(With apologies to The Who)

Ever since I was a young boy
I’ve watched the Buckeye Ball
From Byars down to Ed-die
I must have watched them all
But I’ve never seen anyone like him
Run right through them all
That big headed number 15

SURE. PLAYS. A MEAN. FOOT. BALL.

Tajh Boyd’s college football career comes full circle this Friday, when the stellar QB will lead Clemson against Ohio State in the Orange Bowl.

A little over four years ago, Boyd committed to Clemson, a decision that shocked Jim Tressel and the Buckeye coaches. Boyd had always been transparent about his Buckeye plans. He had grown up rooting for Tressel and the Buckeyes, and OSU was first on his list. The high school phenom even chose to wear a #10 jersey to honor his favorite football player, Ohio State QB Troy Smith.

In 2009, Boyd saw Tressel’s committment to Pryor and realized that he’d have a tough time competing for the starting position. At the eleventh hour, a new opportunity arose at Clemson, and Boyd took advantage.

He hasn’t looked back since. Boyd has spent the past four years tearing through his ACC competition like tissue paper, setting 58 team records. He also holds conference records for touchdowns (127!) and passing efficiency.

OSU fans are more than content with Braxton Miller. But it is interesting to realize that, had Boyd chose Ohio State, he likely would have inherited the starting job after Pryor’s suspension and the failed Bauserman experiment. Boyd had even established a solid rapport with future WR Philly Brown, having thrown a TD pass to him in the Army game.

And yet, as impressive as Boyd’s college career has been, it is fair to note a few caveats: He is frustratingly inconsistent. CFB fans have turned “Clemsoning” into a verb – one week, he appears formidable; the next, he’s completely befuddled and throwing panicked interceptions directly into the arms of defenders. This is the main reason for Boyd being left out of most national QB conversations and award lists. And you more cynical detractors might note the fact that his stats are padded against the weaker ACC teams that Boyd has spent a career playing against.

But enough background – let’s get to the analysis.

When OSU has the ball
One-sentence summary:

Run El Guapo often, run him hard, and complete short passes.

OSU fans are still smarting from the coaches’ puzzling decision to not properly utilize Carlos Hyde in the fourth quarter of the B1G title game. For this analysis, we’re going to assume that they saw the tape and realized that was the stupidest gameplan that ever stupided.

(If they haven’t, then hopefully they’re reading this post and realize it now. Stupid. You don’t score 24 unanswered points and come from behind to take the lead in the fourth quarter, and then deliberately decide “hey, you know what? We took the lead with Hyde; maybe we should stop using him from now on.” Stupid.)

Sorry, digressed there. Back to Clemson…

Clemson’s rush defense is rather pathetic (52nd), and this includes the fact that they only faced teams with rather pathetic rush offenses. Only Georgia Tech’s gimmicky offense is decent numbers-wise, and they easily ran for 5.5 ypc against Clemson. On paper at least, Clemson’s defense should not present much of a challenge to OSU’s two-headed rushing attack.

The biggest defensive threat comes from the Tiger DE Vic Beasley, a Hendricks finalist for the nation’s top defensive end. The OSU offensive line will have to keep him at bay if they expect to have any success with a run-first gameplan.

The Tigers tend to favor man coverage when facing spread teams. If OSU establishes the run, Clemson will likely bring a strong safety into the box to guard against it. From there it’s up to Miller. Late in the season, for some reason, he abandoned the middle routes that had been so successful for a combination of deep passes and screens. Deep passes work well to keep a secondary honest, but they are such low-percentage plays that they are not worth it against a team like Clemson. The risks outweigh the costs – it’s more important to keep the clock running and keep plugging away for manageable second & third downs.

If Miller can manage a solid rushing attack and midrange passing game, the drives will be long, points will come easy, and most importantly, the clock will keep running, keeping Clemson’s offense off the field. This is important because:

When Clemson has the ball
One-sentence summary:

The OSU defense made the trip to Miami, as well.

Bryant is out. Spence is out. Roby is out. Grant is injured and may see limited time. Cue sad trombone.

In an act of desperation, Fickell is revamping the lineup and starting Vonn Bell, hoping for a spark. But any benefit that Bell may bring will be negated by the crushing loss of Noah Spence. If ever there was a game where having your leading pass rusher was critical, it was against the best quarterback your team has seen in years.

There may be a silver lining. Unlike the Buckeyes, Clemson’s gameplan ought to be rather one-dimensional. They aren’t likely to have much success running against OSU’s front seven, even considering the loss of Spence. As easy as Boyd should theoretically have it, one-dimensional teams can often be exploited. Should Boyd have one of his off-days, as he has tended to do against decent competition, Clemson’s offense could suffer.

Prediction
Predictions are based upon experience gained during similar circumstances. But we’re on completely uncharted territory, here. We’ve never seen how a Meyer-led OSU team reacts to a big loss. While Meyer is 4-0 in BCS games, the ability of this OSU team to give him a 5-0 BCS record is in question.

The closest we can come to empirical comparisons (and this is a huuuuge stretch) is this: Both OSU and South Carolina beat Wisconsin in very similar games (although Wisco had an injured QB when playing SC). This may suggest that OSU and South Carolina are at least as good as one another; and SC had no problem whatsoever dispatching Clemson just a few weeks ago. Yes, transitive analyses are terrible, but if you’re looking for optimism… well… there it is.

On paper, it seems like one of two scenarios is likely:

• Clemson’s offense makes a few mistakes and shoots itself in the foot, leading to a dominating victory by the Buckeyes. OSU, 56-24.
• The teams engage in a shootout for the ages, and it comes down to one team’s final possession as the fourth quarter expires. Clemson, 63-59.

What say you?

We haven’t done one of these in a couple of years… We’re resurrecting the format in honor of the B1G Title Game.

The info here complements our earlier By The Numbers post, but is limited to the two teams’ performances against common opponents. It’s not necessarily a perfect way to compare the teams, but it offers a more apples-to-apples comparison between the good and bad guys.

Tables 1 and 2 detail the performance of each team’s scoring offense and scoring defense, respectively, against the numbers the opponents typically give up.

PF = Points For; PA = Points Against, DEV = Deviation from opponent’s average

Table 1: Scoring Offense

Not a lot of surprise, here; Ohio State routinely scores significantly more points against these opponents than is typical for said opponents. (Over two TDs more per game, actually.)

MSU’s average is pretty close to the opponents’ average, indicating that the Spartan’s offense is competent, but not necessarily strong. It might be a sign that the MSU offense tends to play to the level of the defense it is facing.

Table 2: Scoring Defense

Again, surprise-surprise, MSU’s defense clearly outclasses OSU’s defense against these opponents. But what’s more interesting is how inconsistent the Buckeyes look. From game to game against these teams, OSU’s defense vacillates. Not terribly, mind you – even at their worst (against TTUN), they still only gave up one more TD than the opponent would have typically scored – but from game to game, it was hard to say which Bucks defense would show up.

What does it mean?
Against these opponents, Ohio State’s offense was unstoppable and its defense was intermittently solid. Michigan State’s offense was competent, while its defense was dominant. Yeah, yeah, I know, we knew all that.

But let’s assume for argument’s sake that the teams meet “halfway” when they play against each other this weekend. That is to say, both OSU and MSU give and take a little, each team’s average performance being counteracted by the other’s to an equal extent. (For example, imagine a situation where Team A usually gets 100 points, Team B usually allows zero, and if all things were equal, we think Team A would score 50.)

Ohio State is averaging 48.2 ppg this season to the Spartans’ 29.4. Defensively, the Buckeyes are giving up 20.3 ppg to Michigan State’s 11.8.

Based on their performance against these common opponents, if the teams “met halfway,” each team would score about 4 points below their average. This implies that OSU has the advantage – this hypothetical game would end with OSU scoring in the low 40s and MSU scoring in the mid-to-upper 20s. My spidey sense says OSU 40-28.

Of course, this is all hypothetical, and you can never predict all the intangible factors that usually affect the outcome of a game. Someone is going to make a mistake, get a turnover, get a favorable call (or no-call) by the officials, etc. As the old saying goes, that’s why they play the game.

But another intangible aspect of Saturday’s matchup is the fact that none of Michigan State’s opponents were built like OSU, with a solid offensive line and rushing game.

In fact, the best offense that MSU has seen belongs to Indiana. The Spartans did not play Wisconsin or Penn State. They lost to a decent, but not elite, Notre Dame offense. They gave up 28 points – on long, punishing drives – to a Husker team that did not have a starting QB and had turned the ball over 5 times. It’s entirely possible that the Spartans’ defensive numbers are not indicative of their actual strength. And even if it is, the numbers still tend to favor the Buckeyes – providing both teams play like they typically do on average.

OSU lowered the boom on Illinois 60-35 as Carlos Hyde beastballed his way for 246 yards and 4 TDs.

Miller added another 184 yards of his own on the ground, but struggled in the passing game in the gusty Champaign winds. Also struggling was the OSU defense, giving up almost 300 passing yards to Nate “Grandpa” Scheelhaase. (Is it just me, or hasn’t he been playing since about 1990?)

The Buckeyes started and finished at full throttle – a point that will likely go unnoticed by the talking heads. After going up by four touchdowns, the team lost focus and allowed the Illini to chip away at the lead. The game didn’t officially become in-hand until a 9-point swing in the 3rd quarter when OSU converted a safety and a subsequent TD back-to-back.

As much as fans may wish all OSU games could be as easy as the past few; a game like this is a good thing. The defense clearly was suffering from a bit of hubris after its domination of the B1G bottom feeders these past few weeks. Getting punched in the mouth, and being forced to respond, is good for this team as it continues to prepare to play real teams in the months ahead.

But the story of this game should be about Carlos “El Guapo” Hyde. Benched for the first part of the game (rumors indicated he missed a class this week), he still managed 246 yards in just over two-and-a-half quarters of football. He’s now about 50 yards shy of a 1000 for the season, a stat that of course should be considered in the context of him not playing the first three games against OSU’s weakest opponents. Had Guapo not been suspended earlier this season, there’s a very good chance he’d be at least a 1500 yard back this year.

Next week, Hyde should easily eclipse the 1000 mark, and perhaps exceed Keith Byars’ and Eddie George’s TD records. Most appropriately, he will likely do so during his last home game at the Shoe.

Stay tuned to MotSaG… Chip will have a more in-depth analysis of the game to be posted tomorrow.