There's a difference between being a good football program and a winning football program. Look, we all love Frank and what he's done. Ohio was a cellar dweller for decades before Frank (other than the Grobe tenure). He's built a good football program that wins more than it loses most years. That's a helluva lot better than where Ohio used to be. I'm happy for that.

However, there are some things that concern me.

Frank's loyalty is both a blessing and a curse. Ohio has been damn lucky to have basically the same regime for 10 years. That simply does not happen at programs at this level. Bcat2 has pointed out that Steele loves Ohio's coaching. Yeah, because stability always looks good. Look at what WMU, CMU, NIU, and BG have recently gone through with coaching changes. NIU is an outlier in that they keep winning MAC titles, but I think that says more about the culture and identity of the football program than it does actual coaches.

It's been awesome that Ohio has had that stability because it lets fans, recruits and media know what they're getting year-in, year-out. It also shows his current players that if you do right, work hard, keep your grades up and be loyal to the program, the program will be loyal back. Does this mean that players like that get more and better opportunities? Maybe. I don't know. But I wouldn't be surprised because that sounds like a good thing on both sides.

However, stability and loyalty sometimes come with a price. Sometimes Ohio can't get the recruits it should or needs. (Has anyone seen what Roger Lewis is doing at BG? He was ours, right?) Sometimes, the wrong plays are called repeatedly (BUTM) or a player simply doesn't have it that day. Sometimes, the defense allows a long 3rd down to be converted which absolutely crushes any momentum. Players have to perform, but you know what? Coaches have to coach and put them in the right position, too. And I'm not talking just about Frank here. It's the whole staff.

We can talk all day about schemes and play-calling and what have you, but it goes deeper than that. This program needs a jolt. I'm talking a big, fat lighting bolt up the rear. It's just felt so mundane for the last few years. Since the Penn State win, and the last time Ohio beat Marshall, what really has there been to get super excited about? A second tier bowl game? Yay.

I want MAC titles and a chance at a lucrative payout in a rotation bowl. This program deserves it. It's been so close, yet so far. NIU went to five straight MAC Championship games. FIVE STRAIGHT. And they won three of those. From the West Division! There is absolutely no reason why Ohio can't do the same. Or at least win ONE.

You know who else has won a MAC title since Frank has been the coach? Buffalo. Akron. Miami. You know who else has been there? Ball State. Kent State. All of these programs have been arguably bad since Frank took over at Ohio, save for one or two breakout seasons. Ball State going 12-0 was an anomaly.

I still think Frank has that jolt somewhere. Will we ever see it? Who knows. But man, just give me something to be excited about. I wanna see a 44-7 beatdown of someone we shouldn't beat 44-7. I want to scare the crap out of a Power 5 school, or hell, beat them.

Remember how awesome it was when Ohio got the black jerseys? Remember the utter elation amongst the squad? THAT is what I want. I want kids so fired up about something that they go out and tear someone's heart out. Hell, I was ready to go balls out for Frank on that night and I haven't strapped a helmet on in almost 15 years. Obviously, Ohio can't do another one of those. It needs to be something new.

Here's what I don't want:

"Well it's 1st down and 10 from the 27 yard line, Vick takes the snap and runs the read option. Oulette takes it up the middle and gets three yards." If that is the first play from scrimmage against Idaho...

The numbers I posted earlier show that Burrow is probably the best defensive coordinator in the MAC. He was just a shade worse than NIU, but NIU had a much better offense, and the best defense is often a good offense that keeps the ball away from the other team. So, when he nearly matched NIU, it was probably a bigger accomplishment from a defensive standpoint. To be honest, I'm a little surprised no one has hired him away.

Were they times when it would have been nice to get a three and out when they didn't? Of course, but pretty much all the rules changes in the last 20 years have been to make it easier for the offense, to get higher scores. That's the nature of the game these days. Once upon a time a great defense gave up less than ten a game, and now a defense that gives up under 20 a game is pretty rare.


On the other side of the ball, the Offensive Coordinator(s) have been better than average, but not by much. They rank fifth, but that's with the assistance of an outstanding defense, so they probably belong a notch or two lower. That, I presume, is why Albin was never named sole offensive coordinator, but rather was a co-coordinator, first with Gdowski, and now with Isphording. Still, he's better than average, and if he were replaced, you might get someone better (in which case he might get hired away), or you might get someone worse. Instead, I have no problem with the incremental approach, bringing in a new person as a co-coordinator, with the hopes that new ideas in the mix makes the offense even better.


This is a concept that is foreign to a lot of people, but one that is important to grasp if you want to truly understand offensive playcalling. When you are playing a video game, you just want to call plays that work the best. In real life there are other factors at work, both of which you mention:
1. If you think you have a strength advantage, you might want to try to wear the other team down by running right at them. If you are right, the play may be stopped, but it takes it's toll, and as the game goes on, and the defense tires, it works progressively better.
2. You may run a play to set up another play in the future. If the other team has no fear of your running game, it is very, very difficult to pass effectively because their linemen can rush with abandon, and their defensive backs can ignore play action. If they fear the run, the linemen have to use a contained rush, and the defensive backs have to be wary of the run.

In addition, when they keep running rushing plays, to our eyes the plays may look the same, but in reality they are tinkering with the blocking, trying to alter things to make it work, or, the defense may have changed alignments. Some of these things are very, very difficult, if not impossible to see on TV because they just focus on the ball carrier. Sometimes you get a great color guy, and he will slow the action down, and diagram some of the different things that are going on up front, but that doesn't happen as often as I'd like.

A beatdown of Louisiana-Monroe isn't exactly what I was talking about. Ohio should be beating teams like that regularly. And I'm fine with wearing Idaho out, but just stop being so freaking predictable. Change it up!

I'm curious why it doesn't count for anything? They were 8-4 at the time, as was Ohio, and it was expected to be a close, hard fought game. I believe La-Monroe was favored, but only by a few points.

To me that game gave an inkling of what might have been. I think 2 or three of the 19 players that were lost for the season returned for the bowl. I'm thinking Jones, Scott, and maybe one offensive linemen. Before all the injuries that was a very good team. It was no fluke that they beat Penn State. After the injuries they were a mid MAC team.

Sir Paul. I remember before the Independence Bowl you said you did not plan on wasting your time watching what surely was going to be a bad game for Ohio. Turned out Ohio 45-14, I think. So it seems when you are convinced the sky is falling Ohio is about to kick someones buttocks.

I don't disagree with any of that.

Bcat2,

I appreciate your passion for Ohio football, but cmon. Every Ohio loss last year was by 17 points or more, excluding the NIU game of 21-14. If you're gonna pick and choose examples to throw out there, you have to also acknowledge the 44-14 loss to Marshall, the 28-10 loss to CMU, the 31-13 loss to BG and the 42-21 loss to WMU. I don't think the UK game was necessarily a bad loss, but Ohio still lost by 17 points.

And least we forget the combined score of 123-16 against BG, Buffalo and Kent State the year before.

There have been bad losses, really bad ones. You can't deny that.

YES, HE CAN.

I see potential flaws in your logic, L.C.

First, he stayed only on the right side during his freshman year. So, why'd we flop him from side to side during his soph year.

Second, do teams always keep the strong side on one side (on their left or on their right)? If they do, why did we switch Basham if he's better on the weak side...that is, why did we flop him if the weak side didn't flop?

If the teams we faced didn't have a constant weak side and we wanted Basham to always be on the weak side, shouldn't we have seen Basham switch sides as the oppo came to the line of scrimmage (if Basham was standing on the wrong side, on the oppo's strong side)? I don't recall seeing him move to the side opposite from the side which he was standing on very often.

One way or another, we sure did a good job of making Basham pretty ineffective last year, espec compared to his first year. As splendid a first year as he had, you'd think somehow that he'd have had some marked, game-changing effect in at least a few games last year. I saw them all and that was not the case.

Really? I'm looking at the result vs. the talent we saw in Basham's first year.

You don't see a discrepancy.

Yes, this staff doesn't try to lose big so often...but when the effect is the results that we see, I begin to question.

You really don't wonder about the Basham drop off? You really think that I'm the problem?

Basham was not a freshman last year. People knew about him and did some double teaming.
You're a problem with your incessant repetitions. Sorry, forgive me.

Basham's production (and the entire defense, for that matter) dropped in 2013 after Ty Branz was injured. Both Branz and Basham were averaging about a sack per game before the Branz injury. Basham did about half as well after that, averaging a half a sack per game in the 5 games Branz didn't play in, and that was about the same pace as last year.

If we can get a good rush DE opposite Basham who can draw some blocking attention, then Basham's production should return.

"If..." The D line on this team remains my biggest question mark.

Edit: Bcat2 beat me by 2 minutes.