Hurricane Duke Storms Through Hokie Defense; Offense Pops Its Own Bubble

Former Virginia Tech QB Jeff Beyer's film review features Miami's cutback attack, Tech's short passes, screen game, goal line play calling and more.

Miami's Duke Johnson stiff arms Chuck Clark after a big gain in the 4th quarter. [Mark Umansky]

Well, that was ugly. There's no way around it. But it wasn't as ugly as it could have been. Miami beat us in the first half. Handily. We beat ourselves in the second half. Should we have lost the game? Probably. That badly? Not quite. It seems like a broken record, but I think we were only a couple plays away from at least making this more respectable. By no means do I think we deserved to win the game, but it shouldn't have been as bad as it was. Any time we created chances for ourselves we seemed to make mistakes to eliminate those chances right away. Acknowledging our struggles so far, we need all the help we can get and cannot afford to squader the opportunities we do create.

These missed opportunities affect us for far more than just the play during which the occur. A mistake that costs us on one play has a cascading effect that troubles us much further down the road, whether it be that particular series, that possession, or the entire game. Our first possession is a great example. An unnecessary penalty by Bucky Hodges on our first punt return led us to start at our own 13-yard-line instead of a very favorable position nearly right at midfield after a great return by Greg Stroman. I'm not saying we would have scored a TD right away and the game ends completely different, but we have a better chance at getting some points, and the field position game changes entirely even if we still end up punting the ball.

Before I delve into the offense and defense, I want to give a quick shoutout to our special teams play. I think overall we played very well on special teams. It was nice to finally see some good returns on punts (outside of Hodges' penalty) and kickoffs that helped our offense by shortening the field. Additionally, our coverage on punts was generally pretty good, and we blocked an extra point! Obviously the short punt into the wind by A.J. Hughes hurt us, but overall it was good to see some solid play by those who ride bus 3 (special teams).

There was no question of Miami's strategy to attack our defense in this game. Their objective was to funnel everything through their backfield. With large offensive linemen and incredibly skilled running backs, Miami dialed up a heavy dose of zone blocking to move the ball on the ground. A few play-action passes allowed them to go over the top when needed. What hurt us the most were the cutbacks on the runs, and the involvement of the running backs in the passing game. Miami was not afraid to run out of spread formations, ensuring our defense was stretched thin to give Duke Johnson and Gus Edwards plenty of lanes to cut back against the grain.

On this 3rd-and-1 run, you'll see all of our defense slant to the top of the screen, with no one filling the backside for cutback support. Ken Ekanem (No. 4) seems to be automatically crashing regardless of what the offense does, telling me that some sort of cue (probably the alignment of the offset end) was dictating his play. If this is the case, I would have thought there'd be some sort of backside fill. Maybe there is (Kendall Fuller - No. 11, or Kyshoen Jarrett - No. 34), but it's slow to arrive for a 3rd-and-1 situation. Duke Johnson (No. 8 - Miami) runs into his own blocker slowing his momentum, otherwise he would probably would have gained much more than just the first down.

Another example of this comes towards the end of the game. It appears there has been an adjustment to where, instead of Ekanem slanting hard, he loops upfield and the outside linebacker (Derek Di Nardo - No. 41) crashes down the line. This creates an opportunity for Ekanem to make a play in the backfield, but he gets too far upfield, effectively creating another cutback lane for Duke.

We see this another time on Gus Edwards' (No. 7 - Miami) long touchdown run. Over-pursuit by our defense, and a slip by Kendall Fuller, leads to the long touchdown run. Both Dadi Nicolas (No. 90) and Jarrett are scraping down the line, but get caught too far inward. I think there's a legitimate case to make for Jarrett being held by Miami's WR No. 3 here. It was a very short hold, but stopped Jarrett completely nonetheless and should have been called.

When Miami's running backs weren't handed the ball by QB Brad Kaaya (No. 15), they ran routes out of the backfield so he could throw it to them. If part 1a of Miami's strategy was to run the ball with their RBs, part 1b was to have them catch it down the field. I think Miami wanted to attack our interior linebackers, especially Andrew Motuapuaka. Motuapuaka, who made his first start, was put in a tough position having to handle Duke Johnson all night. With so much emphasis on Miami's running attack, it was easy for our defense to get sucked in with a play-action fake, and then get beat over top. This play halfway through the first quarter is a good example.

In this case, Andrew Motuapuaka (No. 54) starts off in pretty good coverage. He knows he's matched up with Gus Edwards, and scrapes along to run with Edwards out of the backfield. Detrick Bonner (No. 8) and Jarrett both are sucked in by the play fake, and scramble to recover. Although Motuapuaka starts in decent position, Edwards' speed creates enough separation for Kaaya to drop the pass in. Thankfully Kaaya does not recognize Bonner coming in on the fake, otherwise he has an easy throw over the middle to Phillip Dorsett for the touchdown.

In another example, Deon Clarke (No. 40) is matched up with Johnson coming out of the backfield running a simple out and in route. Although Kaaya missed the throw, Clarke was out of position and Johnson was open. Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the play of our linebackers in this case. Miami's running backs present matchup problems that they took advantage of with our defense. Covering Johnson or Edwards coming out of the backfield is no easy task for a linebacker, and Miami knows this.

If it's tough for a linebacker to cover either of Miami's RBs, you can bet it is even harder for a defensive end. Twice in this game we saw a play in which a DE was tasked with covering the RB underneath. Before we go screaming about why that would ever occur, keep in mind that same sort of coverage led to an interception vs. Pitt last week. We see that as an example here on 3rd down late in the first quarter.

The Hokies are in man coverage with a safety over the top (Cover 1). Pre-snap, we show a blitz with our 6 interior players. While Motuapuaka and Clarke blitz, Ekanem and Nicolas take two steps up field and then drop into the underneath zones. Again, last week this resulted in an interception. In fact, Ekanem is in the exact same position to intercept the ball that Nicolas was last week if Kaaya hits the underneath crosser. The difference between last week and this week though is Johnson out of the backfield. If Miami's offensive coordinator saw that film last week and dialed this play up for this week... then a tip of the hat to him. Kaaya stands in the pocket just long enough to give Johnson time to get around Nicolas, and floats a prayer up that Johnson can run under. You can't fault Nicolas too much here, it's a tough position to be in.

The EXACT same setup by both teams resulted in Miami's touchdown immediately prior to the half. The setup is identical. Miami has the ball on the right hash, trips to the left and one to the right with the RB to Kaaya's right. The trips all run vertical routes, the solo WR drags across, and the RB releases out of the backfield. We're in cover 1 man, with 6 guys at the line of scrimmage. Again we show blitz, but then the DEs drop off. So again, we have Nicolas in coverage with Johnson. I really don't like to question Coach Foster's calls, but this one has me puzzled. As I've mentioned, we certainly have seen success before with this call, but I don't see the reasoning behind using this defense with Miami having no timeouts and :09 seconds left in the half. Bud's got to want to have this one back. I'm not sure what we have to gain here versus what we have to lose. If you're going to have two players in underneath coverage anyway, why make the switch between the LBs and DEs? If you're going to bring the LBs on a blitz, why not bring the house? It seems like an in-between scenario that doesn't lead to much upside and leaves us susceptible to a big downside in this scenario, a la a Miami touchdown right before half.

Our defense clearly did not have a good first half. However, whatever the defensive coaches told our team/adjusted did wonders for the beginning of the second half. After each of our first two turnovers, the defense did a great job buckling down and getting the ball back. It wasn't until after our third turnover that the defense started to yield; I'm sure it was somewhat demoralizing to see the offense cough the ball up so quickly like that.

From an offensive standpoint, we also did not have a good first half. Again, I yield to French when it comes to blocking schemes and the performance of the offensive line, but we've got to get better there. The bubble routes we attempted from a passing perspective worked to extend the running game outside. I know a lot of people (including the announcers) were critical of this approach, but I think it was a pretty good strategy, at least in the first half. We're not the type of offensive team that can dictate to the defense what we do. Its sad to say, but right now, we have to take what the defense gives us. Last week versus Pitt, it was the outsides and underneath. This week versus Miami, it was the bubble routes. Lets look at this play late in the first quarter. A simple way to analyze this is from a basic mathematical point of view. To the top of the screen, there are 2 Miami defenders. Across from them there are 3 Hokie WRs (well, 2 WRs and a TE). In other sports, you would refer to this as "having numbers" in basketball or an "odd-man rush" in hockey. The point is, we outnumber them. To have a blocker for each defender and one of your better athletes with the ball in space is pretty much the goal of any offensive strategy. That's why I'm okay with this approach, because it was there throughout the game. In this specific example, yes Michael Brewer makes a bad throw and the blocks aren't completed executed correctly, but the foundation was there, so I can't fault Loeffler for trying to take advantage of it.

We see this again early in the second quarter. We have Miami outnumbered at the bottom, and we hit Hodges with a quick pass. The blocks by the Isaiah Ford (No. 1) and Josh Stanford (No. 5) are good, and Bucky gets upfield. Yes I think Stanford has a good block, having his hand on the outside of the DB is what gets him in trouble. He's positioned his body pretty well, and I really don't think he gained much advantage by the "hold". Tough call to make, but having your hand on the outside of the DB makes a good block look more like a hold, which the officials cued in on.

This next example is one that puzzles me though. At the beginning of the clip, if you take the same math approach as above, you'll see 2 defenders and 2 WRs to the top, and 3 defenders and 3 WRs to the bottom. But, Miami shows blitz, creating a man advantage at the bottom. The initial design of this play appears to be a quick screen to the top regardless of the matchups. I think there has to be some sort of check that allows Brewer to change it to throwing to the bottom if the matchup appears more favorable though. It's a tough ask of an offensive lineman to get out to block a charging DB in time for a quick screen. I think we would have had much more success throwing to the bottom of the field if we check to it at the line of scrimmage.

This bubble approach was also created using the 3 players split wide as blockers for the RB out of the backfield. In this clip, we have 3 WR split to the top, with our TE and RB also to the right of the center. For how much of an unbalanced look we are presenting, Miami is not doing a whole lot to overload one side of their defense. As such, when Brewer hits Joel Caleb coming out of the backfield, we have a everyone except the safety blocked, and Caleb picks up a nice little gain before the fumble. I want to emphasize this is a really well executed play outside of the fumble. We have 4 great downfield blocks by the WRs and TEs. It is completely overshadowed by the fumble, but this is what Miami was giving us all night, and we were able to take advantage of it.

I think Loeffler was trying to use the bubble passes to set up a pump-and-go down the sideline for a big gainer. This is a good idea if Miami is jumping the bubble route, but to this point I don't think Miami really was pressuring the bubble that hard. I think sticking with hitting the bubble route quickly was our best bet, especially as we got close to the end zone as in this play.

Not only do we have Miami outnumbered to the top of the screen, but one of the defenders blitzes, so we have two blockers with Hodges running the bubble. However in this case, Ford is actually running a go route so that Brewer can fake to Hodges and hopefully hit Ford down the sideline. Byrn is caught in some sort of awkward middle ground, faking a block on a non-existent defender. He doesn't see it, but looking inside to pick off whichever defender scraped across would help Hodges immensely. Based on the defense Miami lined up in though, I think Brewer needs to nix the fake and hit Hodges immediately. I think the technique of the DB shows he's not going to bite because he has deep responsibility, so the pump fake won't excite him. What I don't know though, is what sort of flexibility Brewer has here. Does he have a pre-snap call to nix the fake? I just don't know.

Switching gears a bit, I wanted to show clips from the later in the second quarter when we were backed up into our own end zone. I think this series of three plays were a huge turning point in the game, and our inability to move the ball coupled with a poor punt by Hughes really tilted things in Miami's favor. Our first play call was a flood route into the boundary.

Hodges clears down the sideline for an out route by Malleck, Rogers peels into the flat and Stanford runs a shallow drag from the backside. Rogers gets eaten up by the DE, so I think Brewer is looking to try and hit Malleck. Based on where the defender is when the ball goes out of bounds, Malleck may not have been open. However, I think the read here has to be underneath first. With Rogers locked up by the DE, Brewer needs to find Stanford over the middle. It appears that he looks at Stanford, but I think at that point he's actually looking at the blitzing defender. He needs to realize the defender is blitzing right from where Stanford is running to, so he has an easy dump off pass. A keen observer will point out how last week I referred to a backside drag route as the 3rd or 4th option that shouldn't be considered. Even if that is that case here, Stanford has a route that is run at a shorter depth and straight across the field rather than drifting further from the line of scrimmage. I think the read has got to be the shorter routes first knowing that being near the goal line Brewer will not have the time to go downfield.

I think part of what makes Brewer feel he needs to rush is his poor footwork on this play. This drop back has to be quicker, cleaner and sharper. After the play fake, he sort of pitter patter steps to gather his feet as if he were going to look for a long throw down field. In this situation though, he is not going to have time for that. He needs to make his fake, and get his feet set immediately to recognize the defense and be ready to throw right away.

This second down play call baffles me. Like seriously. We run a two receiver switch and sit route, with a rollout by Brewer to his non-throwing side (to his left). That's creating an incredibly tough throw for Brewer close to his own end zone. The key to throwing when you roll opposite of your throwing arm side is getting depth, then moving forward towards the line of scrimmage as you throw to get some momentum behind the ball. That's really hard to do when you're almost running out of your own end zone after getting the snap. He appears to have Ford open sitting at the first down line, but he has no easy way to get the ball to him. I'm glad he threw it away, but how do you not call a run play here? Last week, we were backed up into our own end zone and we ran the ball 3 times (remember, Marshawn was out). This time, we throw the ball three times. Granted, the 3rd down call was a good play call based on the situation, (smash route, the corner receiver was open and Brewer overthrew him), but I really thought we'd run the ball on second down.

I know Brewer's arm strength has been questioned in the past, and I think we saw some examples of it during this game. Getting the ball out quickly and with some velocity is not his selling point, and I think we all recognize that. His accuracy and game management was what we were all sold on, even if that hasn't turned out to be the case in every game so far. With Mark Leal, we do see a bit stronger arm. On his touchdown throw, Leal didn't have the best footwork, but was able to make up for it with his arm strength. He threw it pretty flat footed, but still got it there. Unfortunately, just a few plays earlier he threw one low on a very similar route to the TD.

Is Leal the answer? I don't know, Miami was playing some soft defense with the game well in the bag. Will it hurt to find out? No, I don't think so. It's easy to think the grass is greener on the other side, but to really know, you have to cross the fence. I don't think we have much to lose by making a QB change, since nothing else seems to be working. I'm not trying to put all the fault on Brewer though, because there's plenty of areas where everyone can improve. However, a shuffle can bring some different talents to the table. Just keep in mind, it will also bring a different set of challenges too. I'm all for mixing things up to find out what works, but lets not look at a mixup as if there is one-change-fix-all move for the coaches to make. We have to get better all around.

As a side note, I know last week a bunch of you asked what I thought we needed to do execute better, and what I thought of Beamer/Loeffler etc. Those sorts of questions are tough to answer. It's easy to look at the film and explain why things didn't work. The film is right there in front of you, and most everything you need to know is there. As far as describing the how to improve, that's a whole different animal. This is why coaches get paid a lot of money, and get fired when they aren't successful. Discovering that "how to get better" thing is not simple. I can't try and speculate on that because in all honestly, I know nothing about that. I'm not a coach. I put my trust in our coaches, and believe that they are trying to help the team be successful to the best of their abilities. To question their abilities? That's why the athletic director gets paid so much. I'll leave it up to him.

I won't leave you with a complete non-answer though. So what do I think we need to do? Up-tempo. Faster cadence. Just like we did when we opened the second half. Why do I think that? I watch a lot of Oregon Ducks games.

Comments

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Our job as coaches is to influence young people's lives for the better in terms of fundamental skills, work ethic, and doing the right thing. Every now and again, a player actually has that effect on the coaching staff." Justin Fuente on Sam Rogers

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

Five star get after it 100 percent Juice Key-Playing. MAN

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

Five star get after it 100 percent Juice Key-Playing. MAN

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Our job as coaches is to influence young people's lives for the better in terms of fundamental skills, work ethic, and doing the right thing. Every now and again, a player actually has that effect on the coaching staff." Justin Fuente on Sam Rogers

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

No, I *don't* want to go to the SEC. Why do you ask?

We don't love dem Hoos.

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Nope, launch him into the sun and fart on him on the way up"
-gobble gobble chumps

"11-0, bro"
-Hunter Carpenter (probably)

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

Tweedy can run like a dadgum antelope or whatever. I like to use scalded dog. Do antelopes lumber? Cheetah, OK. He runs like a cheetah. He's fast. - Bud Foster

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Our job as coaches is to influence young people's lives for the better in terms of fundamental skills, work ethic, and doing the right thing. Every now and again, a player actually has that effect on the coaching staff." Justin Fuente on Sam Rogers

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Our job as coaches is to influence young people's lives for the better in terms of fundamental skills, work ethic, and doing the right thing. Every now and again, a player actually has that effect on the coaching staff." Justin Fuente on Sam Rogers

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Our job as coaches is to influence young people's lives for the better in terms of fundamental skills, work ethic, and doing the right thing. Every now and again, a player actually has that effect on the coaching staff." Justin Fuente on Sam Rogers

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Our job as coaches is to influence young people's lives for the better in terms of fundamental skills, work ethic, and doing the right thing. Every now and again, a player actually has that effect on the coaching staff." Justin Fuente on Sam Rogers

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"We judge ourselves by our intentions and others by their behavior" Stephen M.R. Covey

“When life knocks you down plan to land on your back, because if you can look up, you can get up, if you fall flat on your face it can kill your spirit” David Wilson

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Our job as coaches is to influence young people's lives for the better in terms of fundamental skills, work ethic, and doing the right thing. Every now and again, a player actually has that effect on the coaching staff." Justin Fuente on Sam Rogers

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner.”~~Judge Holden

Please join The Key Players Club to read or post comments.

"Our job as coaches is to influence young people's lives for the better in terms of fundamental skills, work ethic, and doing the right thing. Every now and again, a player actually has that effect on the coaching staff." Justin Fuente on Sam Rogers