Defense

Submitted by MFreak on November 21st, 2009 at 3:24 PM

I think we can all agree that the defense played very well today. I'm in the camp which thinks that it's a terrible idea to get another DC. With the way they played today, I'm convinced that GERG can handle his job. I'm just curious what the feeling out there is on the status of GERG and the position coaches after the way the team played today today.

Comments

NJWolverine

November 21st, 2009 at 3:37 PM ^

OSU had one of only a few QBs this year who could not throw the ball accurately beyond 10 yards. There were a couple of deep balls that were there but the ball was overthrown. Pryor simply doesn't have much of a passing game, so the secondary wasn't exposed at all today. Furthermore, Tressel was extremely conservative with the offense and with Pryor (still a mistake, though). You aren't likely going to get those types of situations very often from other teams. Maybe the secondary will improve, with new safeties in the mix, but you couldn't say that by today's game.

I will say the D-line was pretty outstanding today. They didn't overpursue very much and generally stopped the RBs at the point of attack, limiting the amount of damage they could do to our inferior LBs.

The LB corp needs a major upgrade. Again, because of Pryor's limited passing ability, they weren't exposed over the middle because Tressel didn't want to risk those throws. So the LBs' job was far easier today than in the past. Even still, they were easily outmaneuvered and physically overmatched. While I see B. Smith in S. Brown's position, nothing else is certain. Roh seems like he's going to be a true DE the way he's been lining up lately, opening the spinner position to unproven players. Mouton should get one last chance because of his talent, but Ezeh and Leach are done. You can't get worse than that. We had better hope that someone new steps up in those positions.

Ultimate Quizmaster

November 21st, 2009 at 3:39 PM ^

Agreed on the great D today.

The only call I didn't like so much was the all out blitz on 3rd & goal that resulted in the touchdown. It seemed like the entire secondary was empty. I didn't think Pryor would have thrown a touchdown if they hadn't blitzed.

A little surprised Tress didn't run more misdirection plays with the RBs. That was the play call that burned our defense this afternoon.

Go for 2

November 21st, 2009 at 3:40 PM ^

I am curious if Brian or anyone else will look at this but we had a great game plan that was built on the realization that Tyrelle Pryor is horribly inaccurate. We were able to go back to the defensive game plan that has been the least damaging which is Woolfolk at safety and Floyd at corner. All Leach had to do (which apparently Ezeh can't do) is fill gaps.

I wonder what our numbers look like with Woolfolk at safety. I also wonder how much of a difference JT Turner at the other corner spot with Leach in the middle would have been.

For all those who think R Rod should get fired, I think this game shows that with even a modicum of depth, this becomes a very good team.

michman79

November 21st, 2009 at 3:41 PM ^

There is no way GERG will not be back. Implementing the 3-4 is as big of a change as an offense going to the spread. It is much more difficult to change then people realize (especially for the LB's and safeties). Most of these kids played a 4-3 in High School.

There will be a big jump in year 2 in the system, very similar to the one the offense has made this year. They won't be a top 10 defense but it is reasonable to expect them to be serviceable and in the top half of the conference.

Replacing GERG would be a terrible move.

BiSB

November 21st, 2009 at 3:42 PM ^

The defense was fast, maintained their assignments VERY well, kept Pryor from breaking contain most of the time, and gave up 14 points... So my question is this:

Where the hell was this defense for the first 11 games?

/tears of "What-if" sadness...

Mgobowl

November 21st, 2009 at 3:47 PM ^

Great game plan and very good execution (what a concept) by the defense. Did anyone else notice more substitutions than usual on both sides of the ball? I thought Gerg played to the player's strengths by being much more situational.

gmbblue

November 21st, 2009 at 3:47 PM ^

It only took 5 games but Kovacs was moved to strong safety where he is much better, Floyd back in and Woolfolk to deep. I have no clue why it took so long, our safety play was so poor there was no way it was that much of a drop off with Floyd.

Also, Leach is not good, but he is better than Ezeh.

formerlyanonymous

November 21st, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^

While I was happy with what I saw, I think OSU also made us look better than we normally are. They didn't really test our safeties that much, and when they did, Pryor overthrew the wide receiver. I can think of at least 2 times that was the case. They ran right at our strength, the line, and for the most part, we did well.

I just say this because there are still going to be a couple posters out there with problems with keeping GERG. I'm not one of them, but if they use the argument that OSU played to our strength, then at least grant them that concession. You can counter with our fundamentals, particularly tackling, not being so bad this game. Also, we didn't really have many absolute bonehead mistakes. We were sucked in on a counter that ended poorly, and we gave up contain at least one other time I can remember. Overall, we really only had one really bad rock/paper/scissors on the screen. Still, I think someone should probably have had that covered, and that wasn't a complete coaching mistake.

Just some thoughts I'd throw out there to bolster both sides of the argument.

Also, Stevie Brown had one hell of a game, so remember to give him love and not just Brandon Graham (although he deserves it, too). Brown made tackle after tackle today. He saved several 3rd down conversions. His pass coverage was also really good.

drcarp

November 21st, 2009 at 4:23 PM ^

You're right about OSU making us look good. It's not too difficult to stop runs right up the middle no matter how bad your secondary is. OSU's two big drives were based on big gains from misdirection runs. Not sure why they didn't try to mix it up more. I think we could make the case that RichRod outcoached Tressel (not too surprising tho..)

JC3

November 21st, 2009 at 4:45 PM ^

OSU was able to run all over the defense at times. Still, I think there's a little more hope than with last year. And if Greg Robinson sticks around I'm hoping we can shore up some deficiencies.