It would be oh so easy to write this game off as “an off day” but I think there are larger issues behind this. But before I start in, let me begin with an August, 2010 article in the Columbus Dispatch newspaper, where sports writer Tim May wrote (link to article) (....At the Rose Bowl, Ohio State beat favored Oregon 26-17, giving up just 260 yards of offense. There was plenty of praise for quarterback Terrelle Pryor and the Buckeyes, who broke a three-game bowl losing streak.
But Tressel knew that silver cloud had a dark lining. Oregon returned six kickoffs for 171 yards, including four for 122 by Kenjon Barner. His one punt return went for 28 yards.
"You take those special teams out of the game, I think we would have had a lot more decisive win," Tressel said. "But you're not allowed to take special teams out of the game. That's a rule. So it was one of those nail-biters."
In the offseason, the Buckeyes emphasized improving their play in all areas of special teams.
"We've probably never kicked and punted the ball more poorly than we did (in the Rose Bowl)," Tressel said. "When you punt (and kick) ball to the middle of the field to guys who are fast it seemed like every time we punted or kicked the ball, schoooom, they went the other way."
In other words, "Have we studied it? Absolutely," Tressel said.
Whether it has paid off could become apparent today when the Buckeyes stage their preseason kick scrimmage, which is closed to the public. It's something Tressel brought with him from Youngstown State in 2001, a scrimmage in which every play is a kickoff, punt or field goal, with occasional fakes.
Because the squad is split, so are the first-team kick- and punt-coverage and protection and return units. But as safety Tyler Moeller said, one can still see who truly wants to be a part of special teams.”
OBVIOUS OBSERVATIONS:
•
The offensive line played reasonably well at times during the third quarter, but that was it. The rest of the game (before and after that), they looked like they weren’t sure what to do, what play was called or how to react against certain defensive situations. Sadly, these same statement can often be made in many of our wins over the years as well – it is just not as apparent when you lose. They don’t say it all starts up front for nothing – it really does!
The offensive line played reasonably well at times during the third quarter, but that was it. The rest of the game (before and after that), they looked like they weren’t sure what to do, what play was called or how to react against certain defensive situations. Sadly, these same statement can often be made in many of our wins over the years as well – it is just not as apparent when you lose. They don’t say it all starts up front for nothing – it really does! •Often, our linemen were beaten on pass rushes, sometimes wholesale missed a block and very often didn’t stay with the blocks they did make. These issues tend to compromise and break down just about everything else an offense can otherwise do.
Often, our linemen were beaten on pass rushes, sometimes wholesale missed a block and very often didn’t stay with the blocks they did make. These issues tend to compromise and break down just about everything else an offense can otherwise do. •At best, Terrelle had an off night, but some of those around him didn’t do him many favors throughout the game.
At best, Terrelle had an off night, but some of those around him didn’t do him many favors throughout the game. •Most of the offense (except for the wide receivers and Boom Herron most of the night) looked uninspired.
Most of the offense (except for the wide receivers and Boom Herron most of the night) looked uninspired.•There are some games where this kind of play just doesn’t get it and we pay the price for this kind of play. Last Saturday was one such game.
There are some games where this kind of play just doesn’t get it and we pay the price for this kind of play. Last Saturday was one such game. •Wisconsin played consistently, on all sides of the ball all night.
Wisconsin played consistently, on all sides of the ball all night.•Wisconsin came out highly stoked, ready to play and everyone in the stadium could see it. They were mentally prepared – we didn’t look or act like it. The Buckeyes lost their edge – who is responsible for that? The “desire” factor was so much on the side of Wisconsin it was disgusting.
Wisconsin came out highly stoked, ready to play and everyone in the stadium could see it. They were mentally prepared – we didn’t look or act like it. The Buckeyes lost their edge – who is responsible for that? The “desire” factor was so much on the side of Wisconsin it was disgusting.•I remember a close personal friend calling me up just moments before kick-off several years ago in our national championship game against Florida and was quick to point out how flat and nonchalant our team looked coming out of the tunnel. The phone rang last Saturday night right before kick again.
I remember a close personal friend calling me up just moments before kick-off several years ago in our national championship game against Florida and was quick to point out how flat and nonchalant our team looked coming out of the tunnel. The phone rang last Saturday night right before kick again.•Our defense seemed a little more motivated than the offense (not hard to do).
Our defense seemed a little more motivated than the offense (not hard to do). •It seemed that for most of the night, Wisconsin ran the ball at will. Any adjustments were either too late or ineffective.
It seemed that for most of the night, Wisconsin ran the ball at will. Any adjustments were either too late or ineffective.•A clinical breakdown of the film would I am sure reveal a number of times when this was not the case, but to me the fan it sure SEEMED like it was the case.
A clinical breakdown of the film would I am sure reveal a number of times when this was not the case, but to me the fan it sure SEEMED like it was the case.•That breakdown of film I suspect would also reveal a defense (and defensive coaching staff) that was once again overly slow to react and change.
That breakdown of film I suspect would also reveal a defense (and defensive coaching staff) that was once again overly slow to react and change.•You don’t “change” something that is working, but you do “change” something that is NOT working. It seemed like whatever Wisconsin did was the right thing. I remember a friend of mine told me about the time he was riding down in the elevator at halftime with several of the Illinois coaches in our loss to the Illini in 2007. During the brief ride he said a couple of the coaches said to each other (regarding our defense), “They don’t know what’s coming, do they?” How many times has this happened since Dantonio left?
You don’t “change” something that is working, but you do “change” something that is NOT working. It seemed like whatever Wisconsin did was the right thing. I remember a friend of mine told me about the time he was riding down in the elevator at halftime with several of the Illinois coaches in our loss to the Illini in 2007. During the brief ride he said a couple of the coaches said to each other (regarding our defense), “They don’t know what’s coming, do they?” How many times has this happened since Dantonio left? •No one is flawless and perfect, but on that first kick off return the team looked exactly like it has for the last two years. This is not a new phenomenon.
No one is flawless and perfect, but on that first kick off return the team looked exactly like it has for the last two years. This is not a new phenomenon.•Very simply, whoever coaches the special teams needs to be replaced – oh, wait a minute, NO ONE is coaching special teams.
Very simply, whoever coaches the special teams needs to be replaced – oh, wait a minute, NO ONE is coaching special teams. CONCLUSIONS:
These factors are unfortunately such a recurring theme, I can’t write it off to just bad players, an off-day, the other team, chemistry, the environment, and a host of other ultimately irrelevant explanations any more. These have become themes in the Jim Tressel era. Please understand that when I talk strategy here, I am NOT talking about the game plan for a particular game. I am talking about the philosophy, ideas, overall framework of the organization and preparation. When I talk tactics, I am talking primarily about consistent execution of the output that comes from strategy.
They can’t any longer be written off to just situations, players or opponents. We have big games every season – they are not a surprise. We consistently get some of the best line recruits of any school in the country. It appears to the uneducated eye (at least me) that most linemen aren’t much better as seniors as they are as sophomores. The result of poor and/or inconsistent line play is; the quarterback hurries, running backs are inconsistently productive, drives stall, third down conversions are inconsistent, and games are often won based upon individual heroics vs. the team performing as a unit consistently. The offense must rely on big plays to score, and pressure gets placed upon the defense, often with the defense spending a lot of time on the field - even in victory.
It is very easy for many of us to confuse having success with being successful. Arguably, a good strategy poorly executed will often fail, yet an average strategy well executed often wins. Excellent results are the fruit of getting both good strategy and good tactics right. I know many organizations in all walks of life that have success, but yet don’t know how or why they are successful. They succeed/win often in spite of themselves. Success for these folks often results from individual heroics and the effort of a few individuals - people that are so good they can get results in spite of the system they are working within. These organizations succeed but don’t have the framework to reliably and consistently be successful.
In football, at all levels, one key ingredient of a successful program is the framework of coaches and their desire and commitment to constant improvement. How do you think current non-marquee programs such as Iowa, Michigan State, Boise State, TCU, Stanford, Utah, etc. are successful? It isn’t necessarily because of great, consistent tradition, nor is it because they always get the greatest players, as they often get the 1-3 star recruits. It also isn’t luck. It is because (among other things) these programs have current coaches who have a philosophy and practice of making those under their control consistently better and always properly prepared. They master the basics, first. They learn and master both the HOW and the WHY so they can reliably repeat their successes.
BEING SUCCESSFUL is the result of creating a successful organization. This requires excellent coaching, mentoring, managing and preparing. People must continually grow and improve their performance lest smart competitors start to catch up. Going through the motions of anything can lead to a false sense of security, as one can otherwise become enamored with activity vs. true improvement and understanding why and why not something should be done. People and organizations that know and practice this are almost always consistently successful.
Does any of this sound familiar, even in victory? If so, what does it all mean and what does it boil down to? Before you criticize me about being too critical, I acknowledge and am highly appreciative of Jim Tressel and the successes he has achieved for Ohio State. He took over a program that was turning our tradition into a sham. He restored pride again.
However, I guess the point of this article is that in almost every defeat during his tenure, we can with little or no exception point to the same exact factors that are present in each loss.
I will offer one of my favorite quotes. I think it was Einstein who said something to the effect; “The definition of stupidity/insanity is repeating the same thing the same way and expecting different results.” It is time to get coaches who can consistently improve their players and infuse mastering the basics in order to consistently be successful, vs. periodically being a success. At least some of our current coaches are not of this ilk. We need coaches who are passionate about constant improvement and are committed to also motivating their teams consistently. As head coach, it is Tressel’s primary responsibility to ensure this. The fans deserve better, but even more so the players deserve better.
I am afraid until we commit to different coaches on Tressel’s staff, we will continue to have success along with the periodic wholesale breakdown games. Without change, we will all just have to live with that. Who would this be (for me)?
Gone for sure would be Jim Bollman (Offensive Coordinator and Offensive Line Coach), Dick Tressel (Running Backs coach) and Nick Siciliano (QB Coach).
On the bubble and placed under the microscope or “probation” (as they are either under-performing consistently or over their head regardless of their titles and experience) would be: Jim Heacock (Defensive Coordinator), Taver Johnson (Cornerbacks) and Joe Daniels (Dir. of Player Development).
Okay, I am done. Take your shots, but think before you respond. Remember, I am on your side and don’t like being critical.
Pat (a.k.a pjsbuck)
Editorial: Being a Success vs. Being Successful
By PJSBuck
October 18, 2010
2000-2010 Buckeye50.com, All Rights Reserved
Click B50 Logo for Editorial Main Menu
