• 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!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Toughts on the O-Line?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Personally from what I could see on TV, (I was on the injured list this week (Back)), I thought it was a mild improvement. I am not sure how this group will do against Big Ten Defenses.

My biggest concern is pass protection there was one guard (I couldn't tell who, but I thought it was Kne) who continuously was allowing penetration into our backfield, and Sims (who I thought would be a strength) also struggled at a few points in the game. When you get bigger and faster athletes up against this line a lot of those Hurries may turn into sacks. Zwick especially is not CK when it comes to moving your feet, and avoiding the rush.

The running game was helped by the passing game. The O-line was effective more than it was dominant, which agains CUSA competition worries me. The only player I thought looked good all game long was Mangold. I could have missed it, but I didn't notice him getting beat or knocked back all game.

They did take care of their assigments well and picked up the blitz well which I really did like that.

The screens and sweeps did not work as well as I hoped today.

I would give the oline a C+ because it is the first game. If we see a similar performance next week it will be a C- to D+
 
Upvote 0
This is how I grade out the O-line:

How many sacks did they give up? - Passing grade
How many penalties did they commit? - Passing grade
How did they do on the goal line? - Passing grade
How many yards did the RB's get? - Passing grade
How many missed assignments did they have? - ?

From my perspective, they did an excellent job. Much better than the group in 2002. Cincy's defense was senior led, and Coach Dantonio knows how to put pressure on a QB. The ONLY thing that slowed down this team was the turnovers and almost turnovers. Those were QB mistakes and not the fault of the OL. Other than that, it's a blowout, IMO.

Go Bucks!! :osu:
 
Upvote 0
O-line play looking good

Try comparing this year's O-line play against 'Nati to the game they had in 2002. And consider that OSU's 2002 O-line fared well enough to go undefeated against other defensive lines in the Big Ten. In comparison, this year's edition looks very encouraging.

'Nati also had other obvious coaching advantages this year compared to 2002. The one huge disadvantage 'Nati had this year was that they had to come into the Shoe and deal with an OSU O-line energized by a frenzied Buckeye crowd.

A newcomer that stood out was Schafer. He made more than one key block for big plays so the the right tackle position looks solid.

The offensive numbers this year against 'Nati were much better. Overall, this O-line appears to be an improved unit compared to a decent 2002 line at this point. The exciting thing is that because they are young and inexperienced, the O-line is just going to keep getting better.

Go Bucks!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
My thoughts

I was able to be at the game yesterday and honestly I thought the O-Line played very well. They only gave up 1 sack if I remember correctly, and yes they had some trouble early on getting the run going. However I think that was more of a type of thing where they was just getting use to their front as well as how cincy was going to play them. IMO they did alot better than last year. Yes, its only one game but hopefully its something they can build on because they have a chance to get better from here on out.
 
Upvote 0
I still need to watch the replay and look at individual performances, but I am VERY encouraged, and here is why -

1. Three OL were starting their first game in front of a QB starting his first game.

2.The offense improved as the game progressed.

3. We gained 4 more yards rushing than we did in ANY SINGLE GAME last season.

4. We had 67 more yards total offense than in any game other than IU last season.

5. We gained 94 more yards rushing than our average per game last season.

6. We had 130 yards more total offense than our average per game last season.

7. We did this against a team that returned 9 defensive starters and was coached by someone we all have acknoweldged as a pretty good Defensive Coordinator - and who knew our personnel and tendencies.

I am very encouraged.
 
Upvote 0
I too thought it was a mild improvement over last year, which, however, does not say much.

I thought pass protection was somewhat adequate for most of the part. This aspect of the game was better than last year.

I thought run blocking was piss poor. This aspect of the game was the same as last year.

I have had some concerns about the lighter and (supposedly) more athletic O-line philosophy that the sheer lack of beef may lead to domination by the opposing D-line. I think the jury is still out on this count. I did not see a "marked" improvement in athleticism versus last year. They still had problems pulling guards as they did last year. While they were not dominated by Cincy's D-line, they did not dominate Cincy's D-line either. We won't be able to tell much about any improvement (or deterioration) versus last year until we start playing teams that feature 300+ lb. DTs (such as Wisconsin - remember Hawthorne?).
 
Upvote 0
I would say an overall decent first effort for the o-line. You're always going to make mistakes in the first game as a unit. If they continue to improve every game, then we should be in good shape for the opening of the B10 season.

I thought going into the game that, with Cinci's returning starters and MD as the coach knowing our O, we could struggle on o. It was a pretty good effort for the oline. Let's continue to improve in the coming weeks.
 
Upvote 0
They looked significantly better on pulling plays than last year's unit, and will continue to improve over the course of the season. The "athletic" type OL may have some run-blocking problems with bigger DLs. That is an area we'll have to note later on...
 
Upvote 0
Good illustrations in this thread by Oh8ch and Mili. I had a bad day watching the game because the rain bands from "Cane Frances" interrupted 60% of the plays. The touchdown pass to Ryan Hamby looked very nice but my friend seems to think it was a fluke because Cincy had blown coverage. I wonder if Coach Petersen is helping the offensive on any of thier blocking technique for passing patterns. They say he is very good in teaching these schemes and techniques. I hope this is true.
 
Upvote 0
I'm encouraged that this group will improve as the season goes on. I saw some good things. I saw a few holes missed by the backs, but we can always argue the point of line vs back vision.

I would like to see OSU go outside more with this linea and the backs we have. I would have liked to have seen some sort of option on the 4th and 1 play with Smith that we didn't make. It would have made future defenses think a little.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top