Just got home from Athens a bit ago and have to get on the road again in a while.  So don't have time to read all recent bobcatattack posts and thus apologize if someone else has already posed the following question:

Q: When Ohio lines up to punt, why are there such wide spacings between the interior linemen?

Perhaps before the season began, the special teams coach concluded that such wide spacings would enable interior linemen to get down field faster and thus strengthen punt converage.  Whatever the reason, as the season as moved along and virtually every punt has Ohio - players, coaches, fans - holding their collective breath, I am genuinely puzzled that those wide spacings remain.  They give onrushing defenders an umimpeded 10-yard sprint.

To the three Ohio players providing the last line of protection and to our punter, the rushers must look like 7 oncoming, runaway locomotives.

Well, okay, a second question: Hasn't anyone on the coaching staff concluded that just maybe closing those spacings and forcing rushers to come in from the edges might be worth implementing?

I think the general consensus on this topic is: The coaches are all powerful and knowing. If a mere mortal like yourself has the audacity to question their strategies, then you should be smoten, and smoten royally.

The second block came from the left side of their D.  I think they figured out that after the first block, Venham would go rugby and move to his right.  Nobody picked up the guy coming in off the edge.  It's a real lack of communication or planning or execution on the punt team.  If he's going rugby, make sure he has a clear path on that side.  Somebody coming from the other side shouldn't get there in time, assuming Venham doesn't lollygag in getting the punt off.

Re the above-highlighted:  No.  1)  They knew they could block it since they've watched our game film.  Anyone who's seen our games on TV or webcast knew this was a disaster waiting to happen.  2) On our first kick, they had five (as in five) guys who came close to blocking the kick.  And, none of the five seem to have made a real effort for the block.  So, they knew they had us on the second kick.  Around me in the stands, everyone saw the five man firebreak on the first kick and predicted the 2nd was going to get blocked.

The obvious is obvious.

I believe the devil is in the details which were mentioned during the broadcast, and if you didn't catch it then here is the data: OHIO had only allowed 29 punt return yards in the nine games prior to the game.  Nice, admirable stat.

My assumption is that the special teams coaches have made a calculated risk in 2012 while employing the new scheme: let's risk a block here and there in the hopes of not giving up chunks of yards through the season.  The strategy appears to be to release every rusher at the line, let the three protectors provide a final line of defense and hope we get the kick off while pressuring the punt returner into mistakes or fair catches by pursuing the returner with all our down linemen.

Well anyone that has paid attention all season, starting with the Penn State game, will have seen that there have been significant rewards to the opposing teams that jailbreak our wall of three protectors, foregoing their coverage and entrusting their punt returner to catch the ball.  And with Jordan Thompson down, the guy who had to choose to block one of two guys in the week one blocked punt in Beaver that led to a short field touchdown, we now have only Eric Herman who has been a constant on the protection blocking wall all year.

Forgive me for being a horses ass, as I usually try to remain pretty level headed about our results and give the coaches the benefit of the doubt, but I am still mad as hell about what happened on Wednesday night, and feel like the results on Wednesday were far more preventable than those in the Miami loss.  Wednesday's performance was a waste, and the coaching staff needs to be held accountable because the blocks we have seen all season are a result of scheme, not effort.

When you have a former wrestler acting as your long snapper, who I believe has done a fine job all season, and a freshman punter, two inexperienced guys who could use a little seasoning, and you go nine weeks with precariously close and executed blocks almost every week, how do you not err on the side of caution and give these guys a little time to mature, buying them time to get the kicks off safely?  I just absolutely, completely do not get it, even analyzing the upside of why they implemented the scheme.

When Grant has been provided protection to execute a textbook style punt this season, instead of reverting to the abomination of the rugby, he has punted well all season.  The dude isn't Paul Hershey...yet, so just put some bodies on some guys at the line and stop giving up the effing short fields with botched and blocked punts.

We have easily had a dozen altered punts this season between muffed exchanges, failed rugby's and blocks due to pressure from the opposing team's pursuit this year, and I am certain we would not have given up a dozen long returns with our team speed providing coverage down field in a conventional punt coverage strategy, so do us all a damn favor coaches and give this grand experiment up!

This one is on Frank, and it pains me to say that.  I get Tyler's mistake during the Miami game and have put that loss aside, but this was completely preventable.  Epic fail beyond any loss we have seen in Frank's tenure, including the MACC last year.

I prefer Occam's razor approach which would be most effective with the least skill...

What I am stating is that some on here stated they timed the kicks at 2.1-2.3, one said 2.5.  If that is the case that is entirely too slow and should be blocked everytime if given a rush, even you could probably run 10yds unblocked in 2.5 seconds.  As for any magical slowness, or coaches timing at practice i cannot testify to those, but I can tell you that a punt needs to be 1.5 to 1.6 seconds, and we obviously were not getting that on Wednesday.

As for our coverage guys, our coverage has been outstanding, one of the best in the Nation, so no problems there, and a slow kick time actually benefits them, however when faced with a rush a slow kick equals a block.

And I agreed with you that the scheme needs to fit abilities, and I believe I stated that in my last sentence.

I absolutely agree with DA and others. If our punter/long snapper are too inexperienced, then we need to make adjustments for that. Better punt coverage is of course desired, however if the side-effect is several blocked punts and shanks then it's clearly not worth the gamble. Of course Wednesday took it to a whole new level, given that it cost us a shot at the MACC.

If you don't have a solid O-line, then you probably don't run the ball 30 times per game. And similarly, if you have a very green long snapper and punter than you probably shouldn't try and run a scheme that leaves no room for error.

The thing I REALLY don't like is that Frank indicated in his press conference that execution is the problem. That is BS. If he doesn't know what he and his staff did wrong, my fear is that we'll see our guys lining up in this formation in Muncie. Wow...wouldn't that be something.

Come on Robert, this is not rocket science. We all know this stuff pretty well, I trust the collective brain of BobcatNation.

Solution to kicking game:  NO MORE 3 AND OUTS.

No need for Rocket Science here:

What we do, and have done, ALL SEASON, Does Not Work.

Therefore.......

DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. ANYTHING. I don't see how with even only one week of preparation for something different could possibly result in any worse execution than what we have now after Months of practice and preparation!!!!! 

Politics?