I don't have enough time to talk about this as much as I'd like to. That's why I am posting it here instead of on the front.
I read it once from the diehard, watch every snap of Hokie football perspective and a second time with a National (big game) perspective. That helped me to accept Hinton's thesis a little more.
How do Hokies break through on offense? Very quietly.
Considering the national perspective on Hokie football... Our three "big time" games in 2010 were Boise State, FSU and Stanford. Offensively speaking they were a flop, success, major flop. But the hype leading up to, and sprinkled throughout via highlights, those games was that Virginia Tech is/was competent on offense. So I get the "very quietly". It was our best offense in years, but ACC on ACC action, where Tyrod and the gang were most effective, was watched by very few, so for most people that means hearing a lot of hype during games where we didn't produce.
I think Doc S overstated our commitment to the run in 2010. Yes the statistics support his claim, and no I don't have any of my own. But, how many times has Tyrod held the ball too long and taken at sack? Or how many times has a pass devolved into a scramble? Without going back and watch each game, I'll answer "too much". Those all count toward Hinton's balance statistic:
There was no change in philosophy in 2010 – the Hokies ran on a little over 62 percent of their offensive snaps
If we has a true run/pass balance of 55/45 we'd probably win a lot more games, because that would imply among other things the offensive line was more adept at pass blocking and imposing on the ground.
Just my thoughts, feel free to share yours.