Fulton Analysis: Achilles' heel

START YOUR BUCKEYEGROVE.COM PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP TODAY!

After Ohio State’s convincing win against Oklahoma it is easy to start already considering playoff possibilities. Yet it is worth evaluating where the Buckeyes’ offense has been relatively inefficient to see where improvements can be made and what threats Ohio State faces going forward.

But first, what is going right. According to S & P+, Ohio State is first in the country on standard downs – meaning that if the Buckeyes stay on schedule they are alarmingly efficient. Behind solid offensive line play, this is spearheaded by the trifecta of J.T. Barrett, Curtis Samuel, and Mike Weber.

Samuel in particular adds a different dimension to Urban Meyer’s offense. According to Pro Football Focus, Samuel has taken nearly an equal number of stats from the backfield and the slot.

He is the Buckeyes’ primary threat from both positions. Not only is he an effective runner, averaging over eight yards per carry. But he has also been Ohio State’s primary downfield receiving threat.

He is averaging 16 yards per reception and has been successfully targeted three of four times on throws longer than 15 yards – with the only miss being Barrett overthrowing an open Samuel in the first quarter on a four verticals route from the slot against Oklahoma.

ALSO: Meyer looks ahead to Rutgers

Yet it is Samuel’s ability to shift pre-snap that truly causes defensive difficulty. By motioning, Ohio State can change from a run-first to pass-first look or vice versa (limiting pre-snap tendencies) and/or shift formation strength. Defenses must quickly adjust. Linebackers in particular are put in the unenviable position of altering contain and spill responsibilities against the run – such as when Ohio State motioned him from the slot to halfback – only to run lead outside back to the boundary for the Buckeyes’ first touchdown against Oklahoma;

or coverage responsibility against the pass.

And Samuel, Weber and Barrett each bring different attributes. Meyer and offensive coordinator Ed Warinner primarily use Samuel to threaten the defensive edge, Weber to run inside, and Barrett to pick up critical first downs.

Yet each has the versatility to fill other roles – a trait that will be more important going forward to limit tendencies. The combination of all three provides Ohio State the ability at the snap to run inside or outside in either direction – spreading the defense thin and providing constraints.

RELATED: Barrett continues to improve

And when Ohio State is ahead of schedule, Barrett is a dangerous passer. According to S & P+, on standard downs he is 26 of 39 for 301 yards, providing the Buckeyes the opportunity to attack downfield off play-action.

But if Ohio State excels on standard downs they have relatively struggled on passing situations. Barrett – and Ohio State – remain relatively inefficient on such downs (2 & 7+ or 3 & 4+), ranking only 77th according to S & P+. Generally speaking, Barrett has improved as a downfield passer. In 2014 he was only 44 of 111 on throws longer than 10 yards. He was only 20 of 45 on such throws in 2015. By contrast, this season Barrett is 8-15 for 239 yards and six touchdowns on throws of 15 yards or more.

But, according to S & P+, on passing downs Barrett is only completing 50% of his passes. Those completions are averaging 16 yards – so they are resulting in big plays. But when Ohio State seeks to rely on the passing game to gains first downs (as it did in the first half against Tulsa) they remain relatively inefficient.

Concededly, Barrett’s passing statistics on throwing downs understates his overall effectiveness. When needed, Ohio State often re-equates numbers by using the quarterback run game in third and medium situations – where Barrett is very effective gaining first downs. Barrett is also a decisive scrambler, quickly getting upfield and putting the Buckeyes back on schedule – adding to the passing game’s effectiveness.

Nor is the Buckeyes’ inefficiency on passing downs solely on Barrett. Although Ohio State’s offensive line has been better pass blocking than it was much of last season, the Buckeyes has a bevy of young receivers. Getting open on timing routes and being on the same page with the quarterback is more difficult than winning on first down play action. The Buckeyes’ primary receiver, Noah Brown, is still receiving limited snaps as he returns from a broken leg. Ohio State’s only other consistent receivers thus far have been Samuel and Dontre Wilson.

And every coach has his strengths and weaknesses. Meyer’s emphasis has long been attacking the defense across a variety of fronts with the spread run game. He has never fully relied upon drop back passing. That is not to say that Ohio State does not have the necessary plays. They run routes you see every week in the NFL, such as follow-pivot, drive, mesh, levels, H-option, and y-cross. But a timing-based passing game takes repetition and precision, and it may not be as much of a focus for the Buckeyes as it would be for an NFL squad.

The upshot remains that the formula against Ohio State is to limit the Buckeyes on first down and put them in passing situations. That task is harder this season, given the multi-front threat of Samuel, Weber, and Barrett, as well as Barrett’s increased passing effectiveness. But unless Ohio State can improve its efficiency in must-pass situations, it remains vulnerable if a defense can limit the Buckeye run game.