Our Honor Defend

I hope anyone who genuinely likes reading this blog understands that, as a dedicated career guy, I really have to hold myself back on posting in order to actualize my goals in the real world.  Lame, right?  I’d post every day if I could.  I’m shooting for about three posts a week in order to keep on top of things at work.  Therefore, I liken this blog to a bit of a mom and pop shop.  It might take a few days for something to come in, and it’ll probably cost more, but maybe you just like the banter.

Moving forward, there a few items to discuss in a measured manner, all of it pertaining to the men of the scarlet and gray.

Spring Kick Scrimmage

The Buckeyes do not lose much on offense or defense this year.  Thaddeus Gibson and Kurt Coleman will need to be replaced.  Nathan Williams helps on that matter.  Really, the offense and defense came along well enough at the end of the year for us to just hope they make the quantum leap forward.  The glaring weakness from last year that deserves immediate attention is special teams.  Pettrey has graduated, ostensibly leaving the kicking game in the hands of the hero of the Iowa game, Devin Barclay.  Further, Jon Thoma has left as well, leaving the punting game — the weak link on the 2009 team in my opinion — open for competition.  Lastly, the Buckeyes lose Lamaar Thomas and Ray Small, important players in their return game.  The spring kick scrimmage should therefore tell us a lot about the direction of this unit.

It did.  It told us we still got a way to go.  The special teams situation is complicated, at least for now.  The only real constant to emerge is Ben Buchanan, and even that is nuanced.  He will be punting for the Buckeyes in 2010, but we obviously wish to see none of those 30-35 yard punts that we got last year.  Unfortunately, Buchanan does not have that consistency yet.  He has also emerged in the field goal kicking scenario, along with early enrollee Drew Basil.  Barclay has made manageable kicks, but lacks the leg strength that Basil and Buchanan have to make the long bombs that Mike Nugent made.

Further, the Buckeyes are still looking for answers in the return game.  They have put everyone back there just to see what works.  If I had to guess, I think Posey will be returning punts.  Both he and Sanzy seem to have the presence of mind to field punts (a very important trait, given the circumstances), but Posey is obviously more durable.  Castel mentions Devon Torrence as a possibility as well.  Getting something in the kick return game would be nice.  We have been inadequate in that category since Ted Ginn Jr left.

Depth Chart

The depth chart is out.   Nothing is final, but a few things are worth mentioning.

• The tailback depth chart has overtaken the defensive line for the ridiculous depth award.  Our fifth stringer at the moment (Carlos Hyde) would be some prized recruit with significant playing time at a couple places around the country.
• Taurian Washington is the third wide receiver.
• Mike Adams is at LT.  I don’t see that changing.  Meanwhile, redshirt freshman Corey Linsley has positioned himself quite nicely at the right guard spot, behind senior Bryant Browning.
• No real surprises at the defensive line, outside Melvin Fellows’ Safari Planet.  The redshirt freshman is the second string strongside defensive end, behind Cam Heyward.  That’s crazy!
• The Buckeyes are still pretty solid on the defensive line, but the crazy depth is gone.  Fellows and Goebel are key players to watch.
• Etienne Sabino is having his best spring yet, and he is being rewarded by holding down the SAM backer spot.  Jonathan Newsome, who has been absent this entire spring, is the third string linebacker.
• The safety picture is the opposite of what I would have imagined.  I would have thought Hines at strong safety and Johnson at free safety.  I’m probably making too much out of the titles.  Zach Domicone and Tyler Moeller are your second teamers.
• Lastly: The Donnie is a second string cornerback.   Does that blow your mind?  Oh it’s happening.
• By the way, I’m calling dibs on any bandwagon that is formed regarding Donnie Evege.   I have sought for the better part of two years to understand the essence of Donnie — what he wants from us and what he may tell us about the mysteries of the universe, the same universe he will one day devour whole.  That is my bandwagon.  Mine.¹

Other Practice Observations

The Buckeyes concluded another practice session on Monday.  Write-ups are from the usual suspects (Ken Gordon, Dave Biddle, others that I may eventually add to this list).  A few things:

• The reports from Jake Stoneburner are genuinely very positive.  The redshirt sophomore is rounding into the form we thought he would be as a tight end: someone far too fast for defensive ends and linebackers and with ball skills to make everyone on the defense nervous.  This is exciting because a more experienced offensive unit can open up the playbook for an otherwise little used position like the tight end (I know… I know, but one of us had to mention it).  Nevertheless, I am more interested in how Stoneburner is progressing as a blocker.  At least, how has the staff reconciled this if they are eschewing that part of his game?  Two TE sets with backup Reid Fragel Rock?  To my knowledge, not much has been said about this.
• Cris Carter has been to more spring practices than his son, and the elder carter exhausted his eligibility in the spring of 1987.  Duron Carter and Jonathan Newsome are still MIA.  No official reason has been given, to my knowledge.  Academics have been discussed by people who bring this up, but nothing official.
• Jordan Hall and Jaamal Berry are quite a 3-4 punch.  If the NCAA is going to expand the basketball tournament to an absurd 96, then maybe we can expand the number of players Ohio State is allowed to field on a given football play to 15.
• Nate Oliver, and not CJ Barnett, was your nickelback on Monday.  Subject to change, but worth noting.
• Nathan Williams continues to be a bad, bad dude.

Sign-Stealing

I was tempted to write what may have amounted to a 1,500 word post admonishing people responsible for the the following passage regarding Oregon’s new system of signs on offense or people who seem to believe or otherwise give credence to it.  You have probably come across it by now, but to recap:

EUGENE – Ohio State was so successful at stopping Oregon’s offense in its 26-17 win over the Ducks in the Rose Bowl that, at times, it seemed as if the Buckeyes knew what was coming.

Did they?

“There were a couple times last year when we kind of felt like our signals were, maybe, compromised,’’ offensive coordinator Mark Helfrich said.

It very well could have been talent, hard work and preparation on the part of Ohio State, but the Ducks don’t like the idea of having their offensive code cracked.

Again, the temptation to scold loudly is great.  Ultimately, I would’ve been belaboring two basic points.

This is the fault of the journalist.  Any criticism directed at Oregon has to be mindful that it is the journalist, not Mark Helfrich and company, insinuating that Ohio State cheated.  I understand that such a mundane football article written in the dog days of the offseason begs to have some kind of hook to invite the reader.  In doing so, he implies without saying… but he kind of says it anyways.  He backtracks partially in the fourth paragraph, but does so after instilling in the reader some sense of culpability on Ohio State’s part.  The first four paragraphs can be succinctly summarized as “Did Ohio State cheat to shut down Oregon’s high powered, nationally elite offense when very few people on local and national media thought they would? Maybe (but maybe not).”  This invites negative interpretation.  There are worse things to do in the world of journalism; it’s called Glenn Beck and Keith Olbermann.  Still, this was weak sauce.  It doesn’t help that the internet is the wild, wild west of humanity either.

Second, and this is the biggie, party people: never, ever confuse cheating by Side A with naïveté on Side B to believe that preferences and signals are not revealed through time and through behavior.  Cheating and being poor at concealing (or good at deducing) private information are not equivalent concepts, something the author of the article does not consider.  Cheating by Side A would be using a mole in Oregon’s football program to hand over a copy their playbook or lace their Gatorade with tryptophan.  Cheating by Side A would be wiretapping Oregon’s booth in the Rose Bowl or their practice field.  Naïveté by Side B would be not believing that it’s conceivable that you can be “figured out” in a strategic setting.  Ohio State has a quality defensive coaching staff, led by diligent coaches like Jim Heacock and Luke Fickell.  The bowl preparation gives them over three weeks to watch every single game and every single play, allowing them to pick up tendencies and where Oregon’s offense may inadvertently tip their hand².  It is accumulated information that updates prior beliefs about tendencies of another player (or team) in a game.  It holds in every strategic setting: markets, social interactions, political gamesmanship, and even football.  In the football context, more games, and more time to parse through them, yields more information about the substance of a team’s signals.  Deducing the opponent’s strategy in a strategic setting is not cheating; it’s just being good.

An important adjustment that Oregon is making in this strategic setting is to better conceal their private information through bluffing mechanisms like nonsense audibles and nonsensical signs on the sideline.  And really, good for them to be devising ways to stay one step ahead of the competition.  In the meantime, I shudder to think of a situation where any loss on the gridiron by a team with a purported offensive superiority should be construed by journalists and fans as mere cheating.  There was no allegation of cheating after the debacle in January 2007.  Why should this — without any given proof — be any different?

Do get back to me if G. Gordon Liddy and John Dean are somehow connected to all of this, though…

1. You are all welcome aboard, but there is a toll.  Exact change, please. [↩]
2. It is not like we totally shut down Oregon’s offense.  Their meager yardage belies the fact that special teams gave them great field position and that they do not believe in time of possession.  The Buckeyes do believe in time of possession and were able to play keep-away at important stretches.  It also doesn’t help when LaGarrette Blount fumbles a ball twenty yards out of the end zone for a touchback.  Even then, one wonders what signs there were to steal regarding their offense.  They privilege two running plays in rushing situations — inside and outside zone read — that account for over half of their ground production.  They struck with the fly sweep once we (initially) took those away and the Buckeyes managed to gradually adjust to that as well.  Further, the lion’s share of their passing game looks for quickie underneath passes (bubble screens, half rolls) or verticals.  I don’t think this is on par with the Voynich manuscript. [↩]