Lighteyes's picture


MEMBER SINCE   January 04, 2017

Recent Activity

Comment 23 Jun 2019

Agreed, I just don't see Hartline taking a lateral move to WR coach anywhere.

I also think he's going to be pretty picky about OC jobs - he's got a really good situation in Columbus, a lot of NFL money banked so salary is less of a concern than most coaches, and is still very early in his career. So he's in a great spot to cherry-pick jobs and make sure he's going to an OC role with real potential.

Presuming Day doesn't completely flop as a head coach so Hartline is forced to jump ship before it sinks, I would be more surprised if Hartline wasn't still here in 3-4 years than if he is.

Comment 22 Jun 2019

It wasn't that long ago that Friedgen and Schiano had their programs in the top 20.

The counter-argument to this is that Rutgers' brief burst of success under Schiano is pretty much their only highly successful era in history - they won the very first game ever played, then spent basically the next 130 years consistently ranging somewhere between mediocrity and garbage. Maryland is a little better historically, but still not particularly stellar.

And more importantly, that would require one of the East powerhouses to take a very notable step back. Sparty might come back to the pack a little without Dantonio, but OSU/PSU/TTUN are all on fairly solid footing*. Unless you expect someone to completely blow a hiring decision again (shout-out to RichRod), that doesn't seem likely.

*Relative to the rest of the division anyways - Harbaugh hasn't lived up to expectations and Franklin's getting some heat, but those are more like "10 wins a year when fans hoped for 12"...not the kind of 6-6/7-5 seasons that would leave a clear opening for someone else to jump up.

Comment 19 Jun 2019

What I took from this post is that Hove is projecting Ryan Day to win five national titles and double-digit B1G championships. Seems fair. ;)

Comment 12 Jun 2019

In fairness, if you're going only based off college production, JaMarcus Russell isn't even close to being on that list - he was a solid college QB, led his team to a lot of wins, and put up solid numbers in a major bowl game. He flopped in the pros but was solid enough in college. Honestly, I'm not even sure Russell is the most overrated LSU quarterback of all time because there was a nice annual ritual of hyping this guy as the new QB savior who would finally produce a remotely viable offense (and then the offense scoring like 12 points a game or something laughable like that).

Comment 07 Jun 2019

I think you may have missed my point. A derisive "why are we worrying about paying these kids" is ignoring the practical realities of the situation - Kevin Warren needs to worry about the amateurism debate and likeness issues and pay-for-play and etc, because this will be an issue that is going to shape the future of college football, the Big Ten, and Kevin Warren's tenure as commissioner. 

I mean, literally two weeks ago, the California State Senate passed a bill with an overwhelming 31-4 bipartisan margin allowing all athletes within the state to profit off their name and likeness starting in 2023. It's widely expected that after the House (California Assembly) takes it up, it will also pass there and the governor will sign off on it. That's an issue that directly affects Ohio State and the B1G.

It doesn't matter what side of the debate you're on, the fact is simply that Kevin Warren needs to be fully engaged and aware of the debate if he's going to mold the debate in a way that serves the B1G.

Comment 07 Jun 2019

Yes, Warren should absolutely pay attention/worry about the pay-for-play movement, licensing/image issues and their impact on the business model.

The current system has been under attack in the courts for most of this decade in various lawsuits. There are legislative proposals on the table in at least three different states (WA, CA, NC) as well as Congress. One of the Democratic Presidential candidates has openly presented a plan to change college sports' amateurism rules. The NCAA appointed a major working group led by Gene Smith to discuss the issues. 

How will it turn out? I don't know and neither does anybody else. But there's enough push for change that it's hard to believe that there won't be any changes whatsoever.

Kevin Warren, B1G commissioner, can be part of that discussion and help shape it in ways favorable to the conference. He could sit back and wait for the right moment to jump in. But he can't close his eyes and pretend that discussion doesn't exist, unless he wants to just let others dictate the terms and limits of the discussion.

Comment 04 Jun 2019

It's definitely *not* an either/or. The recruiting sites themselves have openly admitted that they consider the list of offers in their rankings, particularly if the offer list is clearly out of line with their evaluation.

Most notably, in a couple infamous fake recruits the past few years, the way these guys got star rankings is because the pranksters put together a nice fake offer list that drew eyeballs and got star rankings purely based on the strength of having 'offers' from a solid list of schools.

Comment 29 May 2019

It's great that he sounds happy with where he's at and really enjoying the lower stress lifestyle. We should all be so lucky to retire in our mid-50's with enough money and freedom to basically control the rest of our life. Awesome that after everything that happened last year, he seems to have ended up in a good spot.

...That said, the one thing that pretty much every successful retired college coach (and players too) says is that when you really feel the itch isn't the offseason, it's the season itself, when you're watching games and feeling that urge to compete, that need to win. So the real test isn't whether he's happy and content at a golf tournament in May, it's whether he's still happy and content in September when he's watching games from the stands. 

Comment 29 May 2019

In the 2007 game against Florida, OSU went for it on fourth-and-one from their own 29 yard line in the second quarter. That's about the "least Tressel" moment possible - handing the opponent at least three guaranteed points (possibly more) by not punting the ball away. And the game was only 24-14 at that point, with plenty of time left to even things up.

I understand if you don't remember that though and I apologize for reminding you of that evening.

Comment 22 May 2019

The personalized Heisman, I don't know if it's a new concept, but it certainly is smart recruiting.

However, in terms of the trophies themselves, it's actually not as hard to get the chance to hold one as you'd think. I mean, they're careful with them of course, but Ohio State really likes to show off their successes (as they should). Even as a non-athlete, during my time at Ohio State in the mid-2000's, I held the Illibuck trophy (the student group that coordinates the trophjy was carrying it around the dorms to build appreciation for the 'rivalry'), touched the 2002 national title crystal football (as part of a tour of the Woody Hayes center), and posed with a photo holding the 2007 Big Ten title trophy (random student appreciation day or something like that). Oh, and while I don't know if it's still the case, (one of) Archie Griffin's statues were on display at a (moderately priced) Buckeye themed restaurant in Columbus.

And the Heisman copy that the athletes get often gets given away or loaned or whatever - some are in libraries or museums, there's several on display at restaurants, and a bunch were straight up sold at auction. I'd recommend Googling it sometime; there's some fascinating articles written on the topic of what happens to Heisman trophy statues.

Comment 17 May 2019

Is there any computer system that cannot be hacked? 

Not really, but some are more secure than others. Nobody really started taking computer security seriously until the late 90's or 2000's (even today in 2019, many people/companies still don't), so anything that was built before then tends to have some kind of flaw.

That said, one thing from the article that should make you feel a little safer is that there's no clear benefit to hacking this - there's no likely way to benefit monetarily and even if someone wanted to just cause disruptions (like the article posits), this seems like an overly convoluted and complex way to achieve that end. 

Comment 17 May 2019

Correct, but she was actually later signed to a real deal with Youtube - the 'new song' part by Kevin is a joke, because the video itself is from all the way back in like 2010 or early 2011. It went viral all over the web (mostly in a mocking "haha, see this awful video" sense), to the point that it was one of the most watched videos of the year on Youtube.

Comment 14 May 2019

I think it depends on the player. For players who were on the fence one way or another, yes, getting paid some money now is definitely a nice incentive to tip the direction towards staying - a 4th/5th round football player or second round basketballer could improve their draft stock by returning, so why not stick around and get more experience while also getting some money. But for the lock first rounders and true stars (i.e., the same dudes who're probably getting many of the endorsements in the first place), there's no amount of money that'd reasonably be offered that would make them turn down serious NFL/NBA money.

The money from endorsements (while nice) isn't going to remotely match what a first round pick is going to do for you. Denzel Ward sat out the Cotton Bowl and got a $19.7 million signing bonus. There's no way an endorser is giving a cornerback anywhere even close to that level of money. Ditto for the NBA, there's no level of collegiate endorsements that's going to make a Zion or Barrett or DeAndre Ayton pass up a guaranteed contract worth $20 mil or more.

As for endorsers insisting on bowl games, companies don't seem to mind when players sit out Week 17 of the NFL season. Especially for national corporations that would want to keep the player into the NFL/NBA and develop that relationship, they'd probably actually prefer the player leave early and become an even bigger star at the next level. 

Comment 10 May 2019

Logically, I can't find a reason to argue with you...but there's a part of me that just thinks that Ohio State has won a crazy amount of close games and is due for some horrific bounces one of these years - Ohio State was an unbelievable 7-0 in OT and an equally-impressive 24-3 in one-possession games. 

Can't really justify it, just a vague feeling that they're due for a year where they lose an OT game, another close game, then have another loss on a ridiculous fluky play.

Comment 06 May 2019

A couple years ago (2017), Stewart Mandel (then of Fox Sports) did a study on the top 50 QBs in each recruiting class between 2011 and 2014 and found that exactly half of those QB's had transferred at least once in their college careers.

So 70% is higher than it's been historically in the last decade, but it's not a completely insane outlier year either. Who knows, maybe with the transfer portal and guys continuing to play earlier and earlier, having 70+% of QB's transferring at some point in their career will be the new normal.

Comment 05 May 2019

I'd like to see a series against Georgia Tech. It's absolutely incredible that in the 100+ years both programs have been around (and both at least "pretty good" most of those years) and they've somehow never played. Tech is usually fairly good, if not great, so it's a reasonably quality win. And given that Ohio State under Meyer/Day have put a lot of emphasis on recruiting players from Georgia, this just seems like a no-brainer to schedule a home-and-home series and get extra face time with recruits. Even more so now that Tech's dumped the option, so you don't have to worry about preparing for a quirky offense. Heck, even if you can't fit in a home-and-home, even a 'neutral site' game in the Atlanta Falcons stadium* would probably be worth it to schedule.

*Make no mistake, it would be an even or even scarlet-tinged crowd despite being 10 minutes from Tech's campus.

Comment 03 May 2019

Yeah, the "three targeting calls and you're suspended" actually appears unlikely to ever really be relevant.

First off, any call that's overturned wouldn't count - whether it's overturned during the game or later deemed to be incorrect (a'la Ward). So we're really talking about three legitimate targeting calls in a season. In a season that ranges between 12 and 15 games, we're effectively saying that you personally got ejected from 20%+ of your team's games. That instinctively seems crazy high.

Let's look at some data: ESPN prepared an article from the 2017 season (couldn't find a similar dataset for 2018) which reported an average of 0.23 targeting calls per game, which works out to 0.115 targeting calls per team per game. This basically means the average team has either 1 or 2 ejections over the entire course of the season. So effectively, the suspension only comes into play if your team has one player who single-handedly gets more targeting ejections than the typical entire team. If you're that much of an outlier, then yeah, you just might deserve a full one-game suspension.

Comment 02 May 2019

Agreed. The NCAA tourney is just too unpredictable to expect more than occasional Final Four teams. A team with enough talent and regular season success to get a high seed and show potential for deep runs? Yes. But whether they actually get there or not is way too random - relying on everything from the particular draw to shooting in a particular game to foul trouble.

Even just look at Ohio State's history under Matta: Of the two best teams in his tenure (2007 and 2011), one lost in the Sweet 16 in a horrific shooting night and the other required both a last-second shot (Xavier) and a furious rally from 20 points down (Tennessee) to even make it out of their region.

Comment 02 May 2019

I think reasonable expectations for OSU basketball to have, no matter, who the coach is, are something like this:

1.) Make the NCAA tourney every year. This is a pretty low bar - avoiding garbage losses OOC and going around .500 in B1G play is typically good enough. 

2.) Be a regional recruiting power. Pull in a couple Top 50-ish recruits from nearby states regularly, supplemented with other 3-4 star players. Not national Top-5 classes, but not like 50th either. 

3.) Seriously compete for B1G titles and make a deep NCAA tourney run every few years. Not necessarily every year (though it'd be nice), but at least every 2-4 years, there should be a nice enough mix of returning upperclassmen and young talent to go "oh baby, this is the year" or a bracket that lines up well or whatever.

OSU has had periods where they've greatly exceeded these expectations and been able to set the bar higher (notably, the early 60's and then the peak of the Matta era), but looking at the broad sweep of OSU basketball history as a whole, this seems like a fairly reasonable bar to set.

Comment 01 May 2019

Someone will try it, but I don't think that's the solution.

First off, that would be useless unless you use a true two-QB system - not a handful of snaps here and there or a specific package of plays, but legitimately "hey, here's a huge percentage of meaningful snaps". Tate Martell actually played around 4.5% of total snaps last year (50 out of ~1100), including some in non-garbage time as part of the short-yardage package they briefly tried, but that didn't matter one bit in keeping him here after they brought in Fields. Even if you quadrupled that number to 200 (reminder: this means taking a lot of snaps away from NFL first rounder Dwayne Haskins), I don't really believe that would have kept him here after Fields was recruited over him.

Secondly, if you tried a true two-QB system, could your team actually be successful with it? The only team I can think of which rotated QBs all year to great success was Florida 2006...and that was effectively in a short-yardage package where he only threw like 30 passes all year rather than letting him really go back there and run the normal offense to let it rip as a passer. Every other time that teams have tried a two-QB system, it's been somewhere between "mediocre" and "epic disaster".

Comment 01 May 2019

Yeah, I think that's the really interesting impact here. Historically, the best programs generally got the vast majority of the blue chip QB's. But if QB's really want to transfer if they don't see playing time, there's just not enough of those elite schools available, we're going to see a lot of former blue chippers ending up at places like Northwestern, Purdue, etc (and their equivalents elsewhere).