Don't forget the Indians, too. The '97 World Series was brutal.
Ha!!! You're right, almost immediately, upon reflection at my feeble attempt at a rationalization, I realized that it's much more important to just stay away and not to get sucked down the rabbit hole with him. My bad, :)
I agree with you. Players should get "touches" because, pre-game, those touches fit into an overall offensive strategy against a particular defense, and perhaps even more significantly, constitute in-game adjustments to take, as you said, what the defense is giving you. Ezekiel Elliott should get lots of touches. So should Michael Thomas. So should Curtis Samuel. So should Dontre Wilson. So should Nick Vannett. So should Braxton Miller. So should Jalin Marshall, with heightened attention to securing the ball.
But individual players should be targeted, first and foremost, because it makes the most sense for team success. It's most likely that, as to Coach Meyer's statement, team objectives are ultimate the basis for his, and the coaching staffs, decisions.
Doesn't the half full-half empty expression assume that the content of the glass is the same in a particular situation . . . not different as if in two situations? The content of the glass doesn't change with the perspective of the viewer from one situation to the other . . . it's already fixed. The point of the expression is that, in a given, single situation, one can either be a optimist (the glass is half full) or a pessimist (the glass is half empty), that is, see a single situation in two different ways.
His take on the expression, with two separate situations (you like what's in the glass, you don't like what's in the glass) assumes a completely incorrect perspective on the fundamental point of the expression and, therefore, makes no sense.
Actually, to be strictly up to date, with five wins in 2015, Coach Meyer's career winning percentage as a head coach is now 0.8497, which places him 3rd on the all-time list for those who have been a head coach for at least 10 years at a major/FBS school, behind only Knute Rockne (0.881 @Notre Dame 1918-1930) and Frank Leahy (0.864 @Boston College 1939-1940; Notre Dame 1941-1943, 1946-1953).
Here's a list of head coaches with the highest winning percentage, who have coached for at least 10 years at a major/FBS school:
Coach Meyer is 4th all time - after Knute Rockne (ND), Frank Leahy (ND), and George Woodruff (most years at Penn 1892-1901) - and the highest active coach. Bob Stoops (Oklahoma) is 14th. Nick Saban is 30th. No other active coaches are in the top 30.
Obviously, you're right. I was making a comment about the overall play of the defense, against a pretty good offense, and thought it appropriate to find some positive aspects from the game, while recognizing there is MUCH room for improvement. Kinda like last years championship run.
True fans look for the positive, while realistically confronting the negative. The positive is a basis for growth and counteracts all the negative that some "fans," not necessarily yourself, always seem to fixate on.
On a positive note, take away the 79 yard, 4th quarter TD run by Diamont, and the yards against, especially the rushing yards against, allowed by the defense by a pretty good offense, on the road, is actually a very solid game, 226 yards passing, 97 yards rushing, 323 total yards.
However, the turnovers and penalties must be corrected.
For those of you too young to remember, this is the real Cleveland Browns . . . with the greatest running back of all time:
One game at a time. Next up is Indiana. Let's Go Bucks!!!
Interesting side by side analysis. As the season wears on, the statistical analysis, such as F/+, begins to make more and more sense. Early on, the results are interesting, and can provide insights into immediate trends, but the absolute value of the data only becomes more clear as the season wears on and data accumulates, IMO.
One game at a time and next up Indiana. Let's Go Bucks!
Why does Ohio State seem to have so much trouble recruiting top prospects at the DT position?
You'd think that, with the clear need at DT, and the developing depth in the secondary and at linebacker, that the top DT prospects would recognize that their position is the clear need right now within our defense. A top recruit at DT would help to make this defense more complete and more consistently excellent. Play with Nick Bosa and company and help wreak havoc on opposing offenses.
Is it an individual focus vs. a team focus among the top prospects at DT? Is it a regional thing, the best recruits at the position at the present time seem not be be from Ohio? We haven't had problems signing top recruits nationally at other positions, why DT? Insights anyone? Of course, Antwuan Jackson could decide to attend Ohio State, and we land a top national prospect at DT for 2016. But focusing on landing 2 or 3 nationally prominent guys specifically at DT, which includes Jerron Cage at DT in 2017, over the next few years would be great.
Looks like TTUN could give Michigan State some trouble when they play in Ann Arbor on October 17th.
According to the S&P+ ratings system, the Ohio State defense ranks #1 after the first three games out of the 128 teams rated, while #14 in Rushing Defense S&P+, #1 in Passing Defense S&P+. As an aside, the offense is currently ranked #33 of 128.
Western Michigan is currently rated #94 in overall S&P+, #55 in offensive S&P+, #113 in defensive S&P+
From the S&P+ website: "The S&P+ Ratings are a college football ratings system derived from the play-by-play data of all 800+ of a season's FBS college football games (and 140,000+ plays). S&P+ ratings are based around the core concepts of the Five Factors: efficiency, explosiveness, field position, finishing drives, and turnovers."
More details here: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadef
According to the S&P+ rating system, through 3 games of the 2015 season, the Ohio State defense is ranked #1 in the nation among the 128 programs rated, while the offense ranks #33. Overall, the team is ranked #2, and 3-0 after a 2-1 start last year.
Next week's opponent, Western Michigan, is ranked #113 on defense and #55 on offense.
While the offense is getting the bulk of the attention, especially within the comment community, let's not lose sight of the fact that the defense is playing very, very well. I trust that Coach Meyer and his staff will guide the offense to a return to its excellent play. When he does, it will combine with a nation-leading defensive unit.
One game at a time. Too many talented players and coaches for this team not to succeed. To the players: relax, focus on the task at hand, and be the best that you can be. To the fan base that is often too quick to criticize and critique: please, give these young men a break . . . they are champions and have earned and deserve our respect and more careful consideration. Go Bucks!
Sumaic, thanks for your comment. I did a Google search and found what may be an applicable reference in NCAA Article 11:
"11.7.2 Football Bowl Subdivision - There shall be a limit of one head coach, nine assistant coaches and two graduate assistant coaches who may be employed by an institution in bowl subdivision football."
If this is in fact an applicable limit, it may explain, in part, why there is a tendency to combine coaching functions.
Head coach, offensive coordinator, defensive coordinator, quarterback coach, running back coach, OLine coach, receivers coach, DLine coach, linebacker coach, secondary coach, special teams coach = 11 coaches. Eliminate the two coordinators, and you get to 9.
Any idea how long the limit at 9 coaches has been in effect?
Even though my original thoughts about the question were prompted, to some extent, by the current situation with the Buckeyes, I did not, and do mean to directly imply that this, necessarily, has had any real impact on the situation with the Buckeyes. It really was a more general question.
I completely agree with you that Coach Meyer is as capable as any current NCAA football coach to right this situation. We are blessed to have him, and his assistants, with the Buckeyes. I am confident that Coach Meyer will get the situation straightened out.
Buckeye3M, thanks for the response.
You are probably right that the financial side has much to do with it, but, one of the issues I was driving at was this:
Has the separation of the dedicated responsibility and expectations between the big-picture outlook of the Coordinators and the detail-oriented outlook of the Position Coaches had any significant, adverse effect on the game?
Also, during the game, the Coordinators, those coaches calling the plays and reacting to the game situation, should be in the Press Box, where they can see the field better, while the Position Coaches should be on the sidelines. If the two functions are mixed in one person, does this adversely effect the game, since a Coach can't easily, or fully, perform both functions at the same time?
Coach Beamer post-game comments here:
You overcome complacency by following that age-old cliche, take 'em one game at a time. The talent is there, the coaching is there, the preparation is there. But great teams are great on the field. The most important game is always the next game. Yes, they are all cliches, but they are all true. Grind, grit, hunger . . . to be great.
Jim Brown, the greatest running back of all time:
Point taken about blocking and concern about injury. This multi-quarterback alignment could be used in a limited manner at very specific points in the game. And I suspect that Cardale Jones would relish the idea, in a controlled manner, of doing a little blocking :)
Rather than using two quarterbacks at different times, which has, as you stated, its disadvantages, how about using two (or more?) of the quarterbacks at the same time, in certain game situations or, especially, as an element of surprise to opposing defenses? I could especially see Cardale with Miller, J.T. with Miller and Cardale with J.T.. There must be a large number of run-pass options that could be run off these alignments. Have all three combinations, or even more, available to confuse/challenge the defense. If done in conjunction with a fast huddle, at the very least, it may cause a defense to burn a time out, if done at a key point in the game.