If it ain't the players that are stinking, then the scheme is a rotting corpse.

Let's try something new and take the guys who are wearing # 50-99 play DB, maybe we will have more success? Seriously,some of you believe that we have the best talent every year. Coaches doing something new and radical, I like!

Our defense gave up 14 points in teh first few minutes of the game. They always give up 14 points in the first few minutes of the game. Here's a thought... watch some film and have some idea what the offense is doing before we're down 14. They had plenty of chances to get off the field and never did. Offense, defense, special teams, coaching. Right now it all sucks.

What a concept! I heard the coaches were installing projectors right now into thei meeting rooms so they can watch film next week! I can't believe they've never tried this before.

Central was simply better than us! In the pre season poll most every single person picked this as a loss, and yet you are acting like the sky is falling when it actually happens.

Wait a minute, we did lose this game because of the defense. The unit gave up almost 500 yards and 28 points. They are supposed to be our best unit. They returned 8 starters and were two deep everywhere. They simply did not get off the field on 3rd down. That is their fault not the offnses fault.

We knew the offense would be bad with vick and it is even worse with sprague. So, somebody on defense step up and stop an opponent once in a while and make more big plays.

Here's our offense's time of possession by quarter-

1Q: 3:41
2Q: 5:21
3Q: 2:48
4Q: 5:51

We didn't have an offensive drive last for more than 5 plays and 1:47 until our next to last possession. The defense was on the field for 42:19 and only gave up 4 scoring drives, they even gift wrapped a fumble recovery on the 5 yard line and our offense thanked them by going -2yds in 3 downs and kicked a FG. Our best DB didn't make the trip and 2 of our 3 leading tacklers went out with injuries in the 2nd half, our defense was not the problem.

The real problem with our team, and the reason we lost today, is that we have a former walk-on QB that is scrappy and resourceful at times but has poor throwing accuracy beyond 5 yards. We also have a group of running backs dubbed the greatest in a decade that struggle when a true freshman former walk-on isn't able to take the bulk of the carries for them.

When the other team knows that our offense is going to be 3 downs and a punt they can go wide open on our defense. That's what CMU did today.

I like that the coaches are open to new ideas, and always looking for ways to get better. No defensive scheme is perfect, and if there was one, everyone would use it, and all games would be a 0-0 tie. Michigan State has made this scheme work well, and so it is known that it can work, but it is no doubt true that Michigan State has better athletes across the board than Ohio does. Furthermore, they have been working with this scheme a lot longer than Ohio has, so they have more experience with the intricacies of it, and what can go wrong.

First, let's talk about the differences between the new scheme (Cover-4) and the old scheme (Tampa-2):
CB - In the old scheme, the corners covered the flats, including screens, sweeps, and out patterns. On deep patterns they always had a safety for deep help. They played mostly facing the play, not so much on the receiver. As a result, they made a lot of tackles, but they also were well off the receiver and gave up a lot of uncontested short passes. In the new scheme, they play man on man, mostly, and have no deep help. They have their eyes on the receiver. In this scheme, they will make few tackles because that isn't their job.

S - In the old scheme, they simply had a deep zone. They provided deep help for the corners, and because they were back deep, also had to make tackles on runs that got by the front 7. In the new scheme they have primary cover responsibility if a slot receiver, RB, or TE goes deep, and otherwise play the run.

DL - In the old scheme, their responsibility was to hold positions and guard lanes, and to keep the offensive linemen off the linebackers. In the new scheme, their job is to penetrate and disrupt, and hopefully to force a quick pass before the receivers are able to break free of the man-on-man coverage.

OLB - In the old scheme, they played a shallow zone, and they had to flow laterally to the play. In the new scheme, their coverage area is wider, and goes all the way to the flat. They need to be very athletic. They have to be able to stop sweeps to their side, and also cover out patterns. They will make a lot of tackles in this scheme that used to be made by the corners.

MLB - Not much change. Still covers the middle of the field, and runs.

Because of the changed responsibilities, players will not be doing the same things that fans have seen them do in the past. The corners will not be making as many tackles. The corners will get beaten more often, since they have no help, and that will especially happen if the defensive line isn't able to penetrate. The OLB's will need to be very athletic because their coverage area is very wide.

The goal of the old defense was to give up 4-5 yards every play, but no big plays. It was a bend-but-don't break philosophy. You allow teams to march down the field, and hope for mistake. A penalty, a fumble, and incomplete pass, any of them can end a drive. The goal of the new defense is to attack, and to disrupt. You contest every yard. The goal is more sacks, more tackles for losses, more 3 and outs.

Why did they make the switch? With passing becoming more and more efficient, when other teams did have an incomplete pass, or a penalty, they often were able to get the first down anyway. The bend-but-don't break philosophy was becoming increasingly ineffective. It is also harder and harder to recruit players to play a passive defense. They want to attack.

Has the new defense worked? At times, yes, and at times, no. It worked well at Kent, partially no doubt because they weren't expecting it. It also worked very well against Kentucky, after the first quarter. It worked well against EIU and Idaho, too, for the most part. It did not, however, work well against Marshall at all, and it was not that effective against CMU.

Is it time to throw out the new system? Personally, no, I don't think so. Like Billy, I'm happy to see the defensive coaches trying new things. I'm not surprised that there are some issues, though. I do expect the coaches to learn from debacles like Marshall, and from CMU, and I expect them to work with the players to improve, and work with the schemes to improve. Remember - they coaches have been working with the old scheme for 20-30 years, and with this new scheme for less than one year. I'm not overly surprised that there have been some issues. Any time you make a major change of this nature, there are going to be some problems along with some good things.

The one thing I did not like at CMU about the way the defense played was that I saw all too much effort at stripping the ball. I personally liked it when they were focusing on sound tackling, and I think they gave up some extra yards against CMU from failed attempts to strip the ball. Make the tackle first and foremost.

What about personnel? Does Ohio have the personnel for the switch? I think it starts with the defensive line, and against most MAC teams, Ohio's defensive line will be able to penetrate, and disrupt plays, which will take a lot of pressure off of the corners. Not surprisingly, the two teams that have had the most success against Ohio's new defense have one thing in common - a very good, veteran offensive line. CMU has the best offensive line in the MAC, so they were probably a difficult team for this defense to match up with. I think the defense will fare better against the rest of the schedule.

As for linebackers, Ohio has some very athletic OLB's, so I think Ohio is solid there. Converting former safeties, like Alexander, to OLB is the right approach, I think.

Does Ohio have the cornerbacks for the new scheme to work? I think Bass was better in the other defense, for example, while Wells is working better in this new one. I don't think Bass is doing a terrible job, personally, but he has been burned quite a few times, mostly in games when the defensive line hasn't been able to pressure the QB. I've seen fans blaming him for a lot of things that aren't his fault, however. There were a lot of cornerbacks in the new recruiting class, and hopefully some will good ones in this new system.

How about safeties? Safety is a place where Ohio has been ravaged by injuries. Carpenter, Jones, and Scipio are all out. I have noted that a lot of TD's have been thrown to guys lining up in the slot position, which is the man that is the safeties job to cover in the new system. That seems to be an area where Ohio can make some improvements to the defense.

That was truly a team loss. I fully believe and agree with that.

Defense....well, they were bad for a lot of spots. This just isn't an indictment on Ohio, but tackling in football all together. If I had to see Josh Kristoff just run into somebody and REFUSE to wrap up I was going to kick my TV screen in. He must have done it 5-7 times. He had 9 tackles (I think) and I'm not sure 1 of those was truly a tackle....more like he just ran into the guy and he either went out of bounds or fell down. Bass wasn't as bad, but was guilty on more than one occasion of this technique.

Let's face it, our secondary is garbage right now. Yes...injuries are a big part. Losing Wells & Jones and being minus Carpenter really hurt. But Bass has been a dumpster fire all year. He was supposed to be a first-team all-MAC kid?!?! Every game we play the opposing team looks where he is lined up and they go deep on him....and 80% of the time they are successful. His confidence is shot and we're paying the price. He just isn't good right now.

Kristoff might still be banged up...but as a safety he should watch some Mike Mitchell film and realize that you have to step up and make a tackle. He either doesn't want to take a hit, lay a hit or be involved in contact. It's very noticeable if you watch him.

Our scheme might be a lot of the problem too, but regardless we just don't have guys who can cover right now or make open field tackles in our secondary.

The LBs are banged up...and that sucks. Cause Bryce Brown and Jovon Johnson are playing really well...as is Quentin Poling. But they obviously miss Russell and Carpenter. And they are being put in bad spots cause our supposed awesome DL is not putting much of a pass rush together and cannot do anything to at least slow down the initial point of contact of the opponent's running game. The LBs are being asked to make almost every tackle and that's not fair.

This defense, supposed to be our strength, is pretty bad. They CANNOT get off the field on 3rd down. CMU was 13-17 on 3rd....on the season, Ohio is letting up 51.5% on 3rd down...worst in the MAC....123 out of 125 in the country.

Yes...the offense is as much to blame....but c'mon defense...you have to get a stop once in a while on 3rd down.

As far as the offense, wow....I think it's safe to say we can see why JD Sprague was a walk-on. He is dreadfully inaccurate in the pass game. Whether he's rolling out or the times he does stay in the pocket....he just doesn't deliver. 49% pass completion....ugh. He panics too much. Why not try and trust the O-line in the pocket...they've only allowed 6 sacks thru 6 games.

Vick might not be Jamies Winston....but he was improving. He brought a steady, calming influence to this offense. You saw it vs. Kent. He didn't get a chance to get into any groove at UK getting pulled so early.

He obviously gives us the better chance (any chance) compared to Sprague. Remember, this is Vick's first year as a starter...and there was bound to be some growing pains, but I could see him getting more comfortable with the offense and running it. I'm not saying we beat CMU with Vick, but I think it's far more competitive game.

Not having OUelette vs. CMU definitely hurt. It's painfully obvious to see that Daz is nothing more than a scat back that Ohio isnt' doing a good enough job of utilizing.

Take a page from Urban Meyer (as much as it pains me to say that)...but you have Daz and Robbie Walker (very similar to Dontre Wilson and Jalen Marshall at OSU)....line them up EVERYWHERE. WR, RB....move them around in the slot....just get them the ball in open space and let them do something with ball. (This is also assuming Daz learns how to catch...too many drops!)

Daz is not a between the tackle runner. He might break one every once in a while...but as long as Ohio continues to just pound the ball in the middle with the run game (which they do WAAAAY too much) then OUelette or even Edmonds are more suited for that.

The drops (mentioned earlier with Daz) are also an issue with our WRs. They've gotten better....but this is fundamentals. Some of these passes are just flat drops. This crushes your QBs confidence and as long as Sprague is in, he needs all the confidence he can get.

Overall, this is a team that I believe has talent. I'm not sure the coaching staff is coaching to get the most out of that talent. It sometimes seems to me like they're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. The personnel they have just doesn't fit the scheme sometimes and they aren't adjusting.

I love Frank...and will forever be grateful for what he did for this program....essentially saving it. But unless they can show some drastic improvement, Schaus is going to be left with a tough Bobby Bowden-esque decision on his hand. Do your fire the greatest coach in Ohio football history...or can you convince him to retire? And then the fun game of finding the next guy begins. (Jim Grobe anyone? Ha!)

Seriously....it's difficult to see the football build this great momentum over the last few years and watch them potentially let it go to waste.

This is a fan base (as we've all seen) that will turn it's back on football pretty quick.

I'd hate to see Tailgreat park empty again...and the seats midway thru the first quarter be half empty.

I remember what it was like when Grobe got here in the late 90s....I thought Frank had gotten us over the hump and past those days.....

But as this season goes on, it appears we are going backwards instead of forwards and that scares me and upsets me.

I think there is still time to right the ship and turn it around....but Vick and OUellette have to get healthy and our DBs and DL must start to play better.

If not, I seriously see Ohio finishing 3-9 and 1-7 in the MAC.

There's no way (in this current state) you can tell me Ohio will slow down BG offense....score enough vs good Akron defense....slow UB offense enough....go on the road and beat a much, much improved WMU team....compete with MAC kingpin NIU or slow down a pretty good Miami pass attack.

That reeks of 7 straight losses to end the season.

That's Brian Knorr bad.

For L.C:

"Not surprisingly, the two teams that have had the most success against Ohio's new defense have one thing in common - a very good, veteran offensive line. CMU has the best offensive line in the MAC, so they were probably a difficult team for this defense to match up with."

This is where I'm puzzled. If this is the case, wouldn't you assume that the coaches would identify this during film session and develop a defensive scheme more appropriate for the game?

It hasn't been that case in the home games. They jumped out on Idaho and E Illinois and had decent leads and then let the opposition back in the game. They had a 17-0 lead on Idaho and 21-3 on Eastern Illinois. I anticipate different this Saturday against BG, but the other two home games we were strong early on both sides of the ball.

Right now I think the coaches are learning, too. With more experience they will figure out more about it's strengths and weaknesses. This defense is a fairly new innovation, and really there aren't a lot of people outside of Michigan State with a lot of experience running it.

For those that want more information on this scheme, here are a few links:
http://tinyurl.com/lvgrvtv
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T09xDtbbRv0&app=desktop
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tT6wS1eC4
http://tinyurl.com/mk3q4px

A quote from the last one:

We've seen all three of these.

Note by the way that Ohio still mixes in some of the Tampa-2 as well (as does Michgan State). As I said, I like that Ohio is using this, and while some learning issues are happening, some good things have happened, too, and in time it will mean one more weapon in the Ohio defensive arsenal.

Here's a link to an interesting and informative series in the New York Times, of all places, on the evolution of the various fronts used in NFL defenses, as they moved from 6 to 5 to 4 to 3, back to 4, and now to multiple fronts. It also goes into the design and evolution of the Tampa-2 defense, its strength's and weaknesses, as well as the differences in philosophies for the fronts from "read and react" to attacking fronts. The 7-part series also discusses things like the zone blitz, and the nickle packages, and can be found about halfway down the page.
http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/author/jene-bramel/

Good question. The key to having an offense that is effective is to have a play that you can run effectively against the other team's base defense. Once you prove you can run it effectively, it forces the defense to adjust in order to stop it. Then you can add variety to the play calls, guessing how the defense is going to shift to stop your base play, and then attacking the defense's new weak spots.

TV broadcasts are not conducive to watching the defensive schemes very well because they tend to focus on the ball carrier, exactly who I don't want to watch. As far as I can tell, CMU was using a full-time Nickle defense against Ohio, with 4 down linemen, 2 linebackers, 3 corners, and 2 safeties back in deep zone. With that configuration, they should have been able to cover the passes effectively, because they had one CB on each of Ohio's wide receivers, plus two safeties for deep help. They should, however, been vulnerable to DUTM.

With that defense you have 8 Ohio players in the center of the field (QB, RB, TE, plus 5 OL) matched up against 4 defensive down linemen and 2 linebackers. With 8 on 6 you should be able to run the ball effectively. The QB should also have plenty of time to pass, but a hard time finding an open receiver. Instead, Ohio could not run the ball, and did not have a lot of time to pass. Why did that happen? Because CMU's defensive line totally owned the line of scrimmage.

Against that defense, if Ohio can't run the ball up the middle, and doesn't have a lot of time to pass, it's going to be a long day because nothing is going to work. Another way to say the same thing is that, if you are attacking their weakness, and you can't make that work, it probably isn't going to work better if you start attacking their strength.

It's allowed, but strongly discouraged.