Get ready to add 'Hit-Stick Rolle'd' to your lexiconLuke: Given the "Final Destination" style death march the Ohio State linebacking corp seems to be on right now, the out-for-the-season Ty Moeller aside, which trio of linebackers do you want to see get the majority of the action this fall?
Jason: It's no secret that I'm a huge early Rolle fan and I like hearing he's holding down the middle spot. Undersized or not, he's going to make plays instead of reacting, which was all too familiar at linebacker the past few years. Flanking him, I'd like to see Homan as the solid run-plugger and Sabino with his athleticism on the other side. Spitler will be ready for action soon, but it's just too hard for me to get that excited for a guy that's getting playing time by tenure as opposed to skill alone. Plus, I haven't recovered from his missed punt block against LSU.
Alex: Honestly, I really would like to see the rotational approach using Homan, Rolle, Spitler, and Sabino, with Sweat sprinkled in some times and Hines at the Star. I think Sabino is the best athlete of the bunch and once the game slows down for him and he is able to do what he wants, when he wants, he will be a force to be reckoned with. Spitler and Homan are the most knowledgeable out there and have been around awhile to know how to play in this defense. Rolle is just a beast and his M.O. this year will be: see ball-hit ball. I'm excited to see this new era of players step in to the real LINEBACKER U.
Joe: Like Jason, I'm excited to see Brian Rolle get significant playing time. He's obviously a high-motor guy and the Bucks need guys like that to get everyone fired up. Not only that, but he's a highlight reel of "Jacked Up" style hits, and that's always a good thing for a young LB corps. I'm also looking forward to the continued development of Ross Homan and hoping he becomes one of the leaders of the defense. As for Spitler, it's hard to say because he's sat behind JL for so long I'm not really sure what kind of player he is. Sabino, Sweat, Klein, and Bell are all exciting young players, but hopefully we will be seeing them mostly in blowout wins.
Luke: Brian Rolle is rapidly becoming the unofficial 11W mascot. Moving forward, let's play the hypothetical game. Suppose Ohio State finishes the regular season slate 11-1. While there's obviously no such thing as a "good loss", which dropped contest would be the least consequential in terms of keeping Ohio State in the proverbial discussion for Pasadena? (Or: can the Buckeyes drop a game and still be on the MNC shortlist?)
Joe: I'm going to be the contrarian and say Toledo is the game the Bucks can most afford to lose. After a convincing win over USC, everyone will be expecting a let-down. USC was still in the MNC discussion last year after losing to Oregon State, so it's not entirely without precedent. That being said, I still expect Ohio State to win over Toledo. After all, it's well-established that they don't lose to non-BCS teams. If they lose again to USC, there's no way they'll get back into contention. But if they can win that game and then drop one that is obviously an outlier, they can still get back in the championship game but winning out in convincing fashion. I have to admit that the prospect of losing to an in-state team sickens me. But then again, pretty much any loss sickens me.
Keith: I don't think there's any chance making the MNC if the Bucks lose this year. Even if I were to entertain the thought of a one loss Buckeye team making the title game, to me, it would only be possible if we beat USC early to build some voter equity. Perhaps a loss to say Purdue midway through the slate would give OSU time to work back into the equation in December after everything shakes out. But, even that's a fairy-tale.
Luke: Keith and I are pretty much on the same page here. A loss to USC would all but guarantee the Rose Bowl would be the ceiling for success this season, though I do think there's an off chance an early loss to the likes of Illinois could be overlooked if the results against SC are impressive enough. I do think we're kidding ourselves though if we think the national perception of the Big Ten, as repeated ad nauseam by some certain analysts and bloggers alike, won't trickle down to the media and coaches should another big game dissapointment play itself out 2 weeks from now.
We wrap our pre-season roundtable series with one more Q&A about this past Saturday's jersey scrimmage. The defense won that contest 52-44 with Terrelle Pryor reportedly hitting Jake Ballard on a TD, but the Ohio State defense getting to the quarterbacks six different time. Which is the most telling sign to you: that a tight end was utilized on a scoring play, the defense was able to put that kind of pressure on the quarterback all scrimmage, or the offensive line was unable to protect the quarterback optimally?
Up Next: Corp, Juice, Clark, et al.Keith: Unfortunately, I have to go with the offensive line. It's a tired story that seemingly is told fall after fall leading into the first game. And, it almost never suddenly changes just because the season starts. Just once I'd like to hear how the offensive line is dominating a fall camp. Instead, we are used to the reports of protection problems and shuffling of players to fill gaps. As much as I want to, I can't get enthused about the TE's...yet.
Alex: I am probably taking a different road than most, but I actually think the use of Ballard and Fragel (Stoneburner didn't play) in the scrimmage is the most telling sign. With TP not allowed to be hit or tackled and the offensive line being juggled due to injury, I can ultimately dismiss those two from holding much stock in terms of telling signs for the 2009 season. I think with a young receiving corps and the fact that big time recruits at tight end want to see the ball thrown to the position, Tressel is looking to incorporate "The Jakes" into his offense this year. Ballard is a future NFL player at around 6-7, 260 and has the athletic ability to be a superb pass catcher and blocker. Stoneburner obviously is a match-up nightmare for opposing safeties and linebackers and can cause some damage, especially in the red-zone. I really think you will see the tight end utilized more this year as right now we don't have any proven studs at wide out and until that happens, look for Tress to give TP as many options as possible to throw the ball to and keep opponents guessing where the ball is going.
Comments
I would like to read some opinions as to what should the Bucks show USC in the Navy game. Pull out all the stops and give them a lot to worry about? Or play it close to the vest and not show 'em crap? My guess is that The Vest is going to play it close to the vest.
I'm not so worried about what they show U$C in our opener so much as what they show us in their opener. They play a "worse" team in san jose state. I am anxious to see how corp and/or barkely play against inferior competition, and how much of the playbook they use in that laugher of a game.
I'd like to see something similar to our struggle against OU last year in that game...
wishful thinking i know, but that's what I have been thinking about.
I don't know, I think sometimes it's over rated to "not show everything" if you can do it and do it well let USC try to prepare for it. A lot of really good teams are predictable, you just can't stop them.
I just want to run up the score
It doesn't Matter what you show to USC. USC has way better athletes then Navy, So what ever you do to Navy your not going to be able to do to USC. Its a totally different game.
I agree that Navy is a totally different game than USC. Navy runs a unique kind of option attack that eats up clock. It will be important for the Buckeyes to put up points when they get the opportunity because the game will be a short one with all the running plays.... A 7 play drive that results in a punt to the 5 yard line is not gonna be good enough here.... there will be precious little passing offense and alot of clock being milked.
I think the key to beating USC this year is honestly getting to the QB. USC will have an inexperienced QB at the helm and getting pressure will be key..... it will force errors that could be key to the game.
As long as we show "up" and cover in style I am good. A working offensive line would be a sight for sore eyes. I second buck here, whatever we show against Navy won't matter (vs SC) unless it is blown assigments, cheese cloth O-line and bum-shoulder-version pryor...in which case, get the purple drank ready because some time traveling will be in order this season.
Like I said, cover in style and get into 9/12 healthy.
I wouldn't mind seeing them run up the score on USC either, especially after all the smart ass talk from Pete Carol and Sanchez last year after the game. I know USC has a lot coming back on their O-Line this year, but as I said, Texas had a great line last year and we were able to get a lot of pressure. I feel like they'll hit the QB often in the game, whether he pulls a Boeckman or not, well I'm not sure.
I say let TP show off the gun vs. Navy, to the tune of about 40 pass attempts, and get every receiver involved.
This will A) make USC think twice about stacking the box 2) find out where we are in pass protection(huge) and III) see who is gonna show up at wideout.
It is probably cliche to say that the difference in a football game is winning the line of scrimmage, but you're absolutely right. Gotta protect Pryor and gotta get after [insert USC QB name here]. I have a lot of faith in our defense's run-stopping ability, and I don't think USC will be able to win the game by running it to death. They're going to have to find their veteran receivers against our fresh DBs...it's critical to pitch a tent in the USC backfield and force bad throws. I'm sorry, but if Mark Sanchez really is good enough to be named an NFL starter his rookie season after only playing college ball for one full year...perhaps we had absolutely no chance, even had we played a good game.
It will not be easy, but it's the key to the game as you say. We better hope that the new USC QB's are not as good as that guy was.
AGREED. Then let him pass against USC.
There are 2 mutually exclusive lines of reasoning here:
1) surprising/not surprising USC will be the difference in the game; or
2) execution will be the difference in the game.
I believe in #2. I.e., show 99% of what you have in your playbook if it means perfecting your execution. The rational being who cares--you know it is coming, but we have repp'd it, perfected it, and will continue to throw it at you and you won't be able to stop it even if you know it is coming. Really, in 2009, what could we possibly conjure up that would truly surprise a team, vs. the risk of just plain not executing because we have been holding back?
By all means have a few tricks to pull out now and then, but you can't hide your entire offense, hoping to trick a talented team. You have to practice what you intend to rely on to win. Iron out all the kinks with Navy, MACs, etc., so that come USC/MI our execution is flawless.
Another way to put it, is don't make excuse for why you are "holding back" because that is a slippery slope physically and psychologically...
Trickery is usually only good for one play anyways. Sure it works now and then, and once in a while you win because of a play like Boise State's statue of Liberty, but overall the plays don't work or you still lose in the end if you don't execute your normal offense.
I think we will be trying out numerous plays and formations against Navy, we really don't know what we are good at yet. Any new plays used in the SC game could fall under the category of trickery, being the first time said plays are used this season.
We don't have to run double reverses to fool the defense, simply breaking tendencies is huge, especially against a young defense, and even more against a new coordinator. This may be the one big advantage we have over SC, the fact our coordinators are familiar with our personel and their coordinators are still familiarizing itself.
no one out here is that impressed with either of their quarterbacks. it's only a matter of time before we see why.
Greatest Headline in the History of Sports Journalism . . .
Happy Dicks was a linebacker at Georgia in the mid 60's, which will make this article about the journalist from Georgia, the late, Lewis Grizzard, All, that much funnier.
On the eve of the Georgia - South Carolina game 41 years ago, I was hanging out with three Sigma Pi brothers (the Hound, Tex , and Bake), drinking a few cold PBRs at the old Callaway Gardens Apartment on the Atlanta Highway.
We were discussing the upcoming game against the Gamecocks and lamenting the fact that we were going in with several key players out with injuries, including our starting DE, Billy Payne and his roommate, MLB, Happy Dicks.
About 10:00 that night, another fraternity brother, Lewis Grizzard, came in after he got off work. Our buddy was inactive at the time because he had gotten married over the summer to his high school sweetheart, Nancy. In addition to taking a full load at the University, he was working two jobs to help pay for (as he called it) this expensive habit.
A talented young man, he was writing two columns daily - one in the morning for the Athens Banner Herald and one in the afternoon for the Athens Daily News. Lewis walked in, went straight to the refrigerator, got a beer, plopped down in a chair, pushed his glasses back up his nose and announced, Gentlemen, with any luck at all, tomorrow morning you'll witness journalistic history. I have submitted my column and if it gets by my editor - and there's a good chance of that happening, since he looked drunk earlier this evening - you'll enjoy the greatest headline in the history of sports journalism.
He refused to tell us what it was, and to be honest with you, we all forgot about it. As Lewis went to his lovely, young bride, the four of us went back over to the Fraternity house to get a head start on the weekend. The next morning, as usual, I went straight for the Sports Section. As I pulled it out, I could do nothing but smile, because our buddy had pulled it off. To this day, Vince Dooley calls it his most memorable column ever - all because of the headline, which read:
DOGS TO PLAY COCKS WITH DICKS OUT
There's no doubt about it, it was the greatest headline in the history of sports journalism
Awesome
Amen. The USC defenders, last year, said that the Buckeyes didn't do a single thing that they weren't expecting in that game.
Lewis Grizzard was an alcholic. Stupid article - save it for the uga site.
And you're a dickless, spineless turd.
How's that for writing? Does it meet your standards? Or do I need to write slower for you?