2022-2023 Off-Season

[Backin82]

Winning 2-0 with basically no offense is just the same as winning 52-50 with a dynamic offense. Just win. Couldn’t care less how. Our 12-2 season has an offense that was definitely less than dynamic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Interesting that you've baked two W's into your hypothetical, limited offense scenario. Are you arguing that a limited offense is better than a dynamic offense?

A dynamic offense simply means that we have a range of options in how we attack defenses. It gives us multiple looks and adjustments that can be made to improve our chances of winning. Such a setup does not interest you? Why?

 

[OSUinTX]

I want to see a dynamic offense. Meaning....I want to see an offense that changes attack modes live during the games, and isn't limited to the handful of plays "system" that we've seen in the last 10 years. Stop running into stacked boxes. Stop using the bomb down the sideline hoping for PI so often. Use the middle of the field in the passing game. Develop an intermediate passing game in general. Pass to setup the run if needed. Use the fullback/TE/Hback position more creatively.

Difficult to project defense. I'd just like to see guys in the right position and sound tackling.

And stop taking the foot off the gas. Be nice to watch the end of a game and have some semblance of confidence in the outcome instead of prematurely aging 15 years, the dogs hiding in the other room, loose objects flying towards the TV, and that bottle you opened three hours ago is somehow empty now.

 

[Osucowboy79]

I want to see a dynamic offense. Meaning....I want to see an offense that changes attack modes live during the games, and isn't limited to the handful of plays "system" that we've seen in the last 10 years. Stop running into stacked boxes. Stop using the bomb down the sideline hoping for PI so often. Use the middle of the field in the passing game. Develop an intermediate passing game in general. Pass to setup the run if needed. Use the fullback/TE/Hback position more creatively.

Difficult to project defense. I'd just like to see guys in the right position and sound tackling.

We didn't run into stacked boxes. That was the problem. Our system worked by allowing us to attack the D depending on what they were doing. Basically, exactly what you're asking for.

The problem was that we couldn't run the ball even against a light box so everyone dropped an extra guy or two and you saw the results. Hopefully changing to a gap scheme, getting healthy on the OL and adding true TEs and FBs will address that.

 

[milehighpoke]

2 things I want to see (or not see):

1. Less injuries at key positions - seems it's been about 12 years since this happened.
2. No more go routes / fades on 3rd and long. Ever. Stop. It's stupid. Just stop

 

[Newpoke]

Please, no more bubble screens, a.k.a. sideways passes. They never go for more than a yard, if that. And can we get more creative in the run game, i.e., some motion/misdirection, perhaps some spread-option concepts. Our O has become completely stale and predictable. If we can install a completely new defensive scheme, we should be able to make some significant tweaks to the offense as well. It was kind of depressing watching the bowl games and seeing that almost every team had a more dynamic offense than ours.

 

[GratefulPoke]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1638269975063326721

 

[PokeJ]

Interesting that you've baked two W's into your hypothetical, limited offense scenario. Are you arguing that a limited offense is better than a dynamic offense?

A dynamic offense simply means that we have a range of options in how we attack defenses. It gives us multiple looks and adjustments that can be made to improve our chances of winning. Such a setup does not interest you? Why?

My point is just win. My own expectations of how we win doesn’t factor into it. W’s are W’s no matter how ugly or how pretty.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Backin82]

We didn't run into stacked boxes. That was the problem. Our system worked by allowing us to attack the D depending on what they were doing. Basically, exactly what you're asking for.

The problem was that we couldn't run the ball even against a light box so everyone dropped an extra guy or two and you saw the results. Hopefully changing to a gap scheme, getting healthy on the OL and adding true TEs and FBs will address that.

We ran into stacked boxes often, but I'm actually hopeful it was just the limitations that we had at QB that didn't allow us to adjust much. Maybe with a more cerebral QB, we can open things up a bit and allow some freedom to adjust pre-snap.

 

[Osucowboy79]

We ran into stacked boxes often, but I'm actually hopeful it was just the limitations that we had at QB that didn't allow us to adjust much. Maybe with a more cerebral QB, we can open things up a bit and allow some freedom to adjust pre-snap.

I think there are a lot of reasons for optimism. I expect some early bumps with the drastic changes we're making on both O and D but I do think it's going to end up for the best.

 

[Cowboyshoopspride]

I think there are a lot of reasons for optimism. I expect some early bumps with the drastic changes we're making on both O and D but I do think it's going to end up for the best.

Talking to the players and their parents, they expect a big year and dont share any of the negative/nervous “we’re going to suck and win 2 games next year” mindset.

 

[GratefulPoke]

https://www.ocolly.com/sports/osu-receiver-brennan-presley-provides-his-perspective-of-braylins-transfer-in-offseason/article_f9b199ce-cdac-11ed-ad78-cfaed8b06054.html

 

[GratefulPoke]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1641081543924887553

 

[HacklemanPoke]

We didn't run into stacked boxes. That was the problem. Our system worked by allowing us to attack the D depending on what they were doing. Basically, exactly what you're asking for.

The problem was that we couldn't run the ball even against a light box so everyone dropped an extra guy or two and you saw the results. Hopefully changing to a gap scheme, getting healthy on the OL and adding true TEs and FBs will address that.

I think this last season was the culmination of Gundy being risk adverse, Spencer having trouble reading the middle of the field and throwing interceptions when he did, the offensive line being decimated and a running back not ideal for cut backs/jump cuts. It was the perfect storm.

2021/22 we had an excellent defense and a future NFL running back. Look what happened in the Big12 title game wo Warren. 4 interceptions and no running game. Kinda like this year. Then when the D got a little banged up this yr (Lost Evers, Lacy, Ford, and Harper w Martin, Taylor and a LB dinged up, we couldn’t score and we couldn’t get stops.

We still should have beat WVU and Wisconsin. Season result would look a lot different at 9-4. But we didn’t so we were what we thought we were.

 

[Osucowboy79]

Well said. It would have been hard to make big changes after going 12-2 so maybe the disasters we went through last year were exactly what the program needed to make the necessary changes for the future.

If we did go 9-4 last year, there's a high likelihood we don't make drastic changes on both sides of the ball this off-season.

 

[Backin82]

I think this last season was the culmination of Gundy being risk adverse, Spencer having trouble reading the middle of the field and throwing interceptions when he did, the offensive line being decimated and a running back not ideal for cut backs/jump cuts. It was the perfect storm.

2021/22 we had an excellent defense and a future NFL running back. Look what happened in the Big12 title game wo Warren. 4 interceptions and no running game. Kinda like this year. Then when the D got a little banged up this yr (Lost Evers, Lacy, Ford, and Harper w Martin, Taylor and a LB dinged up, we couldn’t score and we couldn’t get stops.

We still should have beat WVU and Wisconsin. Season result would look a lot different at 9-4. But we didn’t so we were what we thought we were.

This is why I'm a big fan of actually NOT leaning on the running game so much early in the season against weak opponents. Yes, we can absolutely win that way, but it sets us up for the exact scenario you laid out above later in the season when games are more important and injuries are taking their toll. I'd like to see us engage more players and more diverse schemes early in the year or against weak opponents so that we're better prepared for those big 3rd and long plays in crucial moments or when we have a key injury. I'd like our 3rd, 4th, and 5th WRs to see a lot more passes early to give them confidence when the stakes are low, which has the added benefit of keeping your starting RB from carrying 30+ times in games we can win other ways.

Our current season-long approach to managing games gets the max amount of wins consistently, but tends to fail in the biggest games, especially ones where the opposing DC can take away our 1-2 key players/plays, and is maximized when we have key injuries on top of all that.

 

[Newpoke]

Well said. It would have been hard to make big changes after going 12-2 so maybe the disasters we went through last year were exactly what the program needed to make the necessary changes for the future.

If we did go 9-4 last year, there's a high likelihood we don't make drastic changes on both sides of the ball this off-season.

I think it remains to be seen whether or not we make "drastic changes" to the offense. I'm not sure getting rid of the cowboy back position is that big of a deal since all they ever do is block. I'm not convinced that much is going to change with our schemes/play-calling. I hope I'm wrong, but I think that even if we stay healthy, our offense is going to continue to be predictable as it has been for a while.

 

[GratefulPoke]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1641209708814954496

 

[andylicious]

I think it remains to be seen whether or not we make "drastic changes" to the offense. I'm not sure getting rid of the cowboy back position is that big of a deal since all they ever do is block. I'm not convinced that much is going to change with our schemes/play-calling. I hope I'm wrong, but I think that even if we stay healthy, our offense is going to continue to be predictable as it has been for a while.

I don't think it will be. The offense has been sold out to Run Pass QB with limited accuracy. It can't help but improve if we use the TE

 

[Osucowboy79]

This is why I'm a big fan of actually NOT leaning on the running game so much early in the season against weak opponents. Yes, we can absolutely win that way, but it sets us up for the exact scenario you laid out above later in the season when games are more important and injuries are taking their toll. I'd like to see us engage more players and more diverse schemes early in the year or against weak opponents so that we're better prepared for those big 3rd and long plays in crucial moments or when we have a key injury. I'd like our 3rd, 4th, and 5th WRs to see a lot more passes early to give them confidence when the stakes are low, which has the added benefit of keeping your starting RB from carrying 30+ times in games we can win other ways.

Our current season-long approach to managing games gets the max amount of wins consistently, but tends to fail in the biggest games, especially ones where the opposing DC can take away our 1-2 key players/plays, and is maximized when we have key injuries on top of all that.

So, do exactly what we did last year when we threw the ball 40 times a game against Central Michigan, Arizona St and Pine Bluff?

 

[Backin82]

So, do exactly what we did last year when we threw the ball 40 times a game against Central Michigan, Arizona St and Pine Bluff?

Maybe so, but spread the ball out more and be more dynamic. Use more of the field and spread the ball around to different guys with the sole purpose of getting them live game reps.

That said, our OL was absolutely terrible, and our QB had apparent hard limits on play calling, recognition, and audibles. Surely we can improve in those areas at a minimum, right?