Spring Preview: Defensive Backs

Last season: We have all read about the lack of interceptions from the defensive backs last season. The Buckeyes only had 11 picks and Anderson Russell believes they dropped an additional 15. Those numbers are troubling, but not the end of the world. After all, the Buckeyes finished in passing defense (as measured by yards allowed) and we know it was not because teams were busy running on them (they only gave up 83 ypg on the ground). When measured by passing efficiency, the Buckeyes finished 4th.

gamebygame

As you can see from the chart, Ohio State typically held their opponents well below the average passing numbers. Only Washington and Wisconsin fared better than averaged.

Yet, the Buckeyes only faced four opponents ranked in the top half of national passing stats (Northwestern, Minnesota, Purdue, LSU) but each one was held down statistically speaking.

This season: The defensive backfield was paid more attention than any position this spring. For all the wrong reasons. It seems that any discipline has been, and will be, handled internally and any lasting effects remain to be seen. I will go out on a limb and say that Donald Washington, Eugene Clifford and Jamario O’Neal will be available for the Youngstown State game on August 30, 2008, barring any further disciplinary setbacks.

That undefined discipline aside, the personnel in the defensive backfield is identical. Jenkins and Washington are penciled in at the corners, while Kurt Coleman and Anderson Russell seem certain to start at the safety positions.

You would think, naturally, that with all four starters returning there would be no mystery to the depth chart. You are probably right, too. But I cannot help wondering about that nickel package in which the Buckeyes so often find themselves. (Considering the passing rankings above, I find it amazing a need for five DBs arises.)

I know the main goal of that defensive formation is to get more corners on the field to cover a spread formation. Typically, however, teams running that formation throw short passes based out of the shotgun and using the read option. Why not play the traditional 4-3-4 defense, replace a safety with another corner and play a speedy LB alongside Laurinaitis and Freeman? Freeman and Terry (or even Rolle) can cover the flats; Jenkins, Washington and Chekwa can man up on the WRs; and Russell can play center field. Laurinaitis and the line are there to clean up any running play.

Another reason I struggle with the nickel formation is that cushion the corners give. Do you guys notice this? It drives me crazy. One of the benefits of being as talented as Ohio State is that you do not have to cover for very long. The front four and blitzing linebackers ensure that opposing quarterbacks are not hanging out in the pocket. I think some press coverage and disguised blitzes (see Steve’s comment yesterday) would make this defense even better. I like the idea of having three corners on the field at the same time, and when they play more traditional, play-action teams (read USC) they can replace Chekwa with Coleman to get additional run support. I do not see the need to be in the nickel very often.

Starters/reserves: As for the two-deep, it looks something like this:

Big Ten Network

That does not mean that Eugene Clifford or James Scott cannot sneak in there. No, but the competition in front of them is very tough.