As I said, Perry has been somewhat inconsistent. But he was much improved from Minnesota -- and more generally this season. As you said, he also is playing a very different linebacker position. Grant is who he is at this point -- but he is splitting time with a true freshman (who graded as a champion this week).
In some ways, it did not appear that OSU spent a lot of time game planning and repping for Indiana, if that makes sense. I chalk it more up to sloppy play then being a systemic issue.
As I keep saying, the concerns about the run defense are very much overblown. Three really good backs have gotten yards -- but they have all been inefficient in doing so. No team has been able to line up and drive down the field running the football. Most of the points in recent weeks have come off the EIGHT turnovers. The turnovers are a far bigger problem.
My point is it would be more problematic if we saw one guy repeatedly fumbling game after game. Or Barrett making really poor decisions.
But each turnover has instead been a fairly unique circumstance. Sometimes turnovers are just fluky. So you hope they even out after awhile. But from a bigger picture perspective, even if they are fluky, if they keep happening they are going to lose a game they could otherwise win.
Neal Watson helpfully compiled this for me.
83 total kickoffs:
--29 drives has started inside the 25. Resulted in 5 TDs, 1 FG.
--32 @ the 25: 4 TDs, 3 FGA, 2 made FGs.
--22 beyond the 25: 8 TDs, 3 FG attempts.
So at first glance OSU is gaining an advantage by getting the ball inside the 25 vs. a touchback. Of course this does not account for what has occurred on the non-scoring drives -- whether it has flipped field position, etc.
And I agree that OSU's kickoff coverage generally has suffered recently because of injuries.
If you read between the lines, they think Grant brings leadership as a senior captain and they don't want to rock the boat.
Yes -- for whatever reason it seems to be having a bigger effect on momentum. I agree -- I think he should error on the side of being long.
On Saturday, after the kick out of bounds they started kicking it into the end zone -- until the last kick. Will be interesting to monitor how they approach Saturday . . .
I for one also don't think the risk/reward is worthwhile. At the least, I would prefer he kick it with a bit more margin of error. If it results in a touchback, so be it.
I owe Buckdubbs007 a big debt of gratitude for posting every game on You Tube. Much appreciated!
Precisely. First, it gives you an additional blocker against the additional defender. Once the QB hands off he is a spectator. So you now have 2 unblocked defenders -- the counterpart of the ball carrier and the counterpart of the QB. With the QB carrying you have 10 blockers.
Second, it makes the run game more diversified, brings the zone read into play, and forces the defense to defend more gaps.
He started against Michigan State . . . But was quickly pulled. Have not seen him contribute much when in.
In my opinion Perry should be keying the play-side guard. That guard zone steps left. Perry is responsible for the frontside A gap. He should shuffle, shuffle, maintain inside leverage on the guard, and then come downhill.
As to Grant, he is responsible for the play side B gap. The power play attacks the C gap. So he needs to maintain inside-out leverage on the ball-carrier. Gap integrity is crucial. By over-running the play he opens the cut back lane.
As to the second half -- this stuff is largely correctable. As I said, Minnesota was fairly inefficient running the football. Most of the yards came on two series. So it was partly just an issue of controlling the line of scrimmage.
I still maintain that the primary problem against Penn State in the second half was that Barrett could not run. It short-circuited the entire offense.
Ash's general response in the past to I-formation is to play a single high safety, bring an 8th man in the box, and use C1 or C3. That is what I expect to see.
I dont have a satisfactory answer for why Smith (Devin) and Smith (Corey) were used the way they were Saturday. Devin was largely used as a decoy (perhaps to put on film for future opponents). But not certain you want to feature Corey on either essentially a one-man go route or on a jet sweep -- it could have been nothing more than Corey being in the right place at the right time with the rotation.
We were very strong earlier in the year -- as evidenced by having the best differential in starting field position in the country.
I think injuries have particularly hurt the coverage units. And the turnovers by Wilson and Marshall the last two weeks are obviously problematic.
I think a combination of the two. Yesterday Ash said the run fits were off -- meaning they were not recognizing the play and filling holes inside-out.
So I re-watched some of the offensive plays against MSU last year -- and we really struggled with blitz pick-up with our backs. A huge upgrade this year in how Elliot blocked, which made a big difference ...
I held this out of the breakdown . . . but yes, the holding was really blatant. I think their philosophy was they can't call holding on us every snap -- so we'll take our chances...
He also had another great block on lead outside zone in the fourth quarter.
As a side note, OSU again used a nice wrinkle to combat the C4 safety on this play. They had the WR crack back, with the back then responsible for the corner.
Agreed. He doesn't quite have the same size but he and Dak Prescott are quite similar as runners.
It can't be understated how impressive it is that we lost the turnover battle 2-0 (particularly with the field position we gave up with those turnovers) and won the game that handily.