Good story on OSUs D vs us... Flood should read this

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

film-study-how-ohio-states-single-high-coverage-nearly-shut-out-rutgers

Basically it says a single high safety read laviano while CBS played pressing man and allowed everyone else to be in one and freestyle 8 in box to stop run and blitz. Our O was not ready to look off that safety, throw to TEs or RBs filling blitz gaps or throw deep outside towrs who beat the bump coverage at the LOS.

Even with a poor game plan, laviano could have run with the ball more to punish this type of D.

We were seriously out-coached.

 

[kupuna133]

This is why I cannot understand why our coordinators are not in the press box. McDaniels would have a better view of defensive formation sitting up in the box. Being upstairs is an advantage, Being upstairs will also help slow things down for the young OC and take some of the emotion out of it.

 

[miketd1]

OSU had better athletes everywhere except maybe vs an 80% Carroo which might be a push at best.

Meyer says he had a lot of respect for Laviano, but his corner pressing, in-the-box safety style says otherwise. He knew he had a decided personnel advantage and challenged us to go deep.

Unfortunately, the only guy who did was the backup in garbage time.

 

[MozRU]

OC and DC should be in the box.

SMH

 

[Ru2bnj]

The biggest problem RU has when they play an elite talent team like OSU, is there are no real explosive playmakers on offense (with the exception of Carroo..who was hobbled). The WRs are more possession types and can't threaten downfield. Very easy for a team like OSU to play press coverage, with 10 defenders up within 6 or 7 yards of the line of scrimmage. Makes it extremely difficult to run the ball and when RU has trouble running, they have trouble moving the ball at all. Need more explosive players on offense and defense to compete at higher level.

 

[miketd1]

We had Fridge up in the box last year. Didn't seem to help prevent the blowouts...

 

[kupuna133]

OC and DC should be in the box.

SMH

And neither are at RU. Absolutely amazes me.

 

[DHajekRC84]

no, the problem is that Rutgers lacks creative coaches who can play chess and think a couple of moves ahead. We script out our game and play those moves no matter what the opposition does. We have taught our QBs to do one and only one thing at a time which is why they force the ball and never look off. How many times did you hear Reese and Kurt say the OC told him they wanted the ball out fast. We're the British army against the Patriots, stand in a straight line and let the other guys improvise.

Exactly the reason Rettig's finding something like 8 different receivers in the first game vs. Laviano's three TDs to Carroo excited me more. Know it would matter when the big boys came and took Carroo out of the game.

 

[DHajekRC84]

one other thing. If our OC is going to stand on the sidelines and talk to the QB,, please learn to cover your mouth. I am no lip reading expert but I could almost read his conversation word for word the other night . I am sure there is a reason why almost every other school's coaches do that.

 

[kupuna133]

We had Fridge up in the box last year. Didn't seem to help prevent the blowouts...[/QUOTE
That is why both coordinators should be in the box. Thanks for adding to the discussion though!!

 

[jellyman]

film-study-how-ohio-states-single-high-coverage-nearly-shut-out-rutgers

Basically it says a single high safety read laviano while CBS played pressing man and allowed everyone else to be in one and freestyle 8 in box to stop run and blitz. Our O was not ready to look off that safety, throw to TEs or RBs filling blitz gaps or throw deep outside towrs who beat the bump coverage at the LOS.

Even with a poor game plan, laviano could have run with the ball more to punish this type of D.

We were seriously out-coached.

You obviously did not read the entire article, or only drew from it what you wanted to.

It is a very good article, by the way, and a very good analysis. I noticed very similar things during the game, though the article articulated it better than I in many ways.

One of the things I had noticed against both Indiana and MSU was that RU was very successful with crossing routes - both short crossing routes (4-5 yards deep) and medium crossing routes (8-10 yards deep). Crossing routes can be very effective when the WR's face man or even press coverage (they are not as reliant on timing like out, fade or corner routes, so press coverage does not mess up the timing). BUT ... crossing routes, even short ones, require TIME to run, and thus require pass protection. I was noticing that Laviano was not getting enough time to sit and wait on crossing routes. On at least 3 occasions I saw he had to throw the ball before the receiver had a chance to beat the defender on a crossing route resulting in an incomplete pass (the defender batted the ball).

Specifically, on the interception, the OSU defense played that rollout even better than I remembered, watching it on the loop in the article. First, the 3 closer-in receiver targets were extremely well covered, from the get-go (Arci, either Goodwin or another TE and Agudosi). Which means from the start Laviano had just ONE passing option, the deeper route. Second, there was even greater pressure on Laviano than I thought: OSU had TWO pass rushers closing in (I had only remembered one). In particular, #5 basically was close enough to Laviano that Laviano could not step INTO the throw to get good zip. Third, the clip did show that the receiver (Patton?) was SLIGHTLY open. BUT it also showed it would have required a PERFECT throw, with touch, to loop the pass over a multitude of defenders - and do so with a lot of zip - 22-23 yards from the line of scrimmage, on the run, with 2 OSU pass rushers in his face. Yes, possible ... but also that is a pass with a high degree of difficulty. That said, the receiver was more open than I thought from memory, and maybe the decision to throw was not as bad as I thought initially ... but NOT an easy play to execute.

The article basically states that OSU bet its DB's could play close enough man to man with RU's receivers before the pressure by 4 and 5 men rushes got the QB. And if OSU's DB's COULD do that, then OSU could play 9-10 men within 5-7 yards of the line of scrimmage. But the OSU coaches were betting on the OSU defenders being generally more athletic than the RU offensive players (receivers and OL). And they were right, especially with a limited and then absent Carroo - and with Grant also being not 100%.

 

[jellyman]

OSU had better athletes everywhere except maybe vs an 80% Carroo which might be a push at best.

Meyer says he had a lot of respect for Laviano, but his corner pressing, in-the-box safety style says otherwise. He knew he had a decided personnel advantage and challenged us to go deep.

Unfortunately, the only guy who did was the backup in garbage time.

No, the defensive scheme argued that OSU felt they had decided personnel advantages that could reduce the QB effectiveness: That OSU's DL, LB's and DB's had big advantages over RU's OL and receivers, except maybe Carroo - except Carroo was not 100%. If you can cover the receivers for 2-3 seconds, and pressure the QB in that time frame, you negate the efficiency of the QB.

 

[miketd1]

jelly: I think we're agreeing more than disagreeing.

But I'm saying that the article says Meyer claims he had great respect for Laviano. But when you move your safeties up and press your corners on their islands, that's not showing much respect at all.

 

[kupuna133]

You obviously did not read the entire article, or only drew from it what you wanted to.

It is a very good article, by the way, and a very good analysis. I noticed very similar things during the game, though the article articulated it better than I in many ways.

One of the things I had noticed against both Indiana and MSU was that RU was very successful with crossing routes - both short crossing routes (4-5 yards deep) and medium crossing routes (8-10 yards deep). Crossing routes can be very effective when the WR's face man or even press coverage (they are not as reliant on timing like out, fade or corner routes, so press coverage does not mess up the timing). BUT ... crossing routes, even short ones, require TIME to run, and thus require pass protection. I was noticing that Laviano was not getting enough time to sit and wait on crossing routes. On at least 3 occasions I saw he had to throw the ball before the receiver had a chance to beat the defender on a crossing route resulting in an incomplete pass (the defender batted the ball).

Specifically, on the interception, the OSU defense played that rollout even better than I remembered, watching it on the loop in the article. First, the 3 closer-in receiver targets were extremely well covered, from the get-go (Arci, either Goodwin or another TE and Agudosi). Which means from the start Laviano had just ONE passing option, the deeper route. Second, there was even greater pressure on Laviano than I thought: OSU had TWO pass rushers closing in (I had only remembered one). In particular, #5 basically was close enough to Laviano that Laviano could not step INTO the throw to get good zip. Third, the clip did show that the receiver (Patton?) was SLIGHTLY open. BUT it also showed it would have required a PERFECT throw, with touch, to loop the pass over a multitude of defenders - and do so with a lot of zip - 22-23 yards from the line of scrimmage, on the run, with 2 OSU pass rushers in his face. Yes, possible ... but also that is a pass with a high degree of difficulty. That said, the receiver was more open than I thought from memory, and maybe the decision to throw was not as bad as I thought initially ... but NOT an easy play to execute.

The article basically states that OSU bet its DB's could play close enough man to man with RU's receivers before the pressure by 4 and 5 men rushes got the QB. And if OSU's DB's COULD do that, then OSU could play 9-10 men within 5-7 yards of the line of scrimmage. But the OSU coaches were betting on the OSU defenders being generally more athletic than the RU offensive players (receivers and OL). And they were right, especially with a limited and then absent Carroo - and with Grant also being not 100%.

I agree with your assessment. That is why I am surprised RU did not go back to the successful Carroo sideline go route they ran on the first possession. Need limited time to protect and you isolate your receiver on the outside. Crossing routes work on any level. In any sport any time you cross your defenders face (face cut) you have an advantage. Do not understand why RU does not use them effectively. Wazzu, Michigan State Ohio State all ran the shallow and deep crossing routes almost exclusively with great success.

 

[jellyman]

jelly: I think we're agreeing more than disagreeing.

But I'm saying that the article says Meyer claims he had great respect for Laviano. But when you move your safeties up and press your corners on their islands, that's not showing much respect at all.

I understand where we agree - which is great, by the way.

I do not agree it is showing disrespect for Laviano, however. I think it is OSU deciding they can pressure the heck out of Laviano before the receivers can get open if they can press coverage the receivers one on one. Therefore they can prevent even the short passing game from being effective AND stop the running game. More of a "disrespect" for RU's OL and WR's than Laviano. In my opinion, at least.

 

[DHajekRC84]

More of a "disrespect" for RU's OL and WR's than Laviano. In my opinion, at least.

word

 

[jellyman]

I agree with your assessment. That is why I am surprised RU did not go back to the successful Carroo sideline go route they ran on the first possession. Need limited time to protect and you isolate your receiver on the outside. Crossing routes work on any level. In any sport any time you cross your defenders face (face cut) you have an advantage. Do not understand why RU does not use them effectively. Wazzu, Michigan State Ohio State all ran the shallow and deep crossing routes almost exclusively with great success.

RU ran the crossing routes very well against MSU and Indiana. It is a bread and butter play for RU, along with the TE flare, and the out/up and in/sideline routes (sure I am getting that label wrong, LOL). Carroo, Agudosi and Grant all have had success with the crossing routes. But even a SHORT crossing route requires at least 3 or 4 seconds to run effectively, and a medium crossing route can take even longer. Laviano very rarely had 3-4 seconds.

Plus, I suspect that with one safety and the LB's within 5 yards of the LOS, that makes the short (4-5 yard deep) crossing routes less effective until the receiver clears the hashmark (or reaches the hashmark), thus requiring even a little more time to run the route than crossing routes which at times could be open over the exact middle of the field.

 

[miketd1]

Not to mention the ease with which it's able to disguise where the pressure will come from when you have a crowded box...

 

[ruhudsonfan]

I understand where we agree - which is great, by the way.

I do not agree it is showing disrespect for Laviano, however. I think it is OSU deciding they can pressure the heck out of Laviano before the receivers can get open if they can press coverage the receivers one on one. Therefore they can prevent even the short passing game from being effective AND stop the running game. More of a "disrespect" for RU's OL and WR's than Laviano. In my opinion, at least.

I'd suggest if you look at Laviano's passing distribution chart you might come to a different conclusion...or at least you should.

 

[RUJMM78]

We had Fridge up in the box last year. Didn't seem to help prevent the blowouts...

Against elite football program the talent and coaching will be superior to programs like Rutgers.The absence of playmakers is well known by fans and opponents .When Rutgers starts defeating teams with a winning record that will be the signal that the program is heading in a positive direction.In the meantime fans can expect 3-4 blowouts per season.

 

[kupuna133]

I'd suggest if you look at Laviano's passing distribution chart you might come to a different conclusion...or at least you should.

I think it is a total disrespect of Laviano and less the receivers and O line. OSU knew that if they can force the QB to make the throw he is not comfortable with they would have success. They were more concerned to stop the run game and take their chances forcing Laviano to play the deep ball.

 

[miketd1]

78: We have playmakers, but I think they're vastly underutilized. Grant is a case-in-point.

I mean can we at least see Grant on a fake end-around to keep the DE honest?
How about lining him up behind a spread bunch set as a threat to either bubble or fake bubble fade?
What about motioning him into the backfield and have him run a wheel route?
Or have him start in the backfield, have the QB roll right, then hit him with a screen on the other side?

This is exactly how Chip Kelly used DeSean Jackson.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

You obviously did not read the entire article, or only drew from it what you wanted to.
.

Really? How about telling me what I missed rather than just reiterating what the story said to boost the value of your analysis? I guess you did not like my summary of your analysis as a list of excuses for not having a better plan.

 

[DHajekRC84]

But even a SHORT crossing route requires at least 3 or 4 seconds to run effectively, and a medium crossing route can take even longer. Laviano very rarely had 3-4 seconds.

I think a 10 yard crossing route is like a 3 step drop and between 2.-2.5 seconds. And he often didn't have that. But that is why you try and roll your athletic QB who can also run. And as I heard time and time again listening to the experts in the booth..you need to change the rally point for the d linemen from 5 yards behind center to some other place.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

I think it is a total disrespect of Laviano and less the receivers and O line. OSU knew that if they can force the QB to make the throw he is not comfortable with they would have success. They were more concerned to stop the run game and take their chances forcing Laviano to play the deep ball.

Exactly correct imo. Which is why I said we had to abandon the run-first to set up the pass thing... For this game and the whole season.. Save maybe army game. We tell everyone we are run first. We call plays as a run first. It takes a decent team and DC 2 seconds to decide to take away the run and take their chances in man vs deep balls.

 

[miketd1]

GoodOl: Which is exactly why we have so many people clamoring for Rettig. It's not that we think Laviano stinks. Quite the contrary -- he's very good at what he does. But it's what he does not do very well that kills this run-first pro-style offense. Namely throw it deep to keep the defense honest.

 

[brgossRU90]

It boggles my mind that we continue to run the kind of offense we do without even adding the relatively easy and not even new wrinkle of a qb that is a real threat to run. 30 years ago John Elway was revolutionizing the nfl by scrambling all over the place and we still have virtually immobile pocket passers.

 

[Mr_Twister]

Talent, strength, speed, and size chasm is great. Reverse the coaching staffs and the outcome is the same. Bill Belichick could not have materially changed the outcome if he were on the Rutgers sideline.

 

[kupuna133]

RU ran the crossing routes very well against MSU and Indiana. It is a bread and butter play for RU, along with the TE flare, and the out/up and in/sideline routes (sure I am getting that label wrong, LOL). Carroo, Agudosi and Grant all have had success with the crossing routes. But even a SHORT crossing route requires at least 3 or 4 seconds to run effectively, and a medium crossing route can take even longer. Laviano very rarely had 3-4 seconds.

Plus, I suspect that with one safety and the LB's within 5 yards of the LOS, that makes the short (4-5 yard deep) crossing routes less effective until the receiver clears the hashmark (or reaches the hashmark), thus requiring even a little more time to run the route than crossing routes which at times could be open over the exact middle of the field.

Your timing is a little off. A shallow crossing route or a simple stop route takes less than 2 seconds. Deep routes are more of the time frame you are referring and that is why I do not understand why they continue to run elaborate deep routes if they have no intention to throw them. Decoy routes only work if there is an intent to throw them on occassion

 

[ruhudsonfan]

OSU's defensive scheme centered on two things.

1) They (RU) can't block us (OSU). Which means we will get to the QB regularly.

2) On the rare down they do block us, Laviano doesn't go through his progressions. If his primary is covered, he's throwing it to him anyway, taking a sack or otherwise having a negative impact play.

A single high safety indicates that they feel they have the athletic advantage and have faith that the QB will not look the safety off and go to the opposite side of the field.

Laviano has almost 48% of his completions to backs and TEs. At first glance, you might be inclined to say, "see hudson, he DOES go through his progressions and is checking down." However, we know that in the pro-set, those are designed plays to hit backs and TEs.

He does throw shallow crosses pretty well. Which is predominantly a West Coast set staple. So, what does that continue to tell you about our scheme and our talent? Or, our scheme and who is playing the position?

 

[AreYouNUTS]

film-study-how-ohio-states-single-high-coverage-nearly-shut-out-rutgers

Basically it says a single high safety read laviano while CBS played pressing man and allowed everyone else to be in one and freestyle 8 in box to stop run and blitz. Our O was not ready to look off that safety, throw to TEs or RBs filling blitz gaps or throw deep outside towrs who beat the bump coverage at the LOS.

Even with a poor game plan, laviano could have run with the ball more to punish this type of D.

We were seriously out-coached.

Gee, shocker.

 

[miketd1]

Although the shallow cross may be quick to develop, that route may not be the primary receiver on the play. For example, most teams run mesh with the play side post as the #1 read then the opposite crosser:

Another variation is the shallow cross:

The issue here is that you need the shallow to at least get to the middle of the field. The reason is because you want him to attract the attention of the linebackers in the hopes that it opens up the dig behind it. So that's not a 2 second play. More like 3-5. A variation of this is to have the dig on the same side (called "FOLLOW"), but the same issue persists.

There are very few 2 second routes (smoke throw to uncovered receiver, slant, quick out come to mind).

PS: Mesh with Grant lined up in the backfield as the 3rd read/wheel route would work nicely against the Cover-3 press that OSU was employing. Chip Kelly loves that route because it typically pairs Sproles up against a LB running towards the sideline and then downfield.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

GoodOl: Which is exactly why we have so many people clamoring for Rettig. It's not that we think Laviano stinks. Quite the contrary -- he's very good at what he does. But it's what he does not do very well that kills this run-first pro-style offense. Namely throw it deep to keep the defense honest.

Agreed. Laviano is serviceable to good if used correctly. But the fans and team deserve to see if Rettig is better or can be complimentary.

 

[bethlehemfan]

when Rutgers moved the pocket osu only defended half the field.

 

[jellyman]

Really? How about telling me what I missed rather than just reiterating what the story said to boost the value of your analysis? I guess you did not like my summary of your analysis as a list of excuses for not having a better plan.

Okay, so here is what you said, and I will address point by point:

Basically it says a single high safety read laviano while CBS played pressing man and allowed everyone else to be in one and freestyle 8 in box to stop run and blitz.

This statement of yours was accurate.

Our O was not ready to look off that safety, throw to TEs or RBs filling blitz gaps or throw deep outside towrs who beat the bump coverage at the LOS.

Other than not not understanding what "towrs" means, this statement is NOT accurate, nor did it reflect what the article stated. The issue was not that RU's offense "was not ready" to do the things you cite. Rather, from the article - and the few clips the article showed (which were generally reflective of the game, as I remember it), the Rutgers offense was not ABLE to do what you say .. .not "able," rather than not "ready." This is a really important distinction, and talks to RU's offense not executing as well as OSU's defense executed, rather than impliyng that RU was unprepared - which IS what you imply.

In addition to what was discussed in the article (and my comments specifically address why the OSU defensive execution so hampered RU's offense), there were many other plays that demonstrate this.

One play in particular sticks out to me, a 2nd quarter play when RU was still only down 7-0. RU had 3rd and 2 from the OSU 40 yard line, after a terrific throw and catch to Arci). RU had Carroo run a short out pattern, underneath, but a 3-5 yard out, to the left, from either the slot, or from just outside the OT. On the same side, RU had Goodwin run a wheel route, deeper, obviously, than Carroo. With 3rd and 2, this play has several throwing options for Laviano. Option 1, if Goodwin pulls safety help away, and if Carroo beats the CB cleanly to the outside, a quick pass to Carroo gets the 1st down, easy as pie ... and who knows, maybe Carroo breaks a tackle and RU gets even more. Options 2, however, is the more interesting option. If Carroo's out move draws the safety who is over the top, in a little, Goodwin can break free long down the sideline for the wheel route for a big play.

Which as it turns out is exactly what was happening ... the safety crept in as Carroo ran his short out route, and Goodwin started to break free. BUT ... the OSU pass rusher beat Lumpkin badly ... and I mean badly ... was was in on Laviano before Carroo had even made his full break, or Goodwin had a chance to show Laviano he had beaten the safety help. Laviano had to get rid of the ball WAY early ... even ONE more second would have made a huge difference. He actually delivered the pass accurately to Carroo, but the defender was right on Carroo, and the safety help was there also. The ball was knocked away by the CB, and the safety also hit Carroo as the ball arrived. A PERFECT example what the article talked about: The Safety reading the QB eyes to converge on Carroo because Laviano never had time to look to the deeper receiver because the OSU pass rusher was in on him so fast. That was sheer execution of a good scheme by the OSU defense. But had Laviano had even 1 more second he has a chance to get a TD on the wheel route. Of course, we will never know if Laviano would have made that pass, but it was clear how the offensive play was designed - and how OSU beat it. Execution by the defense more than RU being out-coached.

Now, completely separately, I would have gone for it on 4th down and 2 in that situation. But that has little to do with this thread.

Even with a poor game plan, laviano could have run with the ball more to punish this type of D.

No. Laviano is NOT a runner. I have no idea where fans are getting this idea. Sure, he had ONE great run last year in the Nebraska game. I do not see that he is all that fast, or elusive, or that great a runner. I mean he is okay, but he is not really a running QB at all. And certainly, the OSU defneders are WAY faster and quicker than Laviano would be. I mean, jeez, did you see how quickly whetever holes the RU offensive line was creating for the running game (and there were some) closed up? I was very impressed with the OSU defenders' combination of speed, quickness and strength.

We were seriously out-coached.

Maybe, but it is a lot easier to put into place schemes that work well when your players' physical abilities are way better than the opponents' players' physical abilities.

 

[jellyman]

Agreed. Laviano is serviceable to good if used correctly. But the fans and team deserve to see if Rettig is better or can be complimentary.

Why do the FANS deserve to see if Rettig can be better?

The team deserves to have the QB in who gives them the best chance to win. That what PRACTICE is for, not experimenting in the game. In terms of whether Rettig can be complimentary, I guess I do not understand. If they ran different offenses, I could see your point - though I would probably still disagree. But the 2 QB are both pro-style QB's, or at least trained to be so. Either one QB is better at running the offense, or the other one is better at it. And the QB who is better gets the playing time.

 

[ruhudsonfan]

I don't read the article that way at all.

I read the article as saying that OSU plays a certain way all season. They didn't play that way against us. When faced with OSU running a different scheme, we ran our usual stuff--which didn't work for the myriad of reasons the article points out.

Just look at the last video loop. We have 3 guys running shallow crosses off of a bootleg. They are all within 5 yards depth of each other. My 8 year old can tell you that is wrong.

 

[miketd1]

Also, forgot to mention: it's generally accepted that you throw outside the numbers vs cover 1/3 and inside the numbers against a cover 2/4.

Running shallow cross or follow against OSU would have been suicide since the deep safety takes away the dig and the underneath defenders can zone-blitz and fool you into throwing the shallow route right at a defender (again, there are 8 defenders crowding the line of scrimmage -- some are rushing the passer, some are not).

This is why arm strength is absolutely critical -- geometrically, throwing to the sideline is to throw the longest possible distance from the pocket (think hypotenuse vs side of a triangle). If you don't have a gun, you get picked off on those throws (which is exactly what happened to Laviano in the link).

 

[brookdale-soda]

Agree with respect to Laviano. he was under pressure all night. and Carroo was the only one to get separation. Carroo was consistently beating this 1 on 1 coverage. Its a shame he got hurt because he had a few steps on his defender fairly consistently. I was wondering why Laviano didnt roll out much to give himself some more time. that article explains it pretty well.

I wonder if we had mixed in some read option if we could've slowed down the pass rush a little. i know Fridge wanted to add that wrinkle in last season but Nova wasnt the right fit. Laviano couldve used an extra 1/2 a second.

 

[Metropolitans3]

I had a bigger problem with not checking out of runs when there were literally 10 men within 7 yards of the LOS. I also had a problem with not using formations to spread out the defense if we really did want to run the ball.