Ohio State Football 2015 [continued]

[traderumor]

Sure but even Maryland, they scored 49 pts and won by 3 TDs. I think it's unfair to expect more than that

That game was closer than that, though. I did not view their season that way, but that was the source of the criticism. Against Maryland, the game was supposed to be decided by halftime, it wasn't, so that was a fail to many.

[Sea Ray]

That game was closer than that, though. I did not view their season that way, but that was the source of the criticism. Against Maryland, the game was supposed to be decided by halftime, it wasn't, so that was a fail to many.

It should have been (settled by halftime) but this is college football. They don't always go the way they're supposed to. The national championship a decade ago involved games that were much closer than they should have been (Purdue). It happens every year

[bucksfan2]

tOSU was just a victim of circumstances with-in the B1G and other conferences. Think about it. Oklahoma, Clemson, and 'Bama are fortunate to be there. It just didnt roll the Bucknuts way this year.

Yea that is what happened. Its a little easier to swallow in the playoff now, but there are always seasons in which your team is one of the best in the country but gets left out because of a loss or even two. I have seen ultra talented OSU teams fall short because of a slip up. Clemson deserves it this year, the others, especially Oklahoma and Bama are lucky because IMO they suffered bad losses but were over to come it based upon perception. Oh and either not having a playoff or being on the side of a weaker division. Or better yet playing a team in the Conference title game that may have been the worst offensive team I have ever seen.

[cincrazy]

Yea that is what happened. Its a little easier to swallow in the playoff now, but there are always seasons in which your team is one of the best in the country but gets left out because of a loss or even two. I have seen ultra talented OSU teams fall short because of a slip up. Clemson deserves it this year, the others, especially Oklahoma and Bama are lucky because IMO they suffered bad losses but were over to come it based upon perception. Oh and either not having a playoff or being on the side of a weaker division. Or better yet playing a team in the Conference title game that may have been the worst offensive team I have ever seen.

In my opinion, this is the fourth best Ohio State team to not win the national title. The 1969 team lost to Michigan on the last day of the season and went on to win the Rose Bowl, the 1998 Bucks had an inexplicable loss to Michigan State at home but absolutely rolled over everyone else that season, and the 2005 Buckeyes had the wind knocked out of their sails early vs. Texas because of Troy Smith's suspension (I think he was available for that game, but Tressel went with Zwick for the majority of it.) The 2015 Buckeyes, in my opinion, were more about unrealized potential. We know how great they COULD have been, but truthfully we only saw that in one game this year. This core group of players tends to play best with their backs against the wall, and unfortunately it took a loss to MSU to wake them up out of their slumber.

[traderumor]

It should have been (settled by halftime) but this is college football. They don't always go the way they're supposed to. The national championship a decade ago involved games that were much closer than they should have been (Purdue). It happens every year

Well, yea, we're agreeing. I'm talking about why the critics were "disappointed" or felt like the team was overachieving.

[Revering4Blue]

In my opinion, this is the fourth best Ohio State team to not win the national title. The 1969 team lost to Michigan on the last day of the season and went on to win the Rose Bowl, the 1998 Bucks had an inexplicable loss to Michigan State at home but absolutely rolled over everyone else that season, and the 2005 Buckeyes had the wind knocked out of their sails early vs. Texas because of Troy Smith's suspension (I think he was available for that game, but Tressel went with Zwick for the majority of it.) The 2015 Buckeyes, in my opinion, were more about unrealized potential. We know how great they COULD have been, but truthfully we only saw that in one game this year. This core group of players tends to play best with their backs against the wall, and unfortunately it took a loss to MSU to wake them up out of their slumber.

I don't know.

IMO, the 96' team was every bit as good as '98, even with the loss to Michigan. This was in the Mythical National Championship days, anyway, and the Buckeyes were tied to the Rose Bowl, where they knocked off previously undefeated Arizona State - Frankly, IMO, both OSU and that Arizona State team, with Jake Plummer, were better teams than either the overhyped teams (Florida and Florida State) that played for the MNC that year. Four teams ended up with one loss, so there should have been a split MNC.

Also, IMO, the previously undefeated '79 team that lost the Rose Bowl after going undefeated in a very tough Big Ten Season - Just top give you an idea of how tough the league was then, both IU and Purdue ended the season ranked, IIRC. In what turned out to be a 17-16 loss against an enormously talented USC team, rather than kick a Field Goal, Earle Bruce's second quarter decision to go for it on fourth and goal from the 1 backfired as QB Art Schlichter - still the best OSU QB I've ever seen, as he was considered the equal to Elway and Marino at the time - was tackled literally inches from the goal line on an option play.

There's really no way to qualify an argument either way, but it makes for a fun - or agonizing, depending on your point-of-view - debate.

[Assembly Hall]

I don't know.

IMO, the 96' team was every bit as good as '98, even with the loss to Michigan. This was in the Mythical National Championship days, anyway, and the Buckeyes were tied to the Rose Bowl, where they knocked off previously undefeated Arizona State - Frankly, IMO, both OSU and that Arizona State team, with Jake Plummer, were better teams than either the overhyped teams (Florida and Florida State) that played for the MNC that year. Four teams ended up with one loss, so there should have been a split MNC.

Also, IMO, the previously undefeated '79 team that lost the Rose Bowl after going undefeated in a very tough Big Ten Season - Just top give you an idea of how tough the league was then, both IU and Purdue ended the season ranked, IIRC. In what turned out to be a 17-16 loss against an enormously talented USC team, rather than kick a Field Goal, Earle Bruce's second quarter decision to go for it on fourth and goal from the 1 backfired as QB Art Schlichter - still the best OSU QB I've ever seen, as he was considered the equal to Elway and Marino at the time - was tackled literally inches from the goal line on an option play.

There's really no way to qualify an argument either way, but it makes for a fun - or agonizing, depending on your point-of-view - debate.

You are right about the '79 season. That was a grind in the Big 10. IIRC, Purdue finished 2nd, Michigan 3rd, and IU 4th. Loved that Buckeye team. BTW, IU beat an undefeated BYU team in the Holiday Bowl that year. The Bucknuts spanked the Hoosiers by 40 in conference play. They were pretty damn good.

[villain612]

Urban Meyer is now 50-4 at Ohio State.

[BuckeyeRed27]

Urban Meyer is now 50-4 at Ohio State.

And some how only has 1 Big 10 championship. Crazy.

[Assembly Hall]

And some how only has 1 Big 10 championship. Crazy.

Well, they were ineligible that one year. They would have won the B1G and the national championship if they were.

[GAC]

I had no issue with Bosa being charged with targeting. As soon as I saw him leading with his helmet ... and IMO it was deliberate, no doubt ..... I went "Rut Roh". That is targeting in accordance with the NCAAF rule change (2013).

Now if one wants to debate that the punitive action is too severe (ejection), then that's another issue.

Joey is a helluva ballplayer. And to complement his overall athletic ability is his intensiveness, as well as aggressiveness. But Joey, as well as every player on that field, also KNOWS the rule when it comes to targeting. In that situation.... no matter that he was caught up in the moment, adrenaline pumping .... he knew better, and didn't need to lead with his helmet. Pretty obvious IMO.

But I do believe the targeting rule needs fixed. I see it in a similar way as those ridiculous "no tolerance" rules in schools that are too strict and lack common sense. Just like in the schools, those "officials" can only follow and implement the "letter of the law" (no leniency).

Perfect example.... look what happened to Michigan LBer Bolden in that game vs MSU. When a player gets ejected for being blocked into a quarterback while pushed to the ground, your rule has a serious problem.

It needs fixed. Good article..... http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...ds-to-be-fixed

[traderumor]

I had no issue with Bosa being charged with targeting. As soon as I saw him leading with his helmet ... and IMO it was deliberate, no doubt ..... I went "Rut Roh". That is targeting in accordance with the NCAAF rule change (2013).

Now if one wants to debate that the punitive action is too severe (ejection), then that's another issue.

Joey is a helluva ballplayer. And to complement his overall athletic ability is his intensiveness, as well as aggressiveness. But Joey, as well as every player on that field, also KNOWS the rule when it comes to targeting. In that situation.... no matter that he was caught up in the moment, adrenaline pumping .... he knew better, and didn't need to lead with his helmet. Pretty obvious IMO.

But I do believe the targeting rule needs fixed. I see it in a similar way as those ridiculous "no tolerance" rules in schools that are too strict and lack common sense. Just like in the schools, those "officials" can only follow and implement the "letter of the law" (no leniency).

Perfect example.... look what happened to Michigan LBer Bolden in that game vs MSU. When a player gets ejected for being blocked into a quarterback while pushed to the ground, your rule has a serious problem.

It needs fixed. Good article..... http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...ds-to-be-fixed

I definitely think the penalty is too severe. There are a lot of legal hard hits out there that are very dangerous and cause injuries, and just as dangerous illegal hits that do not result in ejecting a player. The ejection is too arbitrary considering the nature of the game. And the funny thing is, that the rule is a "safety issue," how many targeting calls are mixed up with a guy laying on the ground injured? My guess would be a negligible percentage. And targeting only gets called in one on one situations, never do you see it called in a situation with multiple players. So targeting does not occur except in plays where two players are isolated? This is one of those things where the rule makes sense, and it has always made sense. It was called "spearing" and has always been illegal and resulted in a penalty. "If it ain't broke, let's fix it til it is," was in play when they created this rule.

[villain612]

If Bosa doesn't get that penalty, it could've been a blowout. It not only reversed the interception on the play, but he was absolutely manhandling their O-line up that point.

[Assembly Hall]

If Bosa doesn't get that penalty, it could've been a blowout. It not only reversed the interception on the play, but he was absolutely manhandling their O-line up that point.

From where I am sitting it was a blowout regardless. Just sayin'! LOL

[GAC]

I definitely think the penalty is too severe. There are a lot of legal hard hits out there that are very dangerous and cause injuries, and just as dangerous illegal hits that do not result in ejecting a player. The ejection is too arbitrary considering the nature of the game. And the funny thing is, that the rule is a "safety issue," how many targeting calls are mixed up with a guy laying on the ground injured? My guess would be a negligible percentage. And targeting only gets called in one on one situations, never do you see it called in a situation with multiple players. So targeting does not occur except in plays where two players are isolated? This is one of those things where the rule makes sense, and it has always made sense. It was called "spearing" and has always been illegal and resulted in a penalty. "If it ain't broke, let's fix it til it is," was in play when they created this rule.

Not totally disagreeing at all with what you're saying. And I think it should also be emphasized that the targeting rules (9-1-3 and 9-1-4) have not changed from previous years. It's the penalty (ejection) that has changed. And that's where the "debate" begins ... is it too excessive?

We all agree that football is not only a very physical sport, but violent. It's why we watch it (LOL). I can remember back in the day (60s/70s) when players didn't have all the protection, weren't in as good of physical shape (conditioning, etc), and they basically beat the crap out of each other, wasn't uncommon to see players bloodied after the game. There wasn't much emphasis at all on safety. And we see that in a lot of those former players and the toll it took on their bodies.

So I can understand the emphasis in today's game on safety to a certain degree, and trying to do what they can in some areas. I agree with the concussion protocol for instance.

According to the NCAA rules, target is defined "to take aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with an apparent intent that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball."

And a defenseless player is defined as "a player not in position to defend himself".

So I think the Bosa situation qualifies.

Examples of a defenseless player.....

Rule 2-27-14:            

A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass.
A receiver attempting to catch a pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier.
A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.
A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick.
A player on the ground.
A player obviously out of the play.
A player who receives a blind-side block.
A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.
A quarterback any time after a change of possession.

HINTS FOR PLAYERS

Don’t lead with your head
Lower your target--don’t go for the head or neck area with anything
Tackle: Heads-up and wrap-up

So I agree with all the above. I think they need to "re-work" the penalty that doesn't go as far as an ejection.

But again, until there is some sort of re-examination of the rule, players (like Bosa) KNOW the rule, KNOW it means ejection... and they need to use their head in other ways