Get your tin foil hat out, I've got a good one
We're keeping Royster's carries down to keep him from running off to the NFL. By using him as a receiver, punt returner, and by using Green more (8 carries to Royster's 12) we're keeping Royster from being a featured TB. By doing so we're keeping him healthy and making sure he isn't going anywhere. I know it's not true, but it's good for discussion on this glorious Sunday afternoon.
2 months ago
millzners
7 comments
0 recs |
Comments
Is that Tressel's strategy as well?
Keep drugging Pryor prior to each game so that he comes out looking like crap, just so he’ll stay at OSU for a fouth year?
"I thought the kid we were using had the potential to be a good quarterback, and I blew that one." - Joseph V. Paterno
by leeharvey418 on Sep 13, 2009 12:52 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
As much as I find that statement ridiculous
I almost want it to be true. I hate it when talented kids leave early, even if it’s the best option for them (See: Mayhem, Project). With 2010 being a new-QB year, I think it’s the best decision that Royster stays to help out and maybe finally get the hype and recognition he really deserves. That would also give the reigns to Green as the starting RB, which is probably not a great idea either, no offense to him, but he’s a threat, not a starting back.
by dawsonPSU10 on Sep 13, 2009 1:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't gonna read any fanposts/shots today
but this title lured me in.
I also admit to thinking similar thoughs.
My other thoughts about why the run game is struggling: the coaches realized the O-line in pass protection, and our WRs were our biggest concerns, so they spent a majority of time working on that, to make sure Clark is protected, and the WRs recieve enough reps to be competent, that they just assumed the run game will come along in time (since it is usually the first/easier one to develop). Unfortunately we’re progressing slower than we’d like, but I’m still confident we’ll get the running game going in time for when we’ll actually need it.
Speaking of which…what Big 10 team am I supposed to be scared of this year? I really don’t know anymore, since other than Michigan (shudder), and to an extent Northwestern, every Big 10 team I’ve seen so far has looked very weak, and Northwestern is Northwestern, and I just don’t believe Michigan has fully rebounded yet (though both of those games are away for us, which is always scary).
by The JuggerNitt on Sep 13, 2009 2:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Quick correction
and Northwestern is just Northwestern
Fixed.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Sep 13, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course this is all a bunch of BS, but it’s just so odd that you have this talent at TB and he’s splitting carries with a backup almost the whole game.
Royster lining up at receiver is actually a brilliant move, IMO, Royster is a total mismatch for a LB to cover. So I don’t think that’s much of a concern. And we’ve beaten the punt return topic into the ground, so really it’s not important either.
I just don’t know why Green is getting the snaps he is so early in these games — I miss the days of Tony Hunt and 30 carries. If we had a bruiser like that in the backfield we’d have no problem on 4th and goal, and we’d probably have even more success in the passing game (if that’s possible). I just don’t know what they see in Green, he’s too impatient with reading his blocks and he almost always ends up plowing right into the back of an offensive linemen instead of gunning for open space.
"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.
by millzners on Sep 13, 2009 6:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs




















