-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offense -
If not for 3 fumbles, this rating would be more of the 3 to 3 1/2 variety. As it is, the fumbles dock this to 2 1/2 Buckeye leaves. It is also apparent that this team's offense is bi-polar. All year, we haven't really shown the big strike plays and yet Saturday, we scored 3 times from over 45 yards. As a result, we didn't have the long, clock consuming 8 minute drives and high play count totals. When we did have the ball, though, we were pretty effective.
In only 41 plays, we rolled up nearly 400 yards of O. At 9.4 yards/play, it's hard to be upset. What was most welcoming was seeing Troy under center most of the time, as opposed to the shotgun look. As I have harped on several times this year, we usually over-saturate the shotgun look and it becomes increasingly ineffective. Fortunately, the staff went more conventional and it paid dividends. Although Michigan State isn't the most stout on defense, the production (386 yards in 41 plays and 28 points) has to be applauded. It wasn't always pretty but it was effective.
Because Troy was under center much of the time, play action was little more effective. So, too, was the draw play which Pittman torched MSU numerous times. We also sprinkled in a toss sweep (only the 2nd of the year, first was at PSU w/Ginn) and a designed RB screen to mix in a variety of plays to go along with our typical Power and ISO stuff. And, unlike last week, we had virtually zero problems with playclock issues.
The gripes are still there, however. You have to mix in some constructive criticism and this week I want to focus on play design. As I have mentioned other times, the most overused word to describe our problem is "execution". Why? Because execution doesn't account for physical advantages and/or disadvantages. Plays can be "executed" perfectly but if someone gets beat at the point of attack because they are weaker or slower than the opposition, then that's not the fault of execution. That is the fault of the staff not realizing our strengths and weakness compared to the opponent. And, among other things, this is why teams use deception to enhance the chances of execution.
I want to focus on two plays, both involving Ted Ginn getting the ball. The first occurred in the 3rd quarter on a little flanker screen pass. It wasn't so unusual until you realize the design. The formation had TGII lined up wide on the far side. We had a TE on the line directly next to the left tackle. As the play rolls, our TE, Ryan Hamby, goes from having his hand down to being asked to lead Ted as his main blocker. It strikes me as odd to ask a TE to be quick enough to go from a 3 point stance, run 15 yards and get out in front of TED GINN in order to string him for additional yardage. It doesn't seem to be the best design and it should call for a fast, quicker player to lead Ginn and to not have to come from so far away. As a result, the play went for little gain as TG had to, basically, wait for his blocker. Below I have vidcaps illustrating to specific play:
The other play I want to call your attention to is the end-around we ran with TGII in the 4th Quarter. Lined up in the shotgun formation, we have Pittman to the left of Troy Smith. As most people know, end arounds usually require the opposing team's weakside DE to bite or get sucked into the play's original direction. However, on our design, we fake the handoff to Pittman who is running to his right. The first read of the weakside DE is the QB in case he keeps and runs, which we do often. So by virtue of faking to Pittman, it is my opinion the play design actually helped keep the DE "home". So, by the time Troy pitches to Ginn, the DE is waiting for him to push him wide or inside to the teeth of the D. TG tried to swing it wide but pursuit wasn't fooled.
Defense -
This defense was gashed in the first half. They gave up long drives, lots of yardage (249, OSU's ave. for an entire game roughly) and didn't create any turnovers even though MSU had 50 plays to our 17. However, in the 2nd half, Ohio State played their safeties a little deeper which took away some of MSU's desires to go as vertical. They still hit some plays on us in the 3rd but we did a better job. Michigan State came into the game with the 2nd rated offense in the country and we held them to basically their lowest output of the year. In fact, take our their 55 garbage yards in the last 1:27 and after the game was decided, and Ohio State did the best against MSU by far this year.
There has been a lot of talk about AJ Hawk's 19 tackles. While I think he was impressive, my player of the game is Donte Whitner, He was all over the field helping OSU to their 12 sacks (many of which were of the coverage variety). Whitner also had a sack himself, blew up two screen plays, had 3 TFLs and 11 total tackles which tied him for 2nd on the team. There were countless other plays were he was the person turning the play in and allowing others to get the tackles.
On the flip side, I thought Ashton Youboty was a little off. Yes, he had to TD return and the blocked FG but, in coverage, he had one of his poorer games. By my count, he game up 95 receiving yards and a TD to MSU WRs where he was the DB in coverage. Some of this he may have been expecting help but it looked like it was mostly on him.
Special Teams -
Feast or famine. A 76 yard punt by Trapasso, a fumble by Holmes at the 3 yards line on a KO. 30 yard punt return by Holmes and a fumble by Ted Ginn on a punt return. Sprinkle in another Holmes fumble and some mediocre punting by Trapasso and this was, at best, an average game by our special teams units.
What is interesting to note is our return formation on the first KO fumble by Holmes. In today's Columbus Dispatch, Santonio said he was yelling for the up man to field the ball. But, looking at the video, our up men are...well...really up. Like the 25 yardline up. There is a 25 yard gap from them to our returners. MSU exploited it, plain and simple IMO.
::Other Thoughts & Observations::
* I thought Brandon Mitchell did a fine job in replacement of Tyler Everett. Fortunately, Everett should be fine and ready for next week.
* Former Buckeye recruit, Javon Ringer was really impressive. It's too bad grades were an issue because that kid wanted to be a Buckeye. He runs with an ultra wide base and is very shifty. Gonna be a good one provided that knee holds up.
* David Patterson played his best game as Buckeye. I still wonder how a guy that weights 295 lbs plays so light...and that's not necessarily a good thing. But, nonethess, a fine game overall both in pass rushing and playing the run.
* On the blocked field goal, the biggest thing that jumped out at me was how many Ohio State guys kept their feet. And, the ones who didn't such as Nate or Ashton (because they went for the block, naturally) got back up VERY quickly. On the run back, there were 5 Ohio State players in a convoy to the endzone, compared to only 2 MSU.