Week 5: In Which Ohio State Plays Rutgers

Standings
1. Draper (11-5, 1-3 upset)
2. Schweinfurth (10-6, 0-4 upset)
3. Seeberg (9-7, 1-3 upset)
3. Hoying (9-7, 0-4 upset)

Miami Hurricanes @ Duke Blue Devils
Draper: Many will see this as a total mismatch.  One of these teams has won the Coastal Division in their history while the other has wallowed in obscurity while a member of the ACC.  The Duke powerhouse is only 4 years removed from the ACC title game, but Miami might be ready to take a step forward (yes, Miami has never won the Coastal).  Two years ago had one of the most epic endings ever with 17 laterals giving the Hurricanes the victory at the buzzer. Miami had their Hurricane Irma swoon in the first half vs. Toledo but righted the ship.  Duke isn't a pushover, but the Canes have too much firepower.  UM: 30--Duke: 21
Hoying: Time to weigh in on two teams I know almost nothing about (aka most teams this year). These ACC powerhouses have played 6 games between them without dropping any of them. And the Blue Devils have some actual wins over actual teams from the B1G, the B12, and the ACC, while Miami has been picking up the pieces from Hurricane Irma before returning to overcome the Toledo Rockets last week. Duke has had a nice run over the last few years under Cutcliffe (except for last season's hiccup), but Mark Richt has put the 'Canes on a path to recapture the glory of finishing 2nd in the Coastal Division every year. Canes take this one on the road. UM: 27--Duke: 21
Schweinfurth: Let's be honest, I really haven't been paying attention to anyone other than Clemson and FSU (Week 1) in the ACC this year. Duke has had some nice seasons the last few years. Let's be honest, it's still Duke football. I think they hang tough but this is Miami after all. UM: 35--Duke: 20
Seeberg: Tough not to feel for the Hurricanes, who still haven't played a power five opponent thanks to, well, actual hurricanes.  Toledo nearly took advantage of that and led Miami at half last week, only to see Miami explode for 6 second-half TDs.  Duke, meanwhile, has beaten THREE power 5 teams by an average of 16 points.  David Cutcliffe has brought the Duke football program to actual credibility and near-relevance.  A win over the still-readjusting, top-15 Hurricanes might just get the Blue Devils over the top.  Prepare for a Coach K like performance as the Dukies get their long-awaited signature win.  UM: 24--Duke: 31

USC Trojans @ Washington State Cougars
Draper: While Mike Leach may be an evil genius, he seems to have trouble in these big games (at Wazzu).  Clearly, the Trojans have the better talent, but they've been up and down, especially vs. mid level teams.  The Cougars and Mike Leach comprise one of my favorite assemblages of offensive brainpower and scheme, they don't have the horses to compete.  This feels like a "statement" game for the Trojans against a mediocre team beset by injuries.  Don't put it past Wazzu to use some black pirate magic to keep in interesting, but Sam Darnold and the Trojans get a nice road win in Pullman.  USC: 37--WSU: 27
Hoying: You know you've reached the big time when your undefeated, ranked matchup is kicking off at 10:30 on a Friday night. When USC started the season ranked #4, I raised a skeptical eyebrow. Sure, they finished last season ranked #3 (despite 3 losses), and they have everybody's favorite mediocre-producing Heisman candidate and second coming of Peyton Manning, Sam Darnold. But this is a team that's been "back" at least half a dozen times since they were last relevant around 2008, and they've won the Pac-12 exactly zero times since then. OK, so USC might be overrated; who's going to step up and take them down? Cal fell flat against a lackluster Trojan effort last week, but can the Cougs get it done? QB Luke Falk has picked up where he left off last year (and the rest of the team is perfectly capable of mounting double digit comebacks with him off the field, right Boise State?). Running the ball is optional, though, and a one-dimensional offense isn't going to be enough to apply a statistical correction to USC. Not yet. USC: 41--WSU: 24
Schweinfurth: It seems like everyone is on the Sam Darnold train. The more I watch and see stats, the less impressed I am. The dude throws at least 1 pick a game. That's good right? Wazzu can put up points in a hurry (hello air raid) but doesn't play much defense, a Mike Leach special. I think the Trojans win a shootout with Darnold putting up the numbers everyone expects...just with a couple of INTs to keep the Cougs in it. USC: 52--WSU: 42
Seeberg:  USC has been very Cedar Point-like this weekend, rolling up and down and in and out like a coaster.  Lackluster performances against Texas and Western Michigan sandwiched around a blasting of Stanford.  WASU, meanwhile, has quietly started 4-0 with such quality wins as...um...uh...Boise State despite giving up 44 points at home??  Tough to see USC not putting up at least that much offensively and, thereby, tough to see the Cougs keeping up.  Trojans fight on.  USC: 48--WSU: 28

Clemson Tigers @ Virginia Tech Hokies
Draper: I hate to say this, but Clemson is really, really good.  They may stumble out of the gates, but the talent is overpowering.  The Hokies have Blacksburg rocking Enter Sandman at night, but can they take down the new monster of the ACC? My money says no.  The Clemson D is stifling and Bryant is a very good QB running the offense.  Too much Tigers.  Good night sweet Hokie Bird. Clem: 27--VT: 10
Hoying: I'm done picking against Clemson unless I have a really, really good reason to. They're like the ACC version of Alabama or Ohio State. Clem: 34--VT: 20
Schweinfurth: This game screams of a blood bath. Clemson's defensive front is the best in college football. I mean there is no way VaTech moves the football consistently. The Tigers are the best team in the ACC and show it. Clem: 35--VT: 10
Seeberg:  Both teams here have quality wins over nonconference opponents (WVU for Va Tech, Auburn for Clemson) and are riding high early in the season.  Having been to Va Tech in 2015 I can honestly say it is by FAR the best atmosphere in a visiting stadium I have ever experienced (and I've been in the Big House for The Game twice).  Va Tech is good, the venue is superb, but that won't be enough to last all four quarters.  Clemson's D-line is too deep and athletic, and will wear the Hokies down in the second half, much like the Buckeyes do to their opponents.  Tigers pull away late.  Clem: 35--VT: 17

Mississippi State Bulldogs @ Auburn Tigers
Draper:  Time for the other "ranked" matchup of the week.  Two mediocre SEC West squads pandering to be Bama's number 2.  These teams appear to be near mirror images of talent.  Stidham vs. Mitchell.  I don't know.  When in doubt, pick the home team.  If this was in StarkVegas, I'd lean CLANGA, but the Tigers reign supreme in Jordan Hare (in a game no one cares about).  MSU: 17--Aub: 21
Hoying: Good to see that this is still a ranked matchup after Mississippi State got utterly pasted by Georgia last week. Must be that quality win over the LSU team that limped past Syracuse last week. It seems that the most impressive achievement of either of these teams was Auburn's narrow loss to Clemson. When in doubt, pick the home team, especially at night (Eastern time, anyway). MSU: 17--Aub: 20
Schweinfurth: Two SEC teams that aren't Bama which means a snoozefest. Bad offense or good defenses? Who cares, this won't be worth watching until the 4th quarter. I'll take the Tigers are at home. MSU: 10--Aub: 14
Seeberg:  I can't decide if I put too much stock in LSU (that MSU destroyed) or too much stock in MSU (that Georgia destroyed).  Either way, I think Auburn is less bipolar- and at home- so I'm going with the Tigers. MSU: 16--Aub: 27

THE Ohio State University Buckeyes @ Rutgers Scarlet Knights
Draper: Hooray for the famed matchup vs. Buttgers! This has been an annual curb-stomping and I don't expect different this year. Yeah, Rutgers played Washington tough, but Urban's squad was focused by the loss and, let's face it, they have more talent than the Huskies.  Chris Ash is getting Rutgers near the corner of actually winning a close game, but he's not there yet...and OSU won't give him the opportunity.  The defense will give a bit through the air, but the offense is what to focus on this week.  Last week's glorified scrimmage shored up parts of the passing game.  Let's see if we can keep moving in the right direction.  If the passing game sputters on the road, we still have JKLOL and a newly healthy Mike Weber to carry the load.  I think the offense might spend a little more time working on the run this week just like they focused on the pass last week.  Keep em guessing.  Bucks big.  OSU:55--Buttgers: 17
Hoying: Ohio State has played Rutgers 3 times in its storied history. 56-17, 49-7, 58-0. Following these trend lines, the final score of this one should be something like 60 to negative 8. Is Rutgers any better this year? Well, they lost to Eastern Michigan a couple of weeks ago, so no. The Scarlet Knights did play Nebraska tough last week, but not as tough as Northern Illinois did. Maybe Rutgers would fare better if they added a directional word to their name. Like "Rutgers, the State University of Northeastern New Jersey." I hope no restaurants are offering promotions based on the margin of victory in this one. OSU: 52--RSUNJ: 10
Schweinfurth: I still can't believe this is a night game. This should look a lot like last week. JT leads the Bucks to a MASSIVE first half lead and turns it over to Haskins. I guess the bright spot in this game, and last week, is that the backups get some live fire reps and get on tape to get better. Just get out of this game with no injuries, get Weber about 10 snaps, Dobbins his 100 yards, work on the pass D, etc. Feel for Chris Ash. His former boss has no mercy for inferior opponents, especially conference teams. OSU: 56--RSUNJ aka NY's CFB team: 9
Seeberg:  Ah yes, a night game at Rutgers with Greg Schiano in attendance.  Wait a minute, is it 2006?  For Rutgers, the answer to that question is, sadly, no...and Schiano now patrols the opposing sideline.  Rutgers does seem to be improving as this season wears on, but so to are the Buckeyes, now including a healthy Mike Weber!  I expect the defense to look good, and I REALLY hope the offense goes berserk to shut some people up.  I still worry the coaching staff is too enamored with the pass, but last week may have just been to try to work some of the kinks out against a laughably inferior opponent.  In any case, Rutgers isn't a whole lot better, so don't expect this one to be much closer.  OSU: 48--RSUNJ: 14 

Upset Special
Draper: Tennessee over Georgia
Hoying: Northern Illinois over San Diego State
Schweinfurth: Ole Miss over Bama (someone has to pick it)
Seeberg:  Vanderbilt over Florida

Grading the Bucks: Week 4--UNLV

Sorry for the late post.  This will be a short one.  Not a ton of insightful takeaways here.

Offense: A-
JT looked fine but I don't take a lot out of the game given the level of competition.  Honestly, what did you expect him to do? I'll talk about the playcalling later but there was little to nitpick offensively other than the turnovers at the goalline.  Obviously, ball security is of paramount importance, but that was really the only negative.  Buckeye Nation got a dose of reality regarding Dwayne Haskins.  Yes, he did look really good, but there are certainly some inconsistencies (the pick six and a few misses).  Yes, JT has those misses periodically and I don't know if he could have made that throw to CJ Saunders, but Haskins is much more of a gunslinger and plays his game that way.  JT is simply more risk averse (and maybe that's a better strategy with the talent disparity--but no definite answer).  I would like to see Saunders get some time with the 1s as he seems to be a nice little wide receiver with actual hands and route-running ability.

Defense: A-
Again, what can you say.  The starters (for the most part) did what they should have done with a few exceptions (the first half score probably shouldn't have happened).  The D-line is still ridiculously good and the secondary still has holes but that's to be expected when the entire last 2 years secondary is playing on Sundays.  I don't really care much about the second half (offensively or defensively) because that just provided time for the backups to see the field.  Good experience, but not a measure of the team going forward.

Special Teams: A-
Man, I really want to give an A with the nice return by Parris, but you know where I'm going.  Coverage was better this week against an inferior opponent, but I will lose all my hair with these kickoffs out of bounds.  There is simply not reason.

Coaching: A-
I was interested to see the coaching staff go completely into practice mode for this game.  There was a clear agenda to work on the passing game and I really did like the approach.  The running game is fine and we don't need a lot of tuning up in game situations so why bother with it.  JT went play action on almost every "obvious" running down because that's what needs work (and it seemed to show good results).  I absolutely LOVE the fact that the playcalling started utilizing the middle of the field in the intermediate passing game which I feel is JT's strength.  If we can keep working there and add in some of those nice fades in the red zone, we might have something.  Obviously, this wasn't a perfect game, but the playcalling and execution took a step up (yes, I know it was UNLV, but be happy when something positive occurs).

Overall: A-
Nice win.  Didn't learn anything new but got to practice some new concepts as well as get the backups some live action.  Concerning Haskins, don't get me wrong: he has some incredible tools that could lead to fantastic quarterback play, but I feel he showed a few chinks (not to say JT doesn't have them) that leads me to trust the coaches.  I literally heard on radio personalities in Columbus who should know better say (in back to back sentences) that we can't take anything from JT's nice showing and 5 TD- 0 int- 0 punt performance because of the weak opponent, but Haskins 2 TD- 1 int- multiple punt performance against the same team shows he has the skills and it's time to consider a change.  You can't have it both ways.  Either the opponent sucked and we need to take these stats with a grain of salt (my personal opinion) or we have incredibly meaningful data.  Haskins has shown so great high spots but is inconsistent.  JT's ceiling may be a bit lower (definitely in the passing game) but his mental grasp of the game and consistency will keep him in the driver's seat for the foreseeable future.  On to Buttgers.