Usually I do film studies, but this will not be that. This thread will be around ALL the reasons OSU chose to play slow last year. Was keeping guys fresh and limiting total plays a reason? Absolutely. But in my opinion, it is just one small reason. Let's talk about the other reasons, because honestly, I am getting pretty tired of people just saying "go faster" without realizing that impacts the entire operation. And yes, this has a dramatic change on the scheme, goals, and overall job description of the defense. 

Bend but don't break defense

This is not at all a jab at the 2025 defense. They were great. However, outside of 3 players, I 100% believe this defense was less "talented" than 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2024. I know that sounds crazy in hindsight, especially based on the stats, but go back to August. How did you feel about the talent level on the defense before the Texas game. I think most of us would have agreed it was a potential weakspot. No bonafide pass rushers, no lockdown corners, and depth issues along the interior of the D-line. 

The 2025 defense was great, and from a solely PPG allowed stat, one of the best ever. However, they did not get those stats alone. It was an entire operation aimed at aiding the defense. This was not a defense that could be trusted to get to the QB in less than 3 seconds without blitzing. This problem has been further aided by the apparent rule change that holding is legal against OSU DE's. In addition, while our corners were overall solid, they were not lockdown merchants like Jeff Okudah, Marshon Lattimore, Denzel Ward, Shawn Wade (as a nickel), Gareon Conley, etc. 

If you can't get to the QB quickly with 4 rushers, and you can't trust your DB's to survive in press man-to-man for 3 seconds or more, you have to win with scheme. And credit to Matt P, he had one hell of a scheme. But that scheme requires buy in from the offensive side of the ball. 

The 2025 defense limited points. But what they did not do is create havoc plays. 2.5 sacks per game. 5.5 TFL per game, and only 15 generated turnovers rank at the bottom of all OSU defenses in the past decade. When you create havoc, which was a key point to the defenses of Greg Schiano, the defense gets themselves off the field quickly. Whether that is thru creating quick 3 and outs, turnovers, or even allowing a few big plays. This style of defense meshes with an aggressive offense. The mindset is get the ball back to the offense quickly and let them go score. 

However, when your defense is not aimed at creating havoc, you are playing what I'd call a "percentages defense". If you prevent big plays, but do not get sacks or TFL, you force a multitude of 3rd and shorts. Across the country, an offense converts on 3rd and short (3rd and 3 or shorter) approximately 2/3 of the times. 

So as a defense, if you can force three 3rd and shorts, the math tells you that you will get a stop on of them. This is our defensive style. Make an offense beat the math. The problem with this, is that it can lead to extended possessions, increasing the amount of time the defense spends on the field. If you pair this with an fast-paced offense, this has the potential to lead to disaster, as the defense can easily wear themselves down. This is especially true in the transfer portal era where we DO NOT ROTATE. And we will not rotate moving forward. Look at our DB room for 2026. Prior to January, it looked like we would have the deepest room in America. Then the portal happened and essentially overnight, we have zero proven depth. That's just the way it is folks. 

With all that said, it forces the offense to play differently. It becomes the offenses job to keep the defense off the field, more so than the defense getting THEMSELVES off the field. It's called complimentary football. This phrase gets said by everyone and their brother, but I don't know if they fully understand what it means. An aggressive offense needs an aggressive defense to get them the ball back quickly and maintain their rhythm. A conservative defense needs a conservative offense to help give them time to get their legs back under them. 

This is why nearly every time you see a defensive minded coach get a HC job, the offense is conservative. DC's hate their offense being aggressive. It can very easily put them in a bad spot. 

Redzone offense

This is the 2nd biggest factor in my opinion. We sucked in the redzone, and Ryan Day knew it. The major downside (outside of scoring less points) to having a bad redzone offense is that it allows the opposing defense to also play bend but don't break. This limits big plays and forces the offense to nickel and dime their way down the field. This limits explosivity and forces more conservative calls. Yes you can still generate big plays, but these have to be designed big plays, which all require great Pass-pro, which we also did not have. You aren't hitting Jeremiah Smith on a quick screen that goes for 75 yards, unless the defense is playing aggressive. Our offense has been so bad in the redzone that defenses aren't going to do that. Limit big plays, force us to execute inside the 20. 

The reason this impacts tempo is simple. If you don't trust your offense to get 7 instead of 3, you are now putting more burden on a more tired defense to prevent big plays. Yes the defense may create back to back turnovers. But if the offense turns those 2 turnovers into 6 total points... One big play allowed and we are losing on the scoreboard, folks. So you shorten the game. We trust our offense to get INTO the redzone. A shorter game means field goals are more valuable, and we trust that our offense can get into the redzone more than the opponent can. Plain and simple. 

The Takeaway

All I want is for people to understand that if we do decide to go tempo in 2026, it means the defense will have to be different and we need to PROVE we can score touchdowns in the redzone.

We will have to create more negative plays and turnovers. The question is if the talent level is there in the D-line and DB room to make that happen. That is for the coaches to decide. 

In addition, if we can score in the redzone, it changes the game. Defenses will have to play us differently. They will have to be more aggressive, which in turn, opens up the potential for big plays from our offense. If we can do that, it may give Ryan Day the confidence to say, "Hey Matt, it is OK if you give up a couple big plays. Just in turn, force some turnovers and quick 3 and outs, to give the ball back to my offense and we will score 7"/ 

This is Ryan Day's decision and it really comes down to a few questions. Would we be better off having more offensive possessions at the expense to defensive efficiency? Can I trust my offense to score touchdowns? If the answer is yes, then we can turn it up. But if we continue to shit the bed in the redzone, putting the defense is vulnerable positions by being aggressive, has the potential to make things go very south.