I posted this on the Round Table, and possibly I am wasting my time, but I hope many enjoy this analysis and commentary. If you think it is too long, simply do not read it, rather than complaining it was too long, or saying "I stopped reading after ..." as people sometimes do. I warn you it IS long.
I got back very late last night, and got up very early this morning - and had a lot to do today. As a result I have not looked at the message board since I left for the game at 5 PM Saturday - and purposely did not want to see ANY OTHER POSTS prior to posting.
I figure both message boards have been absolute cesspools. Which I find horrible to read. Heck, RU WINS, and fans come out in strength denigrating the team and the coaches, calling for the coaches to be fired. I can only imagine after a loss - and a dominating loss at that.
Anyway, I will start by reminding people of my pre-game opinion: This was a bad match-up for RU in a way Michigan State was not, that I feared OSU obliterating RU, BUT there were real reasons and ways RU and its fans could hope to beat OSU, even if the odds were really low. As a reminder, here were the 6 reasons I posted (though without most of the explanations provided):
1) RU MUST move the ball on offense, and eat clock: Needed to keep OSU's offense off the field and limit OSU's opportunities.
2) RU MUST win the turnover battle (I said +2 or more likely +3 was required).
3) As part of #1, RU's OL MUST give Laviano enough time to throw.
4) RU Special Teams must produce: Returns, blocks, good punting, FG's ... some combination of good special teams play must be executed.
5) Big Plays: RU must limit OSU's explosive plays, while generating SOME of their own explosive plays.
6) RU will have to score more than 30 points, I suspect ...probably at least 35 points.
Scorecard? RU accomplished not a single one of those items, in any way, shape or form. Had RU accomplished 3 of those 6 items, RU probably loses by 3 or 4 TD's. Had they accomplished all 6 items, a chance for a victory might have been there.
Now, to the game itself, starting with conceptual thoughts about the game.
To start, is there anything we as fans can learn about RU from this game? For example, is there anything better in terms of scheming, either offensively or defensively, RU might have done? Or would different combinations of personnel have made a difference? Should RU coaches be fired? Or retained? Or even extended? Without re-watching the game (which is never going to happen for me), I would say there is NOTHING we, as fans, can learn from this game. Nothing, except maybe that the talent level on OSU's team is HUGELY better than the talent level on the RU team - which will not be changed in 1, 2 or even 3 years - without or without new coaches.
Be honest now ... name me a SINGLE player, other than a healthy Carroo, who would certainly start for OSU. That is an easy question: None. PERHAPS, Longa might start ... maybe, but not surely. So, think about this ... at 21 of OSU's starters on offense and defense are BETTER than ANY of RU's counterparts right now. And RU's best player, the ONLY player who would start for OSU, was clearly limited in how much (and probably how well) he could play in this game ... and could not play at all in the 2nd half. How would you expect any materially different outcome?
Next, in my opinion, unless the coaches and players let it, this game should have ZERO impact on the rest of the season. And from a fan perspective, this game should have ZERO impact on the expectations (and hopes, which are different than expectations) for the rest of the season. RU will not face another team the rest of the year with this level of talent and skill gap (and those ARE 2 different things). As good as Wisconsin might be, and as much talent as Michigan might have, neither of these teams have as much MORE talent than RU as OSU has. I still think RU should EXPECT to beat Army and Maryland, and HOPE to beat any 1 or if VERY lucky, and getting healthier, 2, of Wisconsin, Michigan and Nebraska. This game changes these hopes and expectations not one iota.
Lastly, conceptually: RU has a 3Q problem that needs to be addressed, somehow. And THAT, I will admit, is coaching. If you exclude the Norfolk State game, with RU's 28-0 blitz, RU is being outscored 77-36 in the 3rd quarter. In particular, for whatever reason, RU has been putrid in the 3Q in each of the last 3 games, Michigan State, Indiana and Ohio State ... being outscored 63-13 in the 3Q in the last 3 games. Even worse, the 63-13 margin OVERSTATES how well RU does in the 3rd Quarter. In each of these games RU only scored AFTER allowing multiple scores to its opponents: 14 points to start the 3rd quarter versus MSU, 28 points ot start the 3rd quarter by Indiana, and 21 points to start the 3rd quarter by OSU. I am not a coach, and I cannot tell or understand, or know how to fix that. But the last 3 games this has been a HUGE problem ... and it is both an offensive problem and a defensive problem.
Now, to specific game comments:
1) RU's OL got mauled by OSU's front seven. RU actually changed a formation/scheme to start the game, in order to try to run the ball more effectively. And it worked for the first drive. But throughout the game there were FAR too many battles won by the OSU front seven, and far too many very short gains by running backs. And frankly, Laviano had VERY little time to throw the ball. OSU was actually able to get pressure on Laviano for much of the game when they just rushed 4 players ... but also blitzed a reasonable amount of time. The effect of the pressure was not as much sacks (only 2), but the time Laviano had to throw being so short, it limited the pass routes RU was able to run.
2) OSU played with 10 players within 7-8 yards of the LOS a LOT. I know the fans' response is to call different plays, to throw deep ... except a QB needs TIME to throw the ball to run deeper patterns, or evebn medium length crossing patterns. And MOST of the time Laviano did not have the time to throw those patterns. RU DID actually try to pass when OSU crammed the box, but Laviano often had so little time he was forced to throw a short pass.
3) OSU is REALLY, REALLY good. I think RU is ... okay, with a chance to be decent. This type of game is what you often get when a REALLY, REALLY good team plays WELL (which OSU did), and an okay team plays ... okay. Lopsided.
4) Barrett is a tremendous difference-maker, and makes OSU a COMPLETELY different and MUCH more dangerous offensive team. He was the WORST possible match-up for RU - and showed why. And Barrett played a tremendous game. In addition to his great athletic TALENT, he made amazingly good decisions on the read option. To play closer, RU needed Barrett to be not at the top of his game ... which was not to be.
5) Some will say RU coaches need to do a better job preparing the RU defenders .. and maybe they do. But really? OSU has a terrific OL, a GREAT running back, and a terrific read option QB. If the OSU OL executes their blocking, and Barrett makes good choices with his read option decisions, frankly, there is not much RU, or any team can do over the course of an entire game. Sure, RU players can make great INDIVIDUAL plays - as did happen occasionally. But if a team with significantly better talent actually executes well (and RU fans sometimes forget that the other team also is trying to execute its game plan), other than multiple exceptional individual plays by the defense, the team with more talent is going to make plays.
6) Laviano did not have his best game (duh!). But I actually thought he did fairly well in the 1st half. Not great, not enough for RU to be more competitive, for sure. But not bad either. He obviously needed to be spectacular for RU to be competitive ... and that did not happen (and we do not yet know if he can be spectacular without the help of his teammates). He was awful on the 1st 2 drives of the 3rd quarter. He had 3 really bad passes, 2 of which were incomplete passes, directed at 2 open receivers, and the interception (mainly on him, but also good defense). By his 3rd drive of the 3rd quarter, RU was down 42-0.
7) The interception: Laviano should have thrown the pass away, clearly. The play was supposed to be a pass to Arciadacono ... Laviano rolled out, and the play was designed to make the OSU defender make choice: Protect against Laviano running, leaving Arciadacono open for a short reception that might have ended up gaining 5-7 yards (fine for 1st down), or covering Arci, and Laviano runing to gain 4-5 yards. But OSU was able to both cover Arciadacono AND not leave Laviano any room to run ... essentiall blowing up the play. No other recevers were open either (to OSU's credit), and Laviano threw the ball hurriedly, and not well ... he should have just thrown the ball away. Of course, RU was already down 42-0 at the time.
8) OSU defended RU's receivers pretty well. Sure, Caroo got open a couple of times. As did Patton. Arcidiacono got open for a nice play. And Agoudosi got open deep once, late. But, mostly, OSU covered really well - helped by the pressure the OSU pass rush put on, leaving Laviano fewer pass route and pass choice options. For example, at a crucial point in the game, RU down just 7-0, having just forced a punt, with the ball on the OSU 40, on 3rd and 2 yards, RU ran pass routes to the left, with a WR (Carroo) underneath, and Goodwin running a wheel route over the top ... but OSU put such pressure on Laviano that he had to throw the ball early, to the underneath receiver (Carroo). OSU was covering Carroo very well, and knocked the ball down. Here is the killer: Goodwin has literally JUST broken free of safety coverage, down the sideline. If Laviano had just 1 second longer, he MIGHT have seen Goodwin, and thrown it, for potentially a TD. But we will never know, since Laviano did NOT have that extra second - he HAD to get rid of the ball.
9) Separately, on the 2Q play just described in #8, I would have gone for it on 4th down. Additional insult to injury, though I still would have gone for it, Roth had a near PHENOMENAL punt, RU had great coverage downfield, a player at the 1-2 yard line, with the ball landing at the 4 or 5 yard line ... but it took a wierd bounce, AWAY from the RU cover man, so he could not bat it down inside the 5-yard line ... and then skittered sideways, and went out of bounds JUST INSIDE the pylon .. 6 inches shorter and the ball is out of bounds at the 1 foot line. Instead of starting OSU inside the 5, they started at the 20, an scored a TD on that drive.
10) Some RU fans complain about RU playing a safety (usually Cioffi) very deep, too deep they say. There is a reason this is the GENERAL plan and scheme: To limit big plays, if possible. So, I will give you a perfect example of why this can sometimes work FOR RU, using a play where RU did NOT play the safety deep. It occurs on the OSU drive in the 2nd quarter that led to OSU's 2nd TD, a 50-yard pass, catch and run play for the TD. On that play, I noticed that RU had Cioffi run from deep to the LOS, just outside the DE, right before the snap. RU was clearly expecting a read option run. I say this because of Cioff's behavior ... at the snap he blitzed, but not at the QB, exactly, but more of a "contain" blitz ... the OSU Guard pulled to block, and blocked Cioffi, but as soon as Cioffi saw the play was NOT a pass (possibly Barrett reading Cioffi's move?), he paused, clearly expecting the run, and not getting that not sure hat to do. Barrett passed a medium length pass to an open WR (#3), whom Wharton had given a good cushion to, probably because he was not expecting safety help because Cioffi was run-blitzing. When #3 received the ball, he made a move towards the sideline, and Wharton tried to take an angle to pin the receiver on the sideline., but #3 made a move to the inside. Hester was coming over to help on the tackle and ALSO moved to pin the receiver on the sideline ... allowing the receiver to have the middle of the field at the hashmark all to himself. One of those defenders (probably Hester) needs to protect against the inside cut, while the other needs to stop the move to the outside.
11) Elliot is REALLY good. He is as fast as RU's best RB's (or faster), cuts as well as RU's best running backs ... but is bigger and stronger. It helped that in the 2nd half, in particular, he had large holes to run through. But even when he did not, he got positive yards on his sole effort at times, even when RU seemed to have him pinned behind the LOS.
12) Some will complain that if Indian could compete why not RU? The OSU-Indiana game was a different beats. Indiana had a healthy, veteran QB to start the game - plus their star running back. Indian had a veteran OL (I believe 4 returning starteerrs from the prior year). And OSU was not playing Barrett. When Sudfield got hurt, and Howard (their RB), also, Indiana stopped being competitive).
13) I am not even going to talk much ab out RU's injuries: Carroo limited, then again physically unable to play. Grant not at 100%. Austin not able to play. Carroo and Grant are 2 of RU's best big play players. I will say this: Severla of the people in my area thought that had Carroo been 100% he would have run under the Laviano pass to him in the endzone, and RU would have had the TD - they said Carroo came off the field limping a little after that pass. I say maybe, maybe not - obviously a missed opportunity regardless - should Laviano's pass have been better? Or was Carroo truly slower than usual? I have no idea - but noen of you do either.
I am running out of steam, but one last comment:
14) Rettig: I was glad to see him in the game for the 4th quarter. I thought he threw 2 really good passes: To Agoudosi for the 58-yard play, and to Patton for the TD. But his other passes were not great. He had TIME to find Agoudosi on that play - to his credit Rettig made a really good pass. AND ... I strongly believe that TWO of RU's time outs on that drive were due to confusion in the huddle that cost RU time and required a time out ... especially the time out on 2nd down and goal from the 4 yard line. And though I cannot prove it, nor will I try, I strongly believe this is an ongoing issue for Rettig, and very likely one of the primary reasons Laviano is the QB - and will remain so. One more thing: Rettig had the benefit of playing with RU's starting OL , running backs and WR's (other than Carroo), and also the benefit of playing against OSU's 2nd and 3rd team defenders. Still, no doubt the 2 good passes by Rettig will fuel many fans' belief he should be the starting QB, though his performance actually proves nothing.
I got back very late last night, and got up very early this morning - and had a lot to do today. As a result I have not looked at the message board since I left for the game at 5 PM Saturday - and purposely did not want to see ANY OTHER POSTS prior to posting.
I figure both message boards have been absolute cesspools. Which I find horrible to read. Heck, RU WINS, and fans come out in strength denigrating the team and the coaches, calling for the coaches to be fired. I can only imagine after a loss - and a dominating loss at that.
Anyway, I will start by reminding people of my pre-game opinion: This was a bad match-up for RU in a way Michigan State was not, that I feared OSU obliterating RU, BUT there were real reasons and ways RU and its fans could hope to beat OSU, even if the odds were really low. As a reminder, here were the 6 reasons I posted (though without most of the explanations provided):
1) RU MUST move the ball on offense, and eat clock: Needed to keep OSU's offense off the field and limit OSU's opportunities.
2) RU MUST win the turnover battle (I said +2 or more likely +3 was required).
3) As part of #1, RU's OL MUST give Laviano enough time to throw.
4) RU Special Teams must produce: Returns, blocks, good punting, FG's ... some combination of good special teams play must be executed.
5) Big Plays: RU must limit OSU's explosive plays, while generating SOME of their own explosive plays.
6) RU will have to score more than 30 points, I suspect ...probably at least 35 points.
Scorecard? RU accomplished not a single one of those items, in any way, shape or form. Had RU accomplished 3 of those 6 items, RU probably loses by 3 or 4 TD's. Had they accomplished all 6 items, a chance for a victory might have been there.
Now, to the game itself, starting with conceptual thoughts about the game.
To start, is there anything we as fans can learn about RU from this game? For example, is there anything better in terms of scheming, either offensively or defensively, RU might have done? Or would different combinations of personnel have made a difference? Should RU coaches be fired? Or retained? Or even extended? Without re-watching the game (which is never going to happen for me), I would say there is NOTHING we, as fans, can learn from this game. Nothing, except maybe that the talent level on OSU's team is HUGELY better than the talent level on the RU team - which will not be changed in 1, 2 or even 3 years - without or without new coaches.
Be honest now ... name me a SINGLE player, other than a healthy Carroo, who would certainly start for OSU. That is an easy question: None. PERHAPS, Longa might start ... maybe, but not surely. So, think about this ... at 21 of OSU's starters on offense and defense are BETTER than ANY of RU's counterparts right now. And RU's best player, the ONLY player who would start for OSU, was clearly limited in how much (and probably how well) he could play in this game ... and could not play at all in the 2nd half. How would you expect any materially different outcome?
Next, in my opinion, unless the coaches and players let it, this game should have ZERO impact on the rest of the season. And from a fan perspective, this game should have ZERO impact on the expectations (and hopes, which are different than expectations) for the rest of the season. RU will not face another team the rest of the year with this level of talent and skill gap (and those ARE 2 different things). As good as Wisconsin might be, and as much talent as Michigan might have, neither of these teams have as much MORE talent than RU as OSU has. I still think RU should EXPECT to beat Army and Maryland, and HOPE to beat any 1 or if VERY lucky, and getting healthier, 2, of Wisconsin, Michigan and Nebraska. This game changes these hopes and expectations not one iota.
Lastly, conceptually: RU has a 3Q problem that needs to be addressed, somehow. And THAT, I will admit, is coaching. If you exclude the Norfolk State game, with RU's 28-0 blitz, RU is being outscored 77-36 in the 3rd quarter. In particular, for whatever reason, RU has been putrid in the 3Q in each of the last 3 games, Michigan State, Indiana and Ohio State ... being outscored 63-13 in the 3Q in the last 3 games. Even worse, the 63-13 margin OVERSTATES how well RU does in the 3rd Quarter. In each of these games RU only scored AFTER allowing multiple scores to its opponents: 14 points to start the 3rd quarter versus MSU, 28 points ot start the 3rd quarter by Indiana, and 21 points to start the 3rd quarter by OSU. I am not a coach, and I cannot tell or understand, or know how to fix that. But the last 3 games this has been a HUGE problem ... and it is both an offensive problem and a defensive problem.
Now, to specific game comments:
1) RU's OL got mauled by OSU's front seven. RU actually changed a formation/scheme to start the game, in order to try to run the ball more effectively. And it worked for the first drive. But throughout the game there were FAR too many battles won by the OSU front seven, and far too many very short gains by running backs. And frankly, Laviano had VERY little time to throw the ball. OSU was actually able to get pressure on Laviano for much of the game when they just rushed 4 players ... but also blitzed a reasonable amount of time. The effect of the pressure was not as much sacks (only 2), but the time Laviano had to throw being so short, it limited the pass routes RU was able to run.
2) OSU played with 10 players within 7-8 yards of the LOS a LOT. I know the fans' response is to call different plays, to throw deep ... except a QB needs TIME to throw the ball to run deeper patterns, or evebn medium length crossing patterns. And MOST of the time Laviano did not have the time to throw those patterns. RU DID actually try to pass when OSU crammed the box, but Laviano often had so little time he was forced to throw a short pass.
3) OSU is REALLY, REALLY good. I think RU is ... okay, with a chance to be decent. This type of game is what you often get when a REALLY, REALLY good team plays WELL (which OSU did), and an okay team plays ... okay. Lopsided.
4) Barrett is a tremendous difference-maker, and makes OSU a COMPLETELY different and MUCH more dangerous offensive team. He was the WORST possible match-up for RU - and showed why. And Barrett played a tremendous game. In addition to his great athletic TALENT, he made amazingly good decisions on the read option. To play closer, RU needed Barrett to be not at the top of his game ... which was not to be.
5) Some will say RU coaches need to do a better job preparing the RU defenders .. and maybe they do. But really? OSU has a terrific OL, a GREAT running back, and a terrific read option QB. If the OSU OL executes their blocking, and Barrett makes good choices with his read option decisions, frankly, there is not much RU, or any team can do over the course of an entire game. Sure, RU players can make great INDIVIDUAL plays - as did happen occasionally. But if a team with significantly better talent actually executes well (and RU fans sometimes forget that the other team also is trying to execute its game plan), other than multiple exceptional individual plays by the defense, the team with more talent is going to make plays.
6) Laviano did not have his best game (duh!). But I actually thought he did fairly well in the 1st half. Not great, not enough for RU to be more competitive, for sure. But not bad either. He obviously needed to be spectacular for RU to be competitive ... and that did not happen (and we do not yet know if he can be spectacular without the help of his teammates). He was awful on the 1st 2 drives of the 3rd quarter. He had 3 really bad passes, 2 of which were incomplete passes, directed at 2 open receivers, and the interception (mainly on him, but also good defense). By his 3rd drive of the 3rd quarter, RU was down 42-0.
7) The interception: Laviano should have thrown the pass away, clearly. The play was supposed to be a pass to Arciadacono ... Laviano rolled out, and the play was designed to make the OSU defender make choice: Protect against Laviano running, leaving Arciadacono open for a short reception that might have ended up gaining 5-7 yards (fine for 1st down), or covering Arci, and Laviano runing to gain 4-5 yards. But OSU was able to both cover Arciadacono AND not leave Laviano any room to run ... essentiall blowing up the play. No other recevers were open either (to OSU's credit), and Laviano threw the ball hurriedly, and not well ... he should have just thrown the ball away. Of course, RU was already down 42-0 at the time.
8) OSU defended RU's receivers pretty well. Sure, Caroo got open a couple of times. As did Patton. Arcidiacono got open for a nice play. And Agoudosi got open deep once, late. But, mostly, OSU covered really well - helped by the pressure the OSU pass rush put on, leaving Laviano fewer pass route and pass choice options. For example, at a crucial point in the game, RU down just 7-0, having just forced a punt, with the ball on the OSU 40, on 3rd and 2 yards, RU ran pass routes to the left, with a WR (Carroo) underneath, and Goodwin running a wheel route over the top ... but OSU put such pressure on Laviano that he had to throw the ball early, to the underneath receiver (Carroo). OSU was covering Carroo very well, and knocked the ball down. Here is the killer: Goodwin has literally JUST broken free of safety coverage, down the sideline. If Laviano had just 1 second longer, he MIGHT have seen Goodwin, and thrown it, for potentially a TD. But we will never know, since Laviano did NOT have that extra second - he HAD to get rid of the ball.
9) Separately, on the 2Q play just described in #8, I would have gone for it on 4th down. Additional insult to injury, though I still would have gone for it, Roth had a near PHENOMENAL punt, RU had great coverage downfield, a player at the 1-2 yard line, with the ball landing at the 4 or 5 yard line ... but it took a wierd bounce, AWAY from the RU cover man, so he could not bat it down inside the 5-yard line ... and then skittered sideways, and went out of bounds JUST INSIDE the pylon .. 6 inches shorter and the ball is out of bounds at the 1 foot line. Instead of starting OSU inside the 5, they started at the 20, an scored a TD on that drive.
10) Some RU fans complain about RU playing a safety (usually Cioffi) very deep, too deep they say. There is a reason this is the GENERAL plan and scheme: To limit big plays, if possible. So, I will give you a perfect example of why this can sometimes work FOR RU, using a play where RU did NOT play the safety deep. It occurs on the OSU drive in the 2nd quarter that led to OSU's 2nd TD, a 50-yard pass, catch and run play for the TD. On that play, I noticed that RU had Cioffi run from deep to the LOS, just outside the DE, right before the snap. RU was clearly expecting a read option run. I say this because of Cioff's behavior ... at the snap he blitzed, but not at the QB, exactly, but more of a "contain" blitz ... the OSU Guard pulled to block, and blocked Cioffi, but as soon as Cioffi saw the play was NOT a pass (possibly Barrett reading Cioffi's move?), he paused, clearly expecting the run, and not getting that not sure hat to do. Barrett passed a medium length pass to an open WR (#3), whom Wharton had given a good cushion to, probably because he was not expecting safety help because Cioffi was run-blitzing. When #3 received the ball, he made a move towards the sideline, and Wharton tried to take an angle to pin the receiver on the sideline., but #3 made a move to the inside. Hester was coming over to help on the tackle and ALSO moved to pin the receiver on the sideline ... allowing the receiver to have the middle of the field at the hashmark all to himself. One of those defenders (probably Hester) needs to protect against the inside cut, while the other needs to stop the move to the outside.
11) Elliot is REALLY good. He is as fast as RU's best RB's (or faster), cuts as well as RU's best running backs ... but is bigger and stronger. It helped that in the 2nd half, in particular, he had large holes to run through. But even when he did not, he got positive yards on his sole effort at times, even when RU seemed to have him pinned behind the LOS.
12) Some will complain that if Indian could compete why not RU? The OSU-Indiana game was a different beats. Indiana had a healthy, veteran QB to start the game - plus their star running back. Indian had a veteran OL (I believe 4 returning starteerrs from the prior year). And OSU was not playing Barrett. When Sudfield got hurt, and Howard (their RB), also, Indiana stopped being competitive).
13) I am not even going to talk much ab out RU's injuries: Carroo limited, then again physically unable to play. Grant not at 100%. Austin not able to play. Carroo and Grant are 2 of RU's best big play players. I will say this: Severla of the people in my area thought that had Carroo been 100% he would have run under the Laviano pass to him in the endzone, and RU would have had the TD - they said Carroo came off the field limping a little after that pass. I say maybe, maybe not - obviously a missed opportunity regardless - should Laviano's pass have been better? Or was Carroo truly slower than usual? I have no idea - but noen of you do either.
I am running out of steam, but one last comment:
14) Rettig: I was glad to see him in the game for the 4th quarter. I thought he threw 2 really good passes: To Agoudosi for the 58-yard play, and to Patton for the TD. But his other passes were not great. He had TIME to find Agoudosi on that play - to his credit Rettig made a really good pass. AND ... I strongly believe that TWO of RU's time outs on that drive were due to confusion in the huddle that cost RU time and required a time out ... especially the time out on 2nd down and goal from the 4 yard line. And though I cannot prove it, nor will I try, I strongly believe this is an ongoing issue for Rettig, and very likely one of the primary reasons Laviano is the QB - and will remain so. One more thing: Rettig had the benefit of playing with RU's starting OL , running backs and WR's (other than Carroo), and also the benefit of playing against OSU's 2nd and 3rd team defenders. Still, no doubt the 2 good passes by Rettig will fuel many fans' belief he should be the starting QB, though his performance actually proves nothing.
