Silly Statistics: The Over-Criticized Offense vs. OSU

by Bleed Blue 'n White on Oct 26, 2008 12:57 AM EDT

"The defenses dominated at OSU." "Penn State's vaunted offense was struggling." "Both teams looked out of sync."

Sound familiar? Too bad they're all wrong. Here's one thing you won't hear: Penn State had a grand total of zero three and outs. Zero. They had only one drive in which they gained under 20 yards. (Ohio State had one three and out.)

If there was one thing I wish football fans would understand, it's this: Points aren't all about offense, and offenses aren't just about scoring points. We held OSU to six points - and a good portion of that was because our offense was keeping them deep in their territory, where our defense had a long field to work with.

Points usually happen when bad things happen on defense: missed tackles, blown coverages, etc. Defenses typically have an advantage in numbers in a football game, and so disciplined defenses will keep any offense from scoring points on long fields, because sooner or later in the drive, the defense will guess right on a play, and force a negative situation, and end the drive.

The other reason for the low-scoring game is simple: Penn State had only 8 possessions. A normal game usually is 12 possessions long. The game was simply short.

A low-scoring game does not mean a bad offense. Bad offenses have turnovers, penalties, and bunches of 3-and-outs. Penn State had none of those. This was simply a short game in which both defenses played extremely disciplined football.

Thanks for the fanpost! Please do not post any content from a premium site that requires a subscription. Also, if you just want to share a link, quote, or video, please consider using fanshots instead. Thanks.

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Agreed

This was a tactical ball control game. There was one drive where a team had a short field and that resulted in a TD. Combine field position with stout defense and you end up with a low score. The Pac-10 and (now) Big-12 games that end up 52-38 are largely because of teams repeatedly getting short fields off of turnovers. Both PSU and OSU avoided turnovers and pinned opponents deep with punts.

Of course, unless you’re the SEC, you can’t win. In the SEC low scoring games result from superior defense, while high scoring games result from superior offense.

by gcdyersb on Oct 26, 2008 1:57 AM EDT reply actions

We Need

TO RUN THE BALL WITH ROYSTER! why do they refuse to let him get 20+? He is a great talent running behind a great line. I know you wanna get Dwill his touches and I’m all for it but we got to get Royster more carries, if he carries the ball more in the first quarter i guarantee the games not this close.

by PSU4ever31 on Oct 26, 2008 2:34 AM EDT reply actions

Royster was getting stuffed early

The entire first half the Buckeyes were in the PSU backfield. If PSU had been getting yardage from Royster, he would have gotten more carries. Not his fault as the line was not letting him get to the second level. In the 4th quarter Royster finally started getting to the next level. The O-line needed to wake up earlier. It didn’t matter who had the ball.

by gcdyersb on Oct 26, 2008 3:00 AM EDT up reply actions

I don’t entirely agree. I think they were forcing Williams a bit early – I think a few plays with Williams and Royster split in the backfield, and Williams motioning outside to look like a flare screen when it’s actually something like a delayed draw to the opposite side with Royster would be smart, and would allow them to actually get the Buckeye defense to possibly sleep on Williams being in the backfield a bit more.

I was wondering all game if they had apparently used up their screen quotient last week, as this week would’ve been a much better time for them. Screens to Royster, not the flare screens to Williams. You want to get that Buckeye DL thinking “wait, was I just played?” while allowing the OL to utilize their athleticism against lighter opponents.

by Bleed Blue 'n White on Oct 26, 2008 6:20 AM EDT up reply actions

Good points BBW

I am there with ya. I was really surprised they kept trying DWill and that weird little trap in the middle had me sayin ‘wha…?’ Oh well, all’s well that ends well!

If you can smile when things go wrong, you have someone in mind to blame.

by TheMightyErik on Oct 26, 2008 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions

Screens may well have worked, but OSU looked pretty disciplined. Definitely would have been worth a try to get them off balance. Some misdirection plays from the wishbone could have been effective as well. Once you have success on an end around, a delayed draw play is like an automatic first down.

I’m just wondering though if any of the slow developing plays would have been especially effective early. Success begets more success since the defense doesn’t know who to defend. But if you can’t hold your blocks long enough, you don’t have a leg to stand on.

I suppose I don’t want to defend the play calling so much as suggest that a determined athletic OSU defense was going to hold us down regardless until the O-line started winning its 1 v. 1 battles.

by gcdyersb on Oct 27, 2008 12:45 AM EDT up reply actions

Paterno had it right

We had shitty field position the whole game. Ohio State’s defense is too good to go the length of the field on. But we were always able to get a couple of first downs and keep them pinned.

Meanwhile, their offense made some plays, but could not sustain anything. Every yard OSU got was a result of a Penn State breakdown, or a great play on their part. But nothing they did worked.

"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008

by jesse. on Oct 26, 2008 9:35 AM EDT reply actions

Yes, but

the reason field position was poor is because the Lions got beat on special teams.
gcdyersb- you saw the same game I did. We got beat and beat up by the OSU D line until the devlin drives. They punished Daryll, I think he was hurt from the first time he ran. And early in the 4th, when was the last time he badly missed 2 wide open targets?
But they did control OSU the last 12 min of the game.
This game will be very instructive for our program because OSU is the class program in the Big 10 right now. How to be competitive every year, instead of one in four. That’s the challenge.
As Pryor matures OSU will be very very hard to handle.

by dr kill on Oct 26, 2008 10:48 AM EDT reply actions