For the most part we would need to know what the center was doing, what calls he was making regarding defensive formations and how the other lineman were responding to his (and the QB's) audibles. The OC would need to speak with all of them. It's unlikely that individual technique would be the issue -- although learning how to leverage power is crucial when going up against certain players. It looked like some lineman (in both games) were beaten during pass protection by speedier defensive players. With top defenses it might be helpful to have a running back or fullback (with good blocking skills) provide additional support for the QB until the O-line is operating as a cohesive unit. If the issue had been one or two players being consistently beaten -- Herman/Meyer would have made changes. The QB's ability to read and react would also be a factor. All this tends to improve with more game time.
I hope you're right.
Having played college football and having coached, albeit at the high school level, I've found that offensive lines are equal to more than the sum of the parts. It takes time to get all parts firing synergistically as a whole.
In any event we'll soon see. Right now, whether we like it or not, the Spartans are the more complete team and would probably win by roughly 10-14 points -- unless the things you've mentioned lead to dramatic improvements.
If we win I'll be more than happy to tip my cap to you. Meyer's coaching talent might make the difference -- but he's only got 2 weeks to prep and MSU has the week off. Not looking good.
Unfortunately officiating, of any sort, won't change the outcome of the MSU game. I think we've seen enough of the 2014 Buckeyes to safely conclude that they aren't a candidate for the new playoff format -- as yet. In fact the game in East Lansing might not be close if the offensive line issues aren't resolved quickly -- an un-likelihood if ever there was one ....
It's not just different interpretations of the rule -- but different interpretations of "what actually happened" by different referees at different times -- and by different observers (as can be seen on this blog). A premise of law is that "justice must not only be done, but it must also be SEEN to be done". While this isn't "law" per se, this rule DOES originate from lawyers trying to circumvent legal and financial consequences. THAT, sadly, is what this rule is about.
This is NOT about "safety". No one has managed to define that as yet. Unfortunately you can't ensure (head/neck/body?) "safety" in the most violent sport in the world. You start trying to do that and you will inevitably transform the game of football. In essence it won't be football.
If the best athletes in the world don't want to play football (as most of us know it), they should compete in some other sport. To this observer, all players/recruits should be required to sign informed-consent waivers placing full responsibility for participation in the hands of the player. In turn, a player can purchase any number of different kinds of insurance policies -- and demand the best equipment. Currently the best technologies aren't being utilized.