the 10 yard line, both trip was kinda dumb to me. First off, if you line Ginn up in the slot, why not run a cross-fade, and just throw it where only he can get it. There isn't one DB playing for PU who can beat him to a spot. Second, why not go 5 wide, and run a qb-draw? It's only 12 feet. =\

Also, I think T. Smith needs to work on the option a little more. I remember 2 particular times, he was being hit when he flipped the ball. If you are being hit, you don't pitch it. The first time, he got away with one, because it picked up a chunk of yardage, but the second one resulted in a fumble. The only reason that fumble happened is because the ball was late and behind the RB. It was not the hit that popped it loose.

I think we definitely had a week to fine tune the new offense. If our young guys can catch the ball, our defense forces 3 and outs, and we protect the football, I think we have a good chance against that other team this weekend.

 

[JXC]

Okay...the 5 wide QB draw with Smith? How predictable is that? If we line up on the 4 yard line with a 5 wide set, I'd want to shoot somebody. For the second game in a row, I really enjoyed the play calling. The offense really moved well in the 2nd half. Execution and not playcalling is what hurt us in the red zone. That was the first time Smith had to try to come back from behind...and he was a little shakey. Just like Zwick was against Northwestern. For some reason we seem to have a problem with turnovers in the red zone when we are trying to come back. I think that young QB play is likely the problem here, not playcalling. I think this game was good for Smith. It was something he had not experience yet, and in a hostle crowd. Smith is a crowd favorite, and with the game being at home, I think he will feel a lot more comfortable. I think homefield advantage is even bigger for a young team. Both teams are young. The game being at The Shoe is a big advantage. I hope Tressel keeps it up with the playcalling i've seen in the past two games. He's thrown some wrinkles, but not too many. Frankly, scUM doesn't quite know what kind of offense they are going to see. And I like that a lot. I think we can really confuse them.

 

[scooter1369]

I still, for the life of me, can't figure out why we can move the ball when we need to at the end, but not early in the game. We finished the first half with four first downs. FOUR!!! In the second half, we out gained and out scored Purdue. Troy had only one really bad throw and that was the pick in the endzone. Holmes was double teamed, someone else had to be open. The other two weren't his fault.

I actually liked the formations we were using and most of the play calling. We had a stretch of plays where we were way too predictable and we accomplished nothing on offense. Other than that, the play calling utilized the talent on the field. Troy is a good runner. We have speed everywhere. Using the option from the shotgun added a nice wrinkle. But for some reason, Purdue was still stopping it. We hadn't been running that type of offense all year. How was Purdue so well prepared for it?

 

[seed702]

Okay...the 5 wide QB draw with Smith? How predictable is that? If we line up on the 4 yard line with a 5 wide set, I'd want to shoot somebody. For the second game in a row, I really enjoyed the play calling. The offense really moved well in the 2nd half. Execution and not playcalling is what hurt us in the red zone. That was the first time Smith had to try to come back from behind...and he was a little shakey. Just like Zwick was against Northwestern. For some reason we seem to have a problem with turnovers in the red zone when we are trying to come back. I think that young QB play is likely the problem here, not playcalling. I think this game was good for Smith. It was something he had not experience yet, and in a hostle crowd. Smith is a crowd favorite, and with the game being at home, I think he will feel a lot more comfortable. I think homefield advantage is even bigger for a young team. Both teams are young. The game being at The Shoe is a big advantage. I hope Tressel keeps it up with the playcalling i've seen in the past two games. He's thrown some wrinkles, but not too many. Frankly, scUM doesn't quite know what kind of offense they are going to see. And I like that a lot. I think we can really confuse them.

I agree with most of your post. =P I just don't understand running the option when PU consistantly stacked 8, sometimes 9 in the box. At least give Smith an oppportunity to do what he is most comfortable doing, run the football. At least one shot. =]

 

[JXC]

The option worked some of the time...it was stopped some of the time. It was a nice wrinkle. Something else Purdue had to think about. Obviously they saw something on tape, and worked on it in practice, and felt it would work. I think at first it did, then they weren't seeing the sucess that they thought they would, so they went away from it. I'm sure Tressel understands what he was doing. I'm pretty sure he had a reason for bringing out the option...and frankly, I liked it, because our offense hasn't been doing so well lately. We've seen a lot worse this year.