Ohio State v. Akron: Offensive Analysis

The I:  The Downhill Running Game and Constraint Theory

The Buckeye offense's fluidity was perhaps most impressive.  Jim Bollman and company stayed one step ahead of the Akron defense, establishing the downhill run game and then liberally sprinkling in play action and bootlegs.  Make no mistake, the OSU offense was unmistakably different than last year's version.  The 2010 OSU offense was centered around Terrelle Pryor.  The offense was therefore a mix and match of spread and pro-style looks.  While this played to Pryor's talents, it also led to the offense at times having an inconsistent feel.  The OSU offense could look like a mish-mash of individual plays.  At its best, however, an offense is a structured whole, with a base offensive theory and then constraint plays that punish a defense for over playing its hand.

Partly out of necessity, the 2011 OSU offense against Akron took a different approach.  With Joe Bauserman at the helm, Ohio State's offense was almost entirely based from the I formation.  The offense's base was the downhill running game that has made the I formation such an enduring offense.  In particular, the base plays were what every NFL team features--lead inside zone and outside zone, power, and counter trey.  The Buckeye offense put an extensive emphasize on outside zone (or stretch). OSU ran stretch perhaps more than any other run play, and displayed a decided emphasis on lead zone plays.

The Buckeyes also demonstrated a new wrinkle on the traditional counter-trey play.  From the I, both the fullback and tailback would take false steps before countering back behind the pulling guard.  This created a false key off Justin Boren--crucial because of his importance to the offense--and created nice separation for the pulling guard.

OSU's pass game was then predicated around these base run plays.  Specifically, OSU's passing game took the form of the I formation's constraint plays, namely play-action and bootleg passing.  Unofficially, all but two first half passes were play-action of some form.  Joe Bauserman displayed a particular knack with running the bootleg play, doing a nice job of being patient and extending the play horizontally to give his receivers time to get open as they dragged across the formation.  OSU repeatedly displayed the following bootleg, where they would fake lead zone and boot, with the playside guard folding around to lead block. 

OSU would typically run a weakside flood route combo. 

II.  Playing to Your Strengths...

Paradoxically, OSU's limitations resulted in the play-calling working in a coordinated fashion and had the offense functioning as a coherent whole.  The above strategy smartly emphasized Ohio State's strengths.  That starts first and foremost with the offensive line.  The front five led by Mike Brewster and J.B. Shugarts looks to be the best all-around Ohio State offensive line of the past decade.  Shugarts, in particular, was impressive.  As noted, he looks fully recovered from last year's foot injury, and was a dominant run blocker.  Ohio State was heavily right-hand dominant in the run game Saturday, and Shugarts demonstrated why.  Once Mike Adams returns, Ohio State will have the best tackle combination in the country. But all five linemen are very athletic for their size (allowing the heavy reliance on the outside zone play) and controlled the line of scrimmage.

Zach Boren should also be included with the linemen, as he accentuates the downhill run game.   Boren is a simply dominant run blocker, and a luxury for this team.  The above run game clips give some evidence of his effectiveness.  Teams will key on Boren all year, which is why the coaching staff must take steps like the counter above to constrain the defense.

Finally, Jake Stoneburner is a huge weapon for this team, and the coaches did a nice job putting him in a position to succeed.  Many have been calling for Stoneburner to be split in the spot, but Saturday was a nice example of why multiple formations for formations' sake can be counter-productive, and why the tight end produces a unique threat by holding one defender as a run blocker, while threatening a second defender as a vertical pass threat. 

OSU took advantage of this with Stoneburner in several distinct ways.  Most obviously, the heavy play-action use utilizes a tight end by holding the inside pass defenders often responsible for the tight end's zone.  But OSU also used formations to isolate Stoneburner.  On two of his touchdown catches, OSU used twins away from Stoneburner, matching him up with a cornerback whom he can overpower.  On the third touchdown, OSU used a snag combo, but used Stoneburner as the No. 2 receiver running the snag route that they have previously had run with a slot receiver.

As can be seen, Stoneburner is too good a receiver for the linebacker responsible for that zone area, resulting in a touchdown.

III.  While Minimizing Weaknesses...

The Ohio State conceptual approach also minimized exposing the areas where they are most inexperienced--namely quarterback and wide receiver.  The play action game minimizes the field for Joe Bauserman and Braxton Miller to review, and ideally opens mid-range throws from vacating linebackers.  Such an offense fits Bauserman well.  As noted, he is mobile enough to move and extend the pocket.  It also opens up the middle areas where Bauserman is most clearly comfortable throwing the football.  He has a good arm strength and throws a nice 15 yard out while rolling out.  Bauserman outplayed most expectations because the offense highlighted his strengths.  Expect this to remain OSU's offensive identity so long as Bauserman is behind center.

IV.  Moving Forward

Ohio State's offense Saturday was efficient, but not explosive.  Urban Meyer correctly observed that OSU was light on game breakers on the offensive side of the ball.  Part of this is simply a result of suspensions.  Devier Posey is OSU's big play receiving threat, but is unavailable until game 6.  Jordan Hall and Jamaal Berry bring that element from the backfield, but were also unavailable due to suspension and injury.  I was impressed by Carlos Hyde's quick feet and one cut and go approach.  But he is more apt at chewing up yards, not on breaking long runs.  Hall, in particular, will be a welcome return.  OSU clearly plans on utilizing his multiple talents, and he brings a different element.  And, Braxton Miller must continue to be a part of this offense.  As Meyer correctly observed, he is one of OSU's best play makers, and brings a different big play dynamic.  OSU should therefore continue to utilize both quarterbacks' talents, and Miller must be used as a change-up to give the OSU offense more dynamism.

An efficient ball-control offense, however, brings many advantages that should not be overlooked, particularly with the OSU defense.  OSU's offensive line will provide opportunities to continue to move the chains.  If OSU can continue to move the ball and make first downs, it provides this team the opportunity to be successful.