one thing to note when talking about Boise State's "big wins" is that their whole gameplan was (and still is a little bit) the trick plays and gimmicks...this can win you a game every once in a while, but if they played a consistently challenging schedule, the system would fall apart.
Ohio State was also missing 3 key defensive players against Wisconsin...give Wisconsin's D some credit-they played well, but their offense was made to look good by the lack of our 2 top linebackers and top DB.
U don't watch much boise...they don't beat teams by trick plays. That happened once. They lined up against va tech and hammered them legit. And osu's injuries had nothing to do with it. They still had rolle so im not sure how their top 2 lbs were out
1. I didn't say Boise State relies on it NOW...I said that in big games in the past, they DID. As you mentioned in the podcast, VT started terribly this year and hasn't really played anybody since. Until these teams schedule talented opponents regularly, I'm gonna take evidence from TCU's narrow escape from SDSU and say that both Boise State and TCU are only able to win big games because of their opponents being unfamiliar with their playing style.2. Upon looking up the stats, you're right-it was Ross Homan and Tyler Moeller who were the LB's missing from the OSU-WIS game, but missing 2 of your top 3 LB's PLUS Chemdi Chekwa in the secondary is going to allow another team to run on you...which is exactly why, as you mentioned, they were able to run HB dive 14 times in a row for 10 yards a pop...when the best D in the nation gives up 31 points, you can't say injuries had nothing to do with it...
I misunderstood on boise-tcu...I wish they would have played somebody so we could all know for sure. As for osu...don't make excuses for that. They got beat in the trenches all game regardless of injuries. Cam heyward was healthy and he was totally dominated. Just accept the defeat for what it is. Wisconsin came out more prepared and physically dominated. If the injuries were such a big deal then why have they been good in every other game?
Whoa, our first blind OSU fan. Did you even watch the first half? Please stop posting this nonsense, you are embarrassing yourself and the entire OSU fanbase. Oh, and when you said that Boise State's gameplan "still is a little bit" about trick plays and gimmicks i guess you weren't meaning NOW.
don't be that guy...as we've discussed, you both dismiss everything I say about OSU...and as we've discussed, I think ohio state deserved to lose that game based on the way we played. As for Landrum's question, that's the only game this year where they've been missing all those guys...Homan and Chekwa both came back the next game and have played since. Starters are starters for a reason, so to say the outcome of the game had NOTHING to do with injuries is blind. As for the Boise State comment, yes I was referring to now-they still use it, a little bit...I never said they depend on it now. You have to admit that when I make a comment about ohio state, you both have the initial reaction of "how is this going to be wrong?" and never give it objectivity.
No we always combat you because you make ignorant comments like "the Browns should be 10-2" or "OSU should have won that game." You're the only person I've heard, including all of Columbus sports radio, that has said those injuries had any effect on the game. But, I'm sure a little cover corner would have had a huge effect on the run game. Too bad OSU only has a couple good defensive players. I mean, I'm sure they're the only team that has gotten hurt this year...
don't be that fan...you come on here and listen to us say good things about OSU, but as soon as one bad thing is brought up you go crazy. You don't seem to understand that you are the biased person in this conversation because you are the OSU fan. You are also the person who told me that the only reason Wisconsin won by so much was because they had a defensive TD at the end of the game...which never happened, so it's possible that you are delusional.
Yes Prince, I said a wrong thing-and I immediately admitted it when you brought it up...and fixed it. I didn't say chekwa was the only reason...I said THREE top defensive players, two of which are LINEBACKERS, have an effect on the run game...I defy you to find me an expert who says that linebackers make no difference in a run game. I may be a fan, but I'm not ignorant. And landrum...tell me in which browns game, given the leads they had, WHICH ONES other than the two I mentioned they should have lost??? Playcalling and decision-making has cost them almost all of their games...the two I mentioned, they were just outplayed, and the jets was the stuckey fumble.
and PS prince...what part of "give wisconsin credit" and "missing 3 key defensive players" is going crazy??
Im done arguing with you. You have sufficiently made yourself look dumb. Let's try this one last time. STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOT YOUR TEAM. Nobody wants to hear stupid excuses...besides even if I did waste my time yo find an expert who agrees, you would just say something about them having it out for osu. One dumb excuse would follow another.
As a Buckeye fan I attempt to stay as far away from the injury argument as I can. Every team in sports has to deal with injurys at some point. There is absolutely no positive that comes from blaiming a loss on players being hurt. Same goes with the Brownies. If we did this differantly or if we did that differantly we would have won the game is a elementary mentality. Of course we would have won if we right things at the right time. At the risk of sounding cliche, that's what seperates the winners from the losers. What ifs and injurys are horrible crutches (pun intended).
Landrum...1, don't alienate the people that listen to your podcast...especially your friends. 2, I made no categorical statements with hard and fast rules, like, "had nothing to do with," I also said that the team that osu put on the field that game deserved to lose based on the way they played...not making excuses. You're confusing explanations with excuses. I also never called a person a blind fan (I know that was prince, not you) or said anybody "had it out" for ohio state...I never even disagreed with what you said about them in the podcast, I just suggested that, as you agreed with in your podcast, ohio state has a dominant defense and missing key players has some effect on the pace and outcome of the game...I've not pointed to any conspiracies or made any statements without backing up my opinion.Nick, you're right-teams do deal with injuries, and that is a part of the sport. My statement simply is and has been that missing starters changes the on-field performance. This IS elementary, but elementary means basic-not wrong...If removing starters didn't do anything, coaches, not players, would get huge multimillion dollar, multi-year, blockbuster contracts. Besides, what if's are the nature of almost all analysis, or else analysts would just tell us what's going to happen...
I seriously doubt I alienated anyone...if you feel that way then I'm sorry. 1. You said, in exact words, that the fact that OSU was missing those players was why Wisconsin was able to run on them...that is a definitive statement. That is also an excuse. OSU had plenty of defensive talent on the field, including all their D linemen and their two of their three top linebackers (Moeller is not a true LB and had 19 whole tackles on the year). Homan isn't even their best LB. So, there goes that argument.2. I'm not sure what you've been watching for the best 20 years, but coaches get massive contracts because coaching and scheme has a huge effect on the game. Tressel himself makes $3.5 million a year and I know he isn't even the highest paid coach.3. While I agree that OSU has the best defense in the country, that doesn't preclude them from coming out flat in a game. They had nearly all of their best players for the Wisconsin game and they knew exactly what play was coming each and every time, yet, they got murdered. There is no explanation for that other than, for one game, Wisconsin was the better team. Any other opinion is stupid.4. What ifs are not a part of sports. What happens in the game happens and playing the what if game is pointless and unnecessary. I can come out and say that if the Cowboys did this or that then they would be a playoff team, but that makes me look dumb to say that. That's why I go on the podcast and talk about how bad the Cowboys have been and I don't make excuses for them.
I appreciate that you made counterpoints on this one. You're right in your facts-Moeller did only have 19 tackles, but because he's been injured most of the season-it was the week after the wisconsin game that they shut him down, if memory serves me correctly. Here is my rationale for stating that linebackers make a difference in that situation. A defensive line's main function, in my opinion, is not to make tackles-it's to contain and to close the running lanes. Yes, a lot of defensive ends make tackles in the backfield, but I think that's a plus, not the expectation. The linebackers are the ones who go and get the ball carrier after the line has been set. Both are crucial parts to the defense. I also think that osu's biggest defensive weakness is their secondary (and I think you'll agree with me on that one), so missing chekwa means that you drop your linebackers back to help out the weak link, your pass defense. Now they're not there as fast to go get a ball carrier, so the D-line's poor play that night is compounded. My rationale as to coaches vs. players contracts doesn't really apply to tressel, since other than cam newton, NCAA athletes aren't paid outside of scholarships...Peyton Manning and Tom Brady have bigger contracts than their coaches because they're better than other players...by a lot...and not even a quality defensive mind in romeo could make a quality defense out of the garbage the browns put on the field while he was there. I think I addressed point 3 in my reply to point 1, and as for what if's...you're absolutely right-they're not a part of sports...but they are a part of what we're doing here...they're the reason you asked prince if he wants frazier to be head coach long-term...etc. What if's do not equal excuses...I don't know why that term keeps coming up, since I've said repeatedly that the team ohio state put on the field deserved to lose that game.
In most cases I would give you your point on the function of the linebackers. However, that doesn't tell the whole story on what they do. Here is my point. The function of the defensive line, especially the interior, is to occupy blockers to free the linebackers to pursue the ball carrier. Even the best linebackers will struggle when blockers break through to their level (even Urlacher is often criticized for his inability to shed blocks). The function of the linebackers is to read and react. In the Wisconsin game, however, you could have literally pointed to the exact spot on the field where they were going to be running and you would have been correct for about 15 consecutive plays. There was no need to read the defense and no need to react to where the play was going. It was simply, get 9 guys in the box and plug that one area, and Wisconsin physically dominated them at the point of attack. No matter what injuries or what players were out there, Wisconsin was just crushing the defense. That is why I say that the injuries had no effect on the game. When you can just line up and run for chunks of yards without any fight, then you simply can't apply any reason other than, we got our butts kicked.On the coaches, you've pointed out a couple of the premier players, but you won't find anyone reputable that will take your opinion. Coaches are so incredibly important, more important than 95% of the players on the field.
I'm now happy to agree to disagree with you on this game. I remember seeing a lot of runs going to the sidelines after they got through the line, which to me is a sign that we weren't pursuing sideline-to-sideline and turning 3 yard runs into 10 yard ones, but I see your point as well.
So let's recap this...Jason- you make statements, and when you get a response you either dismiss it or say that you never said that (which is really annoying because we are literally copying and pasting from your comments). Landrum has gone through your comments and shown why your arguments are not valid, and all you say is that you will agree to disagree. How does that not make you blind or an extremely biased fan? And how can you say that you saw alot of anything in that game when you had to work and missed the whole first half?As for coaches not getting big contracts...i would say that coaches are more important to the game than what you have indicated. The players get big contracts because fans want to come and see them, but the coaching staff develops schemes so that those players can succeed. Then if a player does get hurt its the coach's responsibility to adjust the gameplan. I think that you do realize that though because, as you have stated before, you think that the browns would be 10-2 without Mangini.
Prince, let's recap this...I make statements, and back them up with evidence. You respond by coming after me...not any arguments. Landrum makes his points, then I make counterpoints...When did I ever dismiss an argument? In fact, outside of letting the whole Boise State thing go, I believe that I've addressed about every point made. I agree to disagree because, as we've discussed, what we're doing here is EXACTLY a game of what-if's...everything that doesn't happen on the field is based on some sort of what-if. I'm happy to disagree peacefully because I understand that a viewpoint other than my own can still be worthwhile and not stupid or blind. You're mad because I talk about OSU when I'm an OSU fan, but consider the possibility that I talk about OSU because I watch more OSU than you do, care more about OSU than you do, and will probably understand OSU better. We'll ignore the multiple times that I've heard you say that you really don't care about college football, and I'll happily address a real point made, such as your coaching one. You're right-coaches are important-but you like John Gruden...right? In the other podcast, Landrum talks about John Gruden getting fired for losing...and what was your rationale for liking him? A good coach can't win with bad players...Coaches can make good players great and great players untouchable, but nothing can make up for a lack of talent.
I'll make a quick illustration for this last point...As you both know...I am NOT a talented basketball player...you could put me in a room with 500 basketballs, Coach K, Pat Riley, Bobby Knight, and Phil Jackson...lock me in there for a week, and I will not be able to play basketball with a truly talented athlete.
evidence? really? where is your evidence that the browns should be 10-2, because I have actual evidence that says they are 5-8. Now onto OSU....you begin by saying that osu was missing their top 2 LBs, which landrum proved to be wrong. Then you say that they were missing 2 of their top 3 LBs and a cover CB. Landrum responds to that saying that one of the LBs you were referring to only has 19 tackles on the season and that the other is still not their top LB. I would also like to add that a cover CB is nice to have when the other team is passing the ball, but they are not going to make the impact against the run that you are implying. Then you tried to say that you weren't making excuses, but landrum uses your quotes to show where you in fact were. I would go on, but you get the idea. When someone make statements, then has them proved wrong, yet continues to believe in them what am I supposed to think other than they are a blind fan or that they are just dismissing the others comments? I know that I don't watch as much osu as you do, but I watch more football than you every week, and I saw as much, if not more of the OSU/WIS game than you did. As for Gruden, I want him to be with the vikings because he is a tough coach who has won in the past, and after the circus that has been the minnesota vikings this year I want to see someone from outside of the organization come in and take over. Also, with your illustration, we are not talking about people like you and me who would be terrible pro athletes, these coaches have the advantage of getting pros on their teams who have played their whole life...luckily for them. I would say that a coach and their scheme is one of the major reasons why you see a less talented team beat a superior one. I also don't understand why you think I'm mad. I am not the one who has been using capslock on certain words when I post...unless I am quoting you. Besides, you know I cant resist pissing off an OSU fan...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Alas, my T9 owned me again, it's supposed to be elementary school* That excuse flew on the kickball field but isn't passable anymore. It's just an argument that will either get you chastised or laughed at. "If we would have shed the blocker that play and tackled the running back they wouldn't have gained as many yards."I'm just as big of an ohio st fan as anyone else but I can readily admit injurys did not play a large part in that game. There just wasn't any stopping the run. Our defensive line just doesn't have the girth for lack of a better word to stop the run effectively.Announcers are an entirely differant discussion because 9/10 of them are awful.
Really, Prince? Caps lock is meant for emphasis on the important word...not yelling. You seem to be mad, or at least something like it, as you continually (and I repeat) come after me, not any argument I make. And more often than not, I am quoted out of context, or subtext is added to what I actually meant. See above...you once again mention that Moeller only had 19 tackles, but ignored the part where that was explained by the fact that he's been hurt for much of the season. I'm not positive on this stat, but I believe that when he got hurt, he was leading the team in either tackles, or TFL's. I also acknowledged Rolle as the best LB on the Buckeyes- that's conceding a point...the opposite of what a blind fan would do. Behind Rolle, however, Homan and Moeller are the most talented LB's. I explained my theory as to why Chekwa's absence was pertinent earlier, but that seems to be ignored as well. As for that game, yes, I missed the first half, but saw almost the entirety of the second half, which showed OSU come back to within 3 pts, then absolutely fall apart defensively, as if they were just exhausted.Nick, I agree that you can't blame one play for an entire game, but if you have watched the NFL much this year, what's the one thing you have heard when analysts explain why the Packers are only 8-5 this year? Half is their lack of running game, but almost every week, I hear about how there will be a challenge for them, since their defense is so banged up.In closing, Prince, don't mistake theory with fact...facts are evidence, not conclusions in and of themselves. Nobody has proved anything in this entire discussion, as it is all theoretical. (also, Nick, is your comment a repost? I'm guessing that your t9 thing means yes.)
Bloomy, I'm gonna be honest with you, and I don't want you to take this as if I am attacking you or anything. You are completely entitled to your opinion on the matter. I, obviously, don't agree with you at all and I think your football logic couldn't be more off. That is neither her nor there. My biggest issue at this point is that you are making a comment on a game you didn't watch and you don't have any of your facts straight from the beginning. I just did my own checking because I thought some of the things you were saying were dubious and I was correct. Ross Homan played in the Wisconsin game, recording 4 tackles and getting injured only after OSU trailed 21-3. Not only that, but Chekwa played as well and had little to no effect on the game because cover corners are not good in run defense, as I said. In essence, you were missing a utility defender who is nothing more than an average player at best. Again, I have no problem with you having an opinion, but you can't come out and make claims based on wrong info (and I include your coach comments in that) and then expect us to not jump all over it.
http://ohiostatebuckeyes.com/fls/17300/stats/football/2010/07wis.htm?SPSID=87745&SPID=10408&DB_OEM_ID=17300#GAME.DEFThis is taken straight off of Ohio State's website, and I included the link. It has the stats for the OSU/WIS game.Ross Homan 4 tackles...FACT (caps for emphasis)Chimdi Chekwa 4 tackles...FACT (caps for emphasis)So in conclusion, I would like to ask why you are trying to explain facts and evidence to me when you told us all that you back up your arguments with evidence...and we have since proved otherwise?
Landrum-can you give me a link to the website that shows when Homan gets hurt? I see his last recorded stat was near the end of the 1st quarter, but I can't find anything on him leaving the game since he wasn't injured on the field.
http://www.toledoblade.com/article/20101017/SPORTS16/10160440He was injured on the field...he left the game because of it but they were already down 21-3
I meant like there wasn't an injury timeout recorded in any boxscores I could find, so I'm assuming he got off the field on his own and in time-thanks though.