Ohio State v. Colorado: Defensive Analysis

The Ohio State defensive coaching staff's apparent takeaway from the uneven performance against the Miami Hurricanes was that they need to get their best 11 on the field, but their best 11 is situationally dependent.  In so doing, OSU more fully embraced the 4-2-5 over TCU nickel defense then they ever before.  Whether a result of personnel changes or practice work, the defense's fundamentals, such as pursuit angles, were vastly improved.  The defense's performance was slightly obscured by long touchdown drives to end each half, but the defense controlled the game whenever in doubt, and showed significant improvement from prior weeks.

Nickel and Dime

Ohio State effectively featured two personnel groupings depending upon down and distance.  The defensive coaching staff apparently decided that Tyler Moeller was a better option than playing three linebackers from a thin linebacker course.    In so doing, OSU turned the 4-2-5 over into their full time defense.  OSU has run the 4-2-5 over as a first down defense against "spread" personnel.  But they have not normally run this defense against pro-style 21 and 12 personnel groupings.  OSU therefore had to apply the principles that TCU and others that run the defense full time apply to "fit" the defense against two tight end formations. 

As OSU always does with their nickel defense, the 'star'--Tyler Moeller, always goes to the field.  If the offense comes out with their formation strength to the field, Moeller simply stacks behind the seven technique and the defense looks like a conventional 4-3 over.

If the number 2 receiver widens out, Moeller simply widens out with him (See 2:19 mark).

If Colorado put their formation into the boundary, however, OSU would become more agressive, walking the backside safety up to mirror Moeller's star position to the field, giving OSU a single-high safety look. 

Thus, though OSU was in a 'nickel' look, the defense actually took on a more aggressive pre-snap look then their traditional 4-3 under defense.  Behind this OSU generally always played 'single-high' defense, allowing the safety to be a factor in run support.

On passing downs, OSU would go further, turning to their '30' dime package, providing them the ability to feature a variety of zone blitzes.   (See video at 3:18 mark). 

Situational Substitutions

Featured with these two different nickel looks was two different personnel groupings.  The primary change was replacing Ohrian Johnson with Christian Bryant.  Bryant is more aggressive against the run and his body type mirrors Moeller and C.J. Barnett, allowing OSU to roll up either safety as described above.  OSU featured a defensive line of John Simon, Garrett Goebel, Jon Hankins, and Adam Bellamy. 

Then with the dime package, Ohrian Johnson came in at safety, with Bryant rolling down for Moeller as the star, essentially trading pass for run defense amongst the defensive backs.  The defensive line also changed in such situations, with Michael Bennett or Daryll Baldwin and J.T. Moore coming in for Goebel and Bellamy in an attempt to create a bigger pass rush.

Much of this shuffling is caused by Nate Williams absence.  The clear plan was for Williams to play Sam linebacker in the 4-3 under, with him then sliding to his LEO rush position in the dime and nickel.  Without his versatility, OSU has to mix and match personnel depending upon the situation.  OSU has seemingly decided that having Tyler Moeller on the field is a better option then playing both Storm Klein and Etienne Sabino simultaneously.  Similarly, Moore and Johnson are apparently not strong enough against the run to fill those traditional positions, so OSU had to make modifications to stop the running game.

This situational pattern paid dividends for the Buckeyes, however.  The most heartening thing for OSU fans was that the defense's fundamentals were improved over previous efforts.  In particular, players took much better pursuit angles, limiting plays.  Colorado will likely not end the season with a good record, but their offense has scored some points this year.  Colorado's late drives at the end of both halves skewed the fact that OSU's defense controlled the game when it was still in doubt.  Colorado's touchdowns also came when some back-ups were getting extended action.  For example, on Colorado's first touchdown drive, Ryan Shazier was in for Andrew Sweat.  While Shazier again flashed and has a very bright future, he got himself caught in no-mans land off of several play  action fakes against screen plays and seam routes.  While this is to be expected as Shazier transitions from playing as a pass rusher, it still contributed to Colorado's score.  The coaching staff is trying to avoid these big plays that have hobbled the defense versus Toledo and Miami by playing people in the situations where they can succeed.

Going Forward...

The big question for Ohio State is whether they can (or will) continue to play their nickel personnel every down versus teams that can effectively run the football, like Michigan State.  While Colorado is a pro-style offense, they are not as committed to the run game as the Spartans will be.  TCU has certainly proved that the nickel defense can be effective against run-first teams, and Moeller does a nice job shedding blockers.  Ultimately, it may come down to whether Bryant and Barnett can be factors against the run playing as the force player from cover-3. 

To me, this is one of the most intriguing questions heading into the game against Michigan State.  Does the OSU defense stick with this look to keep their best personnel on the field, or do they go back to their traditional 4-3 under?