Sometimes you just need to see a team do it.
Before Tech's second half against Western Michigan, no one had seen the Hokies run the ball consistently in 2014.
And if we're really being honest, Tech hasn't rushed with regular success in two years. Long gone are the years of Ryan Williams and David Wilson ripping off 100-yard games with ease. The days of Lee Suggs and Kevin Jones starring together on killer posters are a distant memory.
There have been flashes over the last two-and-a-half seasons. The J.C. Coleman game against Duke in 2012, Shai McKenzie's debut against William and Mary and Trey Edmunds' game last year against Marshall. But if it's that easy to recall days when a running back simply goes over 100 yards, doesn't it illustrate exactly how bad things have been in that department?
Frustrated by the lack of hard nosed Virginia Tech football on offense, fans have questioned and criticized the offensive line, coaching staff, game plans and of course the running backs themselves. The point of this column, however, isn't to take any singular aspect of the running game to task. As a unit it's looked pedestrian at best, and at it's worst...woof.
With all that said, was anyone actually expecting the dominant rushing performance Tech put on display on Saturday?
Wish for it, sure.
Hope for it, maybe.
Expect it?
No rational Tech fan could honestly say that they did.
Sure, the Broncos already gave up oodles of yards to teams like Purdue and Idaho this season. So what? The Hokies have played other soft rushing defenses and didn't look dominating. Remember Tech gaining 48 yards against North Carolina last year, a team that finished 83rd in rushing yards allowed per game (182)? Why would this be any different?
But it was.
After a fiery conversation between the coaches at halftime, offensive coordinator Scot Loeffler committed to pounding it between the tackles in the second half.
"It was intense," Shane Beamer said. "We meet as an offensive staff before we meet with the players at halftime, just to try and figure out what the plan of attack is going to be in the second half. And I think we all as a staff made it pretty clear that we're Virginia Tech, and we need to run the ball in the second half.
"Western Michigan was loading the box, playing man coverage. They were going to put as many guys around the line of scrimmage as they could and play man coverage on the outside. So from a run game standpoint that worries you a little bit, because they're always going to have an extra guy that you can't account for.
"And I just told Lefty 'I don't give a dang if they have eight guys, nine guys, however many guys in the box. If we're Virginia Tech, and these running backs are Virginia Tech running backs, we've got to break a tackle, we've got to make somebody miss. Run through somebody, run around somebody, run-over somebody, whatever.'
"And I went in the locker room and I told the running backs that we're going to run the football in the second half, I told Lefty that I don't care how many guys are up around the line of scrimmage...make 'em miss, and win those battles. The conversation was real brief with [the running backs], it was 'don't make me a liar', and they went out there and they performed. You know, it was awesome to see, it looked like Virginia Tech football in the second half."
Looked like Virginia Tech football.
It's cliche, but he's right. Even though the team hasn't stopped wearing maroon and orange, as of late Tech hadn't resembled the squads of yesteryear that bullied opponents on the ground. And I know, it's just lowly Western Michigan, but could last year's squad have done that? Sure, the Broncos have given up 167.5 rushing yards a game, but Tech ran it for 308. For the first time in quite a while the Hokies simply took an inferior opponent and pounded them on the ground. As a fan, it felt great. As someone who covers the team, I finally saw progress.
Even though this year's offense stars a different cast of characters, their performance up until Saturday had been met with the same criticisms. The quarterback is asked to do far too much, therefore turning it over at a troubling rate. The running game is stagnant, the receivers and the o-line inconsistent, and the fans are forced to watch with one hand over their eyes as the other reaches for the nearest alcoholic beverage.
Sometimes you never really understand how much you miss something until you see it for the first time again. Watching Marshawn Williams and Shai McKenzie crash through an overmatched defensive front made me remember.
"By no means have we 'arrived' and we're suddenly the '85 Oklahoma Sooners or someone as far as running the football," said Beamer. "But it was good to see us be able to line up and literally call the same play, I think we called maybe two running plays the whole second half. Just call the same plays over again, and they know it's coming and they're just not able to stop it. It was pretty cool to see and now we have to continue to build on it."
Though it was against a drastically less talented opponent, this could potentially be a jumping-off point. A place where the Hokies realized they have the personnel to move people around. It won't always work, and without McKenzie it won't always be pretty.
But from now on Tech's rushing attack can't simply be "good enough". We've seen it can be better than that, and the players know they can execute better than that. While Williams may not have the dynamic playmaking ability of his fellow true freshman McKenzie, he still has shown the ability to punish defenses between the tackles with size and just enough shiftiness. Trey Edmunds has looked healthier and more effective each week, and Joel Caleb showed he's more talented than a garbage time back.
It's clear that this Virginia Tech team has the talent to distance itself from the mediocrity of the last two years. To really turn a new page, however, the running game has to unpack its bags after a visit home to Lane last weekend.
Good teams move people, good teams attack people and good teams can run the dang ball. Against Western Michigan the Hokies did all three, and now they set their sights on the Tar Heels. Obviously no one has any idea what will happen this Saturday, but at the very least fans know what they can reasonably expect.
And if the Hokies play up to those expectations? Look out.
Comments
Did I just hear you correctly? We are going to run the ball you say?
I'm so happy!
As a Brown man -- i like dis gif.
I really hope Trey is 100% cause we are going to need him to do things like this.....
As a VT alum living in SEC country, nothing makes me happier than seeing Edmunds gash Bama's vaunted backers for this TD run
seconded.
Thirded
Fourthed.
And I'll bring a fifth...Jack Daniels or Jim Beam?
Wild Turkey, obivously.
yes
I do.
Get back to me after UNC.
Perfect. Agreed.
Please let this be a turning point for us.
If the execute the plays correctly any of the RBs on the roster move the ball. Williams, Edmunds, and Caleb all have the skills and speed to make the play happen as drawn, they just need to work on reading the blocks and making sure there are positive yards when the play breaks down. So far it the backs have done a good job of staying north/south rather than the days when some RBS would start moving backwards east/west.
East/West=Backwards? I think I need one of your homebrews.
Please see any run by JCC this year for examples. JCC will get the ball and then immediately turn his shoulders and run toward the sideline...drives me friggin nuts. I don't care how far you run sideways, the endzone is in front of you.
JCC normally gets called to run a sweep which looks similar to the image below. The idea is that it is an outside run that goes parallel to the line, but it relies on the RBs speed to get to the edge and turn upfield while the line keeps defenders from penetrating to the backfield.
And you often need to be able to make one guy miss.
Edmunds on limited carries has run mostly on sweeps IIRC. On many of those, he has had to beat a guy to the hole, break his tackle, or make him miss.
His production on the same plays is just startling compared to JCC, who hasn't been able to do any of those things.
Makes me feel bad for JCC, but it is what it is. We can wish he had "it" all we want. We can hope that if he loses some of the over-hyped strength (and the weight that came with it), he will regain some quickness & elusiveness, and be effective on these types of plays.
But until something else changes, I just see no evidence suggesting he should be in on sweeps either.
I think Edmunds has run more off-tackle than sweep. You can see how he actually tries to get upfield much sooner than Coleman does.
But then again, that could just be execution instead of the play call.
Trey had a run in the WMU game that was exactly this play but he bounced off of the contact with the safety/backer for a pretty big gain.
My first thought was "That was exactly what French said JCC needed to do on that play from the GT film review where he just got pushed out after a yard."
Except that when he gets the ball on such a handoff, the opposing defenses don't even try to crash through our line. They just flow toward the edge and are waiting on Coleman, so he only ever gets one yard at the most.
My argument isn't regarding how it's executed, just that the play calls for Coleman to run laterally first. You're correct though that he never gets to turn upfield because the other team is waiting for him. I'd imagine it's pretty easy to gameplan for the only play a guy runs when he's in the game. Perhaps that is an overstatement, but it sure seems to be the case.
Yup. Might as well just hold up this sign on the sideline to call in the play:
More or less as unfortunate as it is. Just something we need to remove from our playbook. Unfortunately, with Coleman in the game, teams will expect him to try to get to the edge so Linebackers aren't going to crash the line. He's most effective outside the tackles so either a sweep or a screen.
We don't need to remove it from the playbook, just run it with Juice, Trey etc when they aren't expecting it every now and then.
I meant more of "we need to remove JC running that play from the playbook." Also, I'd prefer to see both of those guys run a power off-tackle. Trey could possibly do well on a sweep, but a power run is better suited for those guys, especially Marshawn given his speed.
There are two things that happen on occasion, if not frequently, with the type of play that Hokie_x3_Hi showed via the image.
From the other side, however, I have seen a lot of teams do a great job of locking up our defenders to run such plays. Luckily for us, though, our safety nets are really damned quick and can usually bring help quicker than the tailback can make the break.
I don't have any problem with the tailback running East-West on plays like this as long as those two other components happen. If not, there would only be a handful of tailbacks in existence that are fast enough and strong enough to make this a productive play on a consistent basis.
Perhaps he meant, if you start from 3 yards behind the line and run to the sideline, the line of scrimmage moves backward.
I think the key is going to be sticking to the run as a game plan. Don't abandon your run-first game plan if the first series is an ineffective 3 and out. After watching these first few games, I really think if we can establish a competent run game, it'll take the pressure off of Brewer and he can play the game the way he wants to (i.e. more TDs than INTs)
Is there any reason why a power running game can't be effective against NC this weekend?
No. UNC may have held Clemson to 92 rushing yards, but their play in that game was surprising to say the least. They got gashed by EAST CAROLINA. If Tech can get the running game going, UNC may be in for another depressing night.
Or at least a depressing late afternoon. #GoACC #AllNoonKickoffs
Personally I am hoping for 350 rushing and 350 passing against that porous UNC defense and at least 7 TD's.
That would more than pay them back for 2012. I can live with that.
Sounds good to me, but will revisit this after the game. I just hope this is the start of a real running game to complement and set up the passing. Time will tell. GO HOKIES!!!
This is fascinating and what I was asking about in a thread a couple of days ago, except, I thought the word was that FRANK and not Shane Beamer was the one that had words with SL.
Now, I don't think there's any sort of rift between the coaches on staff but with Lefty making the play calls it's interesting that, if I'm reading this quote correctly, that Shane was able to demand that he change his play-calling to emphasize running the football.
It is interesting for a couple of reasons, the first being the dynamics and chain of command amongst the coaching staff and the second being offensive philosophy. This same discussion has been taking place here recently at TKP that Lefty perhaps "out-thinks" himself with his play-calling and maybe tries to get too cute and, as an outsider, doesn't appreciate the
and the fan base's desire for a blue collar team that pounds the rock in a predictable yet dominating fashion.
Should be fascinating to see how the first half next week looks.
With these guys and what I've come to understand is input is appreciated and expected. This was just halftime emphatic input that was influential.
Agreed. Trying to read anything more into it at this stage isn't going to be terribly productive, and it's probably a lot more like what Eg sed, than any sort of coaches tiff.
Agreed. I wasn't trying to imply there may be a rift but more wondering whether the approach of running the ball more was game specific or if it'll carry on to next week and for the rest of the season.
I think that many people, not just Shane, had some...philosophical words...with Loeffler at halftime. I don't think it was Shane just forcing Lefty to do whatever he wants, I think Shane was sticking up for his running backs. A sort of "trust my guys, they'll get it done" type deal, which is exactly what you'd expect from a position coach.
I think the important part to note here is that it's not that they were mad at Loeffler or his play calls. They had the confidence in their players to produce and said, "we need to feed them the ball." There wasn't some huge blowout, just straight coach to coach "we can do this" talk.
I'm with Brian. I think the coaches met on it, the run game was brought up, and Shane just stuck up for his guys. No riff.
Personally, I don't think we're going to see a return to pounding the ball this week. Maybe a slight uptick, but with Malleck, Hodges, and Cline all presumably healthy, Loeffler is gonna want to work that short/medium pass game.
And against that pass defense the short/medium game should be a long/td game.
Agreed, its why shane told the guys "Don't make me a liar"
Lefty, being a former QB, might tend to lean on the QB too much. A balanced approach should help the whole offense succeed.
Dammit.
I was really hoping this post was going to be an account of how the coaches read the Dr. Seuss book to the players at halftime and it got them really fired up.
Oh well, maybe someday.
I'll bite: Which Dr Seuss book are you thinking of? This could be fun!
Horton Hears a Who
Cat in the Hat
One Fish, Two fish, Orange Fish, Maroon Fish...
I think he was referencing "Oh The Places You'll Go"
I get the emotion behind "I don't care if you have 9 guys in the box, run it." I see what they're saying and see how it applies especially in a game against a team like WMU. But I can't help but think that the "good old days" where we "imposed our will on defenses" isn't a bit of Rosy Retrospection. There was a LOT of run, run, run Punt. Or usually, run for a little, run for a little, pass for nothing or not enough, punt.
Three runs and a punt and three passes and a punt are the same thing at the end of the day.
I know this is stating the obvious, but you need to be able to do both well. You need to run well enough that they try to stop it, but you need to be able to exploit it when they do. Running into a wall of 9 defenders over and over again is great when you're playing a team like WMU. It won't work against most Power 5 teams, certainly not most good Power 5 teams. We know, we tried it back in the "good old days" and it didn't really work.
I know this is dumb guy talk, but - do both good. Or at least, do both competently. Have a reason why you're doing it, and keep the defenses guessing. Like most things in life, it's all about balance. Unsuccessfully running for the sake of running is just as pointless as unsuccessfully passing for the sake of passing.
All they have to do is run the ball well enough for the opposing DC to respect the run. The passing game is far easier when the defense is forced to concede certain looks, giving the OC clear opportunities for play action. The passing game becomes wayyy easier once the run is established. Ask AJ McCarron.
I think you bring up an excellent point. As fans, we are always subject to the "grass is always greener" philosophies. I remember screaming, pass the ball! When we would consistently run over and over. Also, we were screaming for a west-coast, spread offense to put up tons of yards and points.
That said, we need to do a better job of seeing what's in front of us. GiT was a game we should have continued to pound the rock and bleed the clock. Thank goodness against WMU we said, f*ck it...we're running.
Against UNCheat, they are going to load the box and challenge us to throw. Let's not kid ourselves, they have MUCH better athletes than WMU. Many of their D recruits were ones we wanted badly. Their secondary is their weakness, so if it's there take it. Just don't be afraid to go to the run if they start backing off. ECU's gameplan exposed us to the type of D we will see the rest of the year, "bend but don't break". We will have to establish the line, but also be willing to go over the top will be key to getting them out of their plan.
The advantage there is if they are loading the box, and the O line can give him three seconds Brewer will destroy them through the air. The short game is his strength (by short I am not including screen).
I scream Run, Run, Run, not because of the Good Old Days; I just like the buffet of options 3rd and 2 brings to the table over 3rd and 10.
Ideally, sure. The problem is that the reality seemed to be more often: run for 1 or 2, run for one or 2, face 3rd and 7+, screen pass for no gain, punt
Flashbacks, they'll get after ya.
I think, too, the reason why they were "good 'ol runnin' days" was because we mostly only had success in running the ball, but as you say it was only in small chunks and usually never enough to sustain drives. Looking at some of those years in terms of passing there were a lot of failed opportunities that stuck in our heads worse than the short, but successful running game. And then, on top of that, those days seemed better because our D and Special Teams always came up with huge plays to keep us in the game! The points weren't necessarily coming from the rushing offense, but there were points nonetheless!
"Do both competently & keep defenses guessing". Truer words were never spoken, AMEN !! Leg for you. I think you may be on to something , what a unique concept.
So were doing what stinespring done for years.(THE YEARS WHEN VIRGINIA TECH WAS VIRGINIA TECH)!Everyone wanted his predictable offense gone.Now its the same offense that gets the fans,that wanted him out exited?Those few fans that want beamer out may wanna let that resonate.
There is a difference in predictable and running the ball. If we can run the ball successfully, that opens up a huge amount of play calling. Play action and misdirection will work when the defense is committed to stopping the run.
Beamer said 2 running plays second half?doesn' get more predictable.I like it just think stinespring coulda done it.
Especially if he included one of his well timed bubble screens
Naw, I always liked us having the power run, play-action deep threat pass game.
What wasn't appreciated about the Stinespring/O'Cain offense was the lack of a cohesive offensive identity and the inability of our O-line to block. We relied upon great athletes (see T-mobile, D. Wilson) to get our yards, rather then a decent offensive plan. This was described as 'Multiple sets' in the books because no one could figure out what the hell we were doing (in a bad way.)
This has improved greatly with Loefller, IMHO. But I (read 'fans') still want our identity at VT to be pound the freakin' rock and THEN pass and last half vs WMU showed a glimpse of that.
I don't think anyone wants to go back to the days of the FrankO'Stine offense.
This is far from accurate. Before Stinespring we ran with power. During Stinespring we ran predictably. Mostly because his play calls led to obvious reads by opposing defenses. I think everyone is saying we want to be like old Virginia Tech, not previous coordinator Virginia Tech.
^ This. When getting nostalgic for VT offenses, I'm going back to Suggs and Jones days. Every time I'd see Suggs line up in the good old I-formation, I said to myself, "Tech is going to get at least 4 yards here." I want that again. Guaranteed (or as close to it as you can get) forward progress.
Not Ryan Williams era?
I loved the Williams and Evans days. I just don't know if those were the quintessential VT years. I think that when you have guys like that in the backfield, you're going to succeed no matter what you do. When they were playing, I was still generally cursing Stiney's playcalling, so it seems less rosy to me. Back in 2000-2002, I could watch and just know it was going to work.
Here, here. Suggs and Jones was power running as a TEAM not as power running from one wonderfully gifted athlete (Ryan Williams and David Wilson).
Heck, even Cedric Humes and Mike Imoh held it down for us.
I disagree that we didn't run with power with Stinespring. You may say it was predictable and in many cases it was, but it was effective. Here's the breakdown of Stiney's reign as OC and our Rushing performance in terms of yards/game and national ranking:
02: 212.43 #19
03: 209.31 #17
04: 178.23 #32
05: 190.69 #29
06: 113.38 #90
07: 133.64 #82
08: 174.36 #35
09: 208.15 #14
10: 198.71 #23
Over the course of those 9 seasons, he ran an offense that averaged nearly 180 yards per game with an average ranking of 38. I don't have numbers for Bustle before Stiney or before then. We aren't going to lead the nation, but we were pretty regularly in the top 1/3 outside of 2006 and 2007.
yeah, my problem with Stiney was never running the ball. It was elementary passing schemes and mindbogglingly bad pass protection. And a fundamental use of the "mobile QB" as a crutch.
I always liked Stiney's commitment to the run and the results that came with it. His ball control was a huge complement to Foster's defense in that era.
That was always what I believed too. Stiney and passing didn't go together but the combination of a mobile QB and good RBs kept our rushing game up.
Great article! I bet that conversation was very intense between the coaches. Glad they made the right decision
We used to have a running game? BillDozerVT vids or it didn't happen.
By the way, we had 34 carries for 48 yards last year against UNC. Yeah.
Counterpoint: 293 yards and 3 TDs (and no INTs) from Logan Thomas.
I don't recall if it was UNC selling out on the run and forcing us to pass or if it was just the fact that our run blocking (and thus our run game) was horrendous. Probably both.
Congratulations!
This play is your play.
You're off to the End Zone!
You're off and away!
You have brains in your head.
You have feet in your shoes
You can steer yourself
Through any hole thay you choose.
You're not on your own. Just follow left guard.
And YOU are the guy who'll put points on the board.
You'll look over your blocks. Look 'em over with care.
About some you will say, "I don't choose to go there."
With your shoes full of feet and your head full of brains,
you're too good to commit to the wrong rushing lane.
And you may not find any
you'll want to go down.
In that case, of course,
you'll run end around.
It's opener there
in the wide open air.
Out there things can happen
that are really quite grand
when receivers and tight ends
throw a block for a man.
And when things start to happen,
alone and in space,
Just go right along.
You'll win that footrace.
OH!
THE PLACES YOU'LL RUN!
That is just..... beautiful.