COLUMBUS, Ohio -- If you played word association with tight end Marcus Baugh's 31-yard completion in the third quarter of Ohio State's win over Army on Saturday, the likely responses would be something like "misfire" or "inaccurate."

Here's a refresher on the play:

Baugh came streaking free across the middle of the field, and Buckeyes quarterback J.T. Barrett threw the ball behind him. If the ball was on target, it could have been a long catch-and-run touchdown. If Baugh didn't make the adjustment he made, flashing some strong hands, then it would've gone as another incomplete pass and more questions about Barrett.

Forget about the ball placement for just a second and think about the set-up.

Why was Baugh running free across the middle of the field?

It goes beyond Ohio State simply being more talented than Army. Yes, that's true. And it will be true over the next month. That's why no one here is putting the Buckeyes back on the national championship path because they beat a bad team.

But you also need to be able to pick out little building blocks that show you whether or not Ohio State will be able to win the next time it plays a playoff-caliber team -- say, Oct. 28 against Penn State. The Buckeye offense needed to undergo some changes after a loss to Oklahoma.

The change was getting back to building a passing attack off of the strong running game Ohio State has always had, even if the coaching staff sometimes chooses to abandon it.

"We got back to what Ohio State's offense is: Playing fast, getting the ball in space and making plays," receiver Parris Campbell said.

Which brings us back to Baugh's long reception. Campbell's role in the play was as important as the quarterback and the tight end. Watch the play below and pay attention to the safety to Barrett's right. He bites hard on a fake bubble screen action by Campbell, leaving the middle of the field open for Baugh. The concept also works in a play-action run fake to Mike Weber.

There are a few bells and whistles.

Campbell's 11-yard gain on the previous play, a bubble to the opposite side of the field, set that up. Or maybe it was any of the other quick, short passes to the perimeter built off of play-action that Barrett threw on Saturday.

There was nothing sexy or exciting about Ohio State's offensive game plan against Army. And it will probably look very much the same when the Buckeyes host UNLV, another woefully undermanned opponent, this Saturday. Barrett completed 15 passes at or behind behind the line of scrimmage. That's not bringing people to their feet, or making them feel any better about a down-field passing attack that still needs a lot of work.

But it's a step in the right direction, and hopefully a sign that the coaching staff will stop trying to force onto Ohio State's offense a game plan and style of attack that doesn't fit its personnel.

"I felt like we were trying to get back to what we built on in the spring and the fall, getting the ball out in space," receiver Terry McLaurin said. "Despite us having a couple of holding calls, we were aggressive blocking out on the perimeter. That was the emphasis from Coach (Kevin) Wilson and the staff."

Run-pass options were aplenty for Barrett against Army.

That's a touch that the new offensive coordinator Wilson was hoping to bring to the offense. Using Barrett's running ability as a threat, but creating reliefs in the passing game in the form of passes to the sideline that give the defense something else to think about when Barrett keeps the ball on a zone read.

Oklahoma gave Ohio State some trouble with that stuff two weeks ago.

There's nothing wrong with stealing what works from the competition.

The Buckeyes needed to accomplish one thing against Army: Getting Barrett and this offense into some kind of rhythm that they can build off of over the next month. By getting back to basics and simplifying some things, they got off to a solid start.

"We just wanted to go fast, stop thinking so much, and just let us play," receiver K.J. Hill said.

Will a game plan predominantly reliant on this kind of passing attack work against teams like Penn State or Michigan? Probably not. That's also not the point.

Urban Meyer likes to refer to Ohio State's games against bad non-conference opponents as "preseason games." That's not a shot at the competition as much as it is an admission that the Buckeyes, like every team, have things to iron out when they get out of training camp and into games. Playing overmatched opponents helps in the feeling-out process. Ohio State is now in that part of its schedule after opening with Indiana and Oklahoma.

Against the Sooners, Ohio State did what has become far too common in big games, and that's abandon the run while forcing the issue in the downfield passing game against a defense dropping a bunch of players into coverage. That doesn't work. Clearly.

There has to be a balance -- both between the run and the pass, and between the kind of passes you're attempting. And in this case, those short passes to the sideline off of play action are viewed as extensions of the running game.

Barrett and the offense must get more proficient throwing the ball deep. That remains the offense's biggest issue, and nobody is saying that's been fixed.

But using the concepts used against Army will create more openings to do that -- if Ohio State is willing to stick with it when it counts.

"It's getting back to the basics of what we do. That's playing fast, not a lot of things going on trying to decipher things," Barrett said. "Just playing fast, having our offensive line controlling the line of scrimmage. Myself getting the ball out there to our play makers on the perimeter. Getting back to who we are. Last week we were trying to be perfect on every play. If you play football like that, a lot of times you're not gonna get the results."