Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Hustle Belt Top 70 #57 Tarell Basham (DE - Ohio Bobcats)
Page: 1 of 2
Bcat2
General User
B2
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295
Victory
General User
V
Member Since: 3/11/2012
Post Count: 2,519
person
mail
Victory
mail
Posted: 7/26/2015 12:31 PM
Am I the only one that sees Basham as much more valuable than Daz?
Athens
General User
A
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,454
person
mail
Athens
mail
Posted: 7/26/2015 12:41 PM
Victory wrote:expand_more
Am I the only one that sees Basham as much more valuable than Daz?
No.
Valley Cat
General User
Member Since: 12/28/2004
Location: Jackson Twp., OH
Post Count: 1,246
mail
Valley Cat
mail
Posted: 7/26/2015 8:32 PM
Hopefully he progresses to make him much more valuable than #57 in the MAC. Needs another pass rusher on the opposite side of him to free him up.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/26/2015 8:43 PM
Victory wrote:expand_more
Am I the only one that sees Basham as much more valuable than Daz?

Both have the potential to be very valuable. I think everyone appreciates how much Basham could accomplish this year, but many underestimate the things that Daz can do for the team. Daz can help the team in a lot of ways, though, and if he breaks a couple punt returns or kickoff returns for TDs, and can improve his receiving, he certainly can deserve his ranking.
Bcat2
General User
B2
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295
person
mail
Bcat2
mail
Posted: 7/27/2015 7:36 AM
Valley Cat wrote:expand_more
Hopefully he progresses to make him much more valuable than #57 in the MAC. Needs another pass rusher on the opposite side of him to free him up.
Be nice if his stats were to improve , though, opponent DCs study film and if the result is that he draws constant double/triple team attention there is no higher praise. We just have to be able to look deeper than the stat sheet, like the Texans appear to have with C. Mc.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 7/27/2015 10:15 AM
What should we look at, then, if not the stat sheet?

The play on the field, the team's record?

Should we just assume that everything's perfect, as you seem to?
UpSan Bobcat
General User
Member Since: 8/30/2005
Location: Upper Sandusky, OH
Post Count: 3,817
mail
UpSan Bobcat
mail
Posted: 7/27/2015 10:40 AM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
What should we look at, then, if not the stat sheet?

The play on the field, the team's record?

Should we just assume that everything's perfect, as you seem to?
All he said was that his stats aren't the only indicator of the level of his play. If defenses give him all the attention, he might not accumulate numbers, but someone else will.
Mike Johnson
General User
Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: North Canton, OH
Post Count: 1,756
mail
Mike Johnson
mail
Posted: 7/27/2015 11:04 AM
It was more than double- and triple-teaming that held down Basham's stats. He didn't show the strength that I expected, and there were times he wasn't in position when the offense snapped the ball.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/27/2015 11:28 AM
UpSan Bobcat wrote:expand_more
All he said was that his stats aren't the only indicator of the level of his play. If defenses give him all the attention, he might not accumulate numbers, but someone else will.

When a defender ties up two offensive players, that means that somewhere there is a defender that has no offensive player on him. As an example, McLeod and Crutcher didn't have huge stats last year, but they did a great job of tying up the offensive line, with the result that the linebackers had great stats. My only worry about the defense for 2015 is whether the defensive line can continue to keep the linebackers free. I really don't worry about how many tackles the defensive tackles will make.
Last Edited: 7/27/2015 11:29:45 AM by L.C.
Bcat2
General User
B2
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295
person
mail
Bcat2
mail
Posted: 7/27/2015 4:25 PM
Mike Johnson wrote:expand_more
It was more than double- and triple-teaming that held down Basham's stats. He didn't show the strength that I expected, and there were times he wasn't in position when the offense snapped the ball.
Interesting. From the stands at the Independence Bowl I watched Tremayne Scott get into their QB's head. Scott was moving about, back off the line filling a passing lane which resulted in an audible. Then at the snap Scott would have moved again. Scott finished the bowl with 5 tkls, 2 tfl, 1 int & 2 sacks. Their QB Browning always checked Scott just before the snap. I would say most of the time Scott was not in position until just before the snap. He and Browning had a cat n mouse game within the game.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 3:14 AM
UpSan Bobcat wrote:expand_more
What should we look at, then, if not the stat sheet?

The play on the field, the team's record?

Should we just assume that everything's perfect, as you seem to?
All he said was that his stats aren't the only indicator of the level of his play. If defenses give him all the attention, he might not accumulate numbers, but someone else will.

Maybe. But this person, who about 100% appears to be allied with or tied to Athletics but who refuses to answer re the nature of that relationship, NEVER posts anything but effusive praise for the program.

So, if the play on the field is poor and the record's lousy against mediocre competition then fill-in-the-blank-with-useless/irrelevant-stat or point to anything other than reality.

I get it. There's some potential here. We have to have hope.

But the post here was about last year's performance on the field.

Sheesh--if the guy was getting the attention of 2 or 3 O-linemen, then shouldn't that have freed up other guys to make lots of big plays--sacks, tackles for loss? But, of course, there was little notable of that.

Again, it's 2015. The most effective blitz is not a balanced blitz. It's a flood-one-side wave. Will OHIO ever realize that and employ it?

But, hey, that doesn't matter; the coaches and team are infallible.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 3:16 AM
Sorry. I'm big on a reasonable representation of the truth.

I'm gonna call b.s. here for those pollyanna who keep telling us that everything's perfect when that's clearly not, has not been, the case.
Bcat2
General User
B2
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295
person
mail
Bcat2
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 6:20 AM
Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
What should we look at, then, if not the stat sheet?

The play on the field, the team's record?

Should we just assume that everything's perfect, as you seem to?
All he said was that his stats aren't the only indicator of the level of his play. If defenses give him all the attention, he might not accumulate numbers, but someone else will.

So, if the play on the field is poor and the record's lousy against mediocre competition then fill-in-the-blank-with-useless/irrelevant-stat or point to anything other than reality.

Sheesh--if the guy was getting the attention of 2 or 3 O-linemen, then shouldn't that have freed up other guys to make lots of big plays--sacks, tackles for loss? But, of course, there was little notable of that.

Again, it's 2015. The most effective blitz is not a balanced blitz. It's a flood-one-side wave. Will OHIO ever realize that and employ it?
Well, the truth is that from 2013 to 2014 changes to the defense resulted in the defense improving from 6th to 2nd in scoring defense. The rushing defense improved from allowing 188 to 133 per game and the average per rush from 4.6 to 3.9. For that to happen there would have had to have been both very good coaching and very good play on the field. I will take a #2 scoring defense every year and give pats on the back to everyone involved. No question we see things differently. Fewer sacks = better scoring/rush defense, go figure. Guess that is why they are the coaches. Glad they don't pay attention to all the amateur advice from the cheap seats.
Last Edited: 7/28/2015 6:22:51 AM by Bcat2
C Money
General User
Member Since: 8/28/2010
Post Count: 3,420
mail
C Money
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 7:12 AM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
Well, the truth is that from 2013 to 2014 changes to the defense resulted in the defense improving from 6th to 2nd in scoring defense. The rushing defense improved from allowing 188 to 133 per game and the average per rush from 4.6 to 3.9.
The defense also went from 7th in pass defense @ 217.9 per game to 10th @ 261.4 per game. Losing a pass rush could be a big reason for that.
Bcat2
General User
B2
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295
person
mail
Bcat2
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 7:22 AM
C Money wrote:expand_more
Well, the truth is that from 2013 to 2014 changes to the defense resulted in the defense improving from 6th to 2nd in scoring defense. The rushing defense improved from allowing 188 to 133 per game and the average per rush from 4.6 to 3.9.
The defense also went from 7th in pass defense @ 217.9 per game to 10th @ 261.4 per game. Losing a pass rush could be a big reason for that.
Honestly, are you saying that discounts the improvement in scoring/rush defense?
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 8:18 AM
C Money wrote:expand_more
The defense also went from 7th in pass defense @ 217.9 per game to 10th @ 261.4 per game. Losing a pass rush could be a big reason for that.

2013 is not a good basis for comparison. They turned the defensive line loose, and told them to penetrate and disrupt. They did disrupt, and got a record number of sacks, but the overall result was not good. Teams didn't pass against Ohio partly because they didn't need to, since running lanes were wide open.
C Money
General User
Member Since: 8/28/2010
Post Count: 3,420
mail
C Money
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 9:00 AM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
Well, the truth is that from 2013 to 2014 changes to the defense resulted in the defense improving from 6th to 2nd in scoring defense. The rushing defense improved from allowing 188 to 133 per game and the average per rush from 4.6 to 3.9.
The defense also went from 7th in pass defense @ 217.9 per game to 10th @ 261.4 per game. Losing a pass rush could be a big reason for that.
Honestly, are you saying that discounts the improvement in scoring/rush defense?

I'm saying there are trade-offs. Sure, on paper, the rush defense did better. And the scoring defense was an improvement. But if the other team can throw at will on you, I'm not sure how much it matters.

I know you subscribe to the "run the ball, stop the run" philosophy, so I wouldn't expect you to prefer pass defense for rush defense. But the pass defense was absolutely horrid at times last season, and simply pointing to a statistical improvement in rush defense as a sign of optimism is pretty shortsighted.

Plus, I still am not sure how we replace Mr. Crutcher, Mr. McLeod, and Mr. Davis on the inside without some regression in rush defense this year. Hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I am mentally preparing for teams to be able to run on us this year. I would have loved to see a big-bodied Neal Huynh-esque transfer come in to eat up blockers and keep the LBs free to do their damage.
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 9:57 AM
Look at our record last year, the teams we played and the scores. I'd say we were pretty miserable.

Anyone who thinks that we were any better than mediocre==to me that's willfully ignoring.

I don't enjoy that. But I do acknowledge the truth.

Look at the teams we played. Look at our record.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 10:21 AM
C Money wrote:expand_more
I'm saying there are trade-offs. Sure, on paper, the rush defense did better. And the scoring defense was an improvement. But if the other team can throw at will on you, I'm not sure how much it matters.....

To me, when you look at defense, in the end it's about points. Whether the other teams scores through the air, or on the ground, doesn't matter. The 2014 team gave up 24.8 points/game while the 2013 team gave up 27.5 a game. If they can replace McLeod and Crutcher, the 2015 team hopefully can keep it down to 23 or so.

Monroe Slavin wrote:expand_more
Look at our record last year, the teams we played and the scores. I'd say we were pretty miserable....

The defense was very good last year, second best in the MAC, actually. Unfortunately, however, the offense was not good last year, #11 in the MAC. That was largely because Ohio had one of the least experienced offensive lines in the country last year. With everyone back this year who played last year, plus the return of Wood, and two JUCOs the offensive line should be much better, and the entire offense will reflect that.

Most years Ohio averages 27-30 points a game, but last year they averaged only 20. If they can get back to 27 this year, and the defense can hold their average to under 24, it should be a pretty good year.
Bcat2
General User
B2
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295
person
mail
Bcat2
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 11:02 AM
C Money wrote:expand_more
Well, the truth is that from 2013 to 2014 changes to the defense resulted in the defense improving from 6th to 2nd in scoring defense. The rushing defense improved from allowing 188 to 133 per game and the average per rush from 4.6 to 3.9.
The defense also went from 7th in pass defense @ 217.9 per game to 10th @ 261.4 per game. Losing a pass rush could be a big reason for that.
Honestly, are you saying that discounts the improvement in scoring/rush defense?

I'm saying there are trade-offs. Sure, on paper, the rush defense did better. And the scoring defense was an improvement. But if the other team can throw at will on you, I'm not sure how much it matters.

I know you subscribe to the "run the ball, stop the run" philosophy, so I wouldn't expect you to prefer pass defense for rush defense. But the pass defense was absolutely horrid at times last season, and simply pointing to a statistical improvement in rush defense as a sign of optimism is pretty shortsighted.

Plus, I still am not sure how we replace Mr. Crutcher, Mr. McLeod, and Mr. Davis on the inside without some regression in rush defense this year. Hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I am mentally preparing for teams to be able to run on us this year. I would have loved to see a big-bodied Neal Huynh-esque transfer come in to eat up blockers and keep the LBs free to do their damage.
When you have have the #2 scoring defense, teams were not doing anything at will against you. I invite you to check the stats further. Pass Defense Efficiency actually improved slightly in 2014 130 from 133, though, Ohio was rated #7 in both years. Scoring defense is what matters and Ohio jumped from 6th to 2nd.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,697
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 11:13 AM
Mr. Pollyanna here: I'll add that with a half-way decent offense last year the defense would have looked even better because the other team would have had the ball less often. I'm sure some stat guru can come up with time of possession figures, but I would expect that OHIO lost that battle more often than not in games last year, because we had a lot of three-and-out possessions, if memory serves. We also stalled in the Red Zone on many, many occasions. If the offense improves as much as I expect this fall that'll help the defensive figures also. Go OHIO!
C Money
General User
Member Since: 8/28/2010
Post Count: 3,420
mail
C Money
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 12:02 PM
Bcat2 wrote:expand_more
When you have have the #2 scoring defense, teams were not doing anything at will against you. I invite you to check the stats further. Pass Defense Efficiency actually improved slightly in 2014 130 from 133, though, Ohio was rated #7 in both years. Scoring defense is what matters and Ohio jumped from 6th to 2nd.

You don't remember Rakeem Cato throwing for 303 yards and 3 TDs in the first half? You don't remember Titus Davis having 119 yards receiving and 2 TDs in the first quarter? You don't remember Zach Terrell throwing for 343 yards (212 of which were to Corey Davis)?

We gave up, on average, 38 points a game in those three losses.

When teams were able to throw on us at will, we lost, and we lost big.
TheBobcatBandit
General User
Member Since: 8/25/2013
Post Count: 618
mail
TheBobcatBandit
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 1:00 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Mr. Pollyanna here: I'll add that with a half-way decent offense last year the defense would have looked even better because the other team would have had the ball less often. I'm sure some stat guru can come up with time of possession figures, but I would expect that OHIO lost that battle more often than not in games last year, because we had a lot of three-and-out possessions, if memory serves. We also stalled in the Red Zone on many, many occasions. If the offense improves as much as I expect this fall that'll help the defensive figures also. Go OHIO!
+1 Everyone seems to forget that the best defense is a good offence. Last year our offense was pretty bad and we still managed to have one of the best defenses in the MAC. We can all expect big things this year from our defense. Even if our offence is just average this fall. I think we'll still have a shot at the MACC.
Last Edited: 7/28/2015 1:01:46 PM by TheBobcatBandit
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,821
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 7/28/2015 1:29 PM
C Money wrote:expand_more
When you have have the #2 scoring defense, teams were not doing anything at will against you. I invite you to check the stats further. Pass Defense Efficiency actually improved slightly in 2014 130 from 133, though, Ohio was rated #7 in both years. Scoring defense is what matters and Ohio jumped from 6th to 2nd.

You don't remember Rakeem Cato throwing for 303 yards and 3 TDs in the first half? You don't remember Titus Davis having 119 yards receiving and 2 TDs in the first quarter? You don't remember Zach Terrell throwing for 343 yards (212 of which were to Corey Davis)?

We gave up, on average, 38 points a game in those three losses.

When teams were able to throw on us at will, we lost, and we lost big.
Don't let facts get in the way of your argument C Money. That's silly.
Showing Messages: 1 - 25 of 40
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)