Yesterday was a head scratcher for a number of reasons. One in particular is the rotation that we continue to see with the Running Backs. Notice how the carries were divided during the game at ECU:
Brendon Motley: 19 carries for 85 yards (4.5 yds per carry)
Travon McMillan: 5 carries for 30 yards (6 yds per carry)
J.C. Coleman: 7 carries for 13 yards (1.9 yds per carry)
Sam Roders: 4 carries for 8 yards (2 yards per carry)
Trey Edmunds: 5 carries for 8 yards (1.8 yards per carry)
Let' s disconnect for a moment from the recent "Trevon McMillan should be RB#1" sentiment and focus on what the rotation might be doing to hinder the success that any of these backs might otherwise be having.
Outside of Motley's 19 carries, the offense ran the ball (with these 4 guys) 21 times. Think about that for a moment. Most RB#1's in college are getting that many carries or more per game. Here are a few examples from Saturday:
McCaffrey (Stanford): 30 carries for 206 yards
Smith (MIchigan): 16 carries for 125 yards
Chubb (Georgia): 15 carries for 131 yards
Prosise & Adams (Notre Dame): combined for 30 carries and 303 yards
Walton (Ole MIss): 21 carries for 133 yards
Jackson (Northwestern) 33 carries for 184 yards
I picked these RB's/teams at random, so I'm not offering up a completely scientific thesis here. My point however is that when you look at other teams who have between 20-40 run plays per game, those plays are typically divided between two guys (with the outlier jet sweeps and things of that nature not being considered). I also understand that different offensive systems are going to change the way this looks... Please for give the generalizations here and consider what we are seeing.
My thinking is that the RB rotation is problematic to the teams success on the ground, even in light of the fact that VT has been a bit more successful this season. The old adage about "when you have 2 QB's you don't have a QB" might be true of the VT RB situation... "When you have 4 RB's you don't have a RB".
Comments
None of our RBs could get going yesterday. It looks to me that except for some goal line work, there wasn't much hole manufacturing going on.
They can't get it going if they run the ball once and then run back to the sideline.
I think this is an over-used excuse for poor running back play. A running back should be able to perform when asked. I can understanding quarterbacks being cold coming off the bench, but running backs need to be able to go at any time. The NFL rarely uses a single running back system and those running backs aren't complaining about flow or rhythm. When I hear about running backs that get stronger as the game goes on, I can only think that it's actually the defense getting worn down and the running back remaining strong; this can still be accomplished with a stable of backs.
I agree. I keep seeing it posted that Mcmillan is clearly our best running back. I don't think we've seen enough from any of them to make a clear determination on who should be "The guy". The only thing we know is that JC and trey have been the guy before and were able to produce. Trey still looks to hesitant to me, JC still isn't making people miss or breaking tackles and McMillan may be the best option, but shane needs to get each of these guys 10+ carries at some point and hopefully one of them emerges. The other thing is if we go off of YPC trey is never going to be the top guy because he gets the goal line carries, which he isn't doing a great job with.
Agreed. Sadly, this is a circular problem since if we don't let guys play most of the game as "the man," we don't have the evidence to see who is the man.
See JC Coleman the last 4 games of last year.
How many runs was he getting the last 4 games?
To put into perspective, over the last 4 games in 2014 for JC Coleman
Duke- 20 carries 95 yards 4.8 avg- longest run 12. Next closest back had 5 and that was Marshawn
Wake- 18 carries 94 yards 5.4 avg -longest run 31. Next closest back had 5 Deon Newsome
UVA- 18 carries 118 yards 6.6 avg - longest run 38. Next closest back had 8 Sam Rogers & Motley
Cincy- 25 carries 157 yards 6.3 avg 1 TD- longest run of 35. Next closest back had 4 Sam & Trey
Hmmm a freakin clue!! Print this out, highlight the # of carries, and slide it under FB's door, SL's door, and Shane Beamer... then draw a picture of a mic dropping!
Actually I would argue that most NFL teams use a single running back system with a guy to spell him every few drives. The way it typically works in the NFL and the way it used to work here at VT when we had Ryan Williams and David Wilson, was the main guy would get two full drives of work and then sit out on the third drive while the #2 guy comes in. The only time the #1 guy would come out during either one of his full drives would be him asking to come out or if he had a couple long runs or runs where he was breaking a bunch of tackles that required him to use a ton of energy.
As has been expressed a number of times, but most recently by Bblankin in the "ECU Venting" thread, I think the general sentiment and problem is:
"In four years I have seen nothing to make me think Shane Beamer is a running backs coach."
Overall, the lack of a consistent running game is probably due to a variety of factors, but I think the most consistent is referenced above. It seems we're constantly moving guys in and out to find a combination that works; although I thought that was the purpose of spring practice. Obviously, we can't have consistency without one or two of the RB's getting consistent reps every game. For me, McMillian has the highest upside and is our greatest home run threat while on the field.
Again, FB is loyal to upperclassmen, and that's probably rubbed off on Shane. I appreciate JC and how hard he runs, but his size is problematic at the line. If JC is on the field I'd like to see him on a wheel routes or something that helps him get into space easier. McMillan was never given a chance yesterday to really hit the middle and see if he could make anything happen.
McMillan was never given a chance
yesterdaythis season to really hit the middle and see if he could make anything happenWe have freshmen and sophomores all over the field, I don't think we can chalk up the running back situation to loyalty to upperclassmen.. although I'm not sure what exactly we can attribute it to TBH
I agree completely. I didn't mean to imply that loyalty to upperclassman was the only reason for the lack of consistency, but maybe a factor. Again, my thoughts are pure speculation.
And yes, McMillian should have the most reps thus far this season.
Our running game has gone down the shitter since Shane took over the RB's. Coincidence? I'm starting to think not....
THIS is what I think is the #1 problem with the offense. The lack of an effective rotation prevents any RB to get going (ex.: Travon and Trey each w/ 5 carries), which therefore leads to no ground game production outside of Motley, which then becomes a predictable offense a la Logan Thomas. Then, Motley is forced to beat the defense with his arm. Ineffective offense.
I still think Trey should be given more of a shot. We know what he CAN do. But he will never show it with a measly 5 carries a game.
*self-reply*
There are just a lot of things wrong with this right here
Statistics...they'll get after ya.
Trey has he his shot. Travon is our best healthy RB and it's not close. Pad level, speed, burst, strength, ability to catch, vision .. Not even close. I actually think he's the best RB we have on roster but that's yet to be seen.
It is close. Travon has rarely taken handoffs between the tackles, so it's not like he should be getting 25 carries a game. Trey is the guy to take those carries, and he's very capable of doing so successfully. We've seen it.
"It is close. Travon has rarely taken handoffs between the tackles, so it's not like he should be getting 25 carries a game."
I'm tired of hearing this about Travon^
WE DONT KNOW WHAT HE CAN BETWEEN THE TACKLES BECAUSE HE HASNT REALLY BEEN GIVEN A CHANCE TO!
Sorry, wasn't yelling at you specifically RealDiehl. More at the coaches.
You right. I'm saying this mainly because I, like you, don't know for certain if he would be effective up the middle. But French and others seem to think he would, so wtf Shane
Is Shai just not healthy? He and Travon are our best backs in my opinion and neither one receive enough carries
He hasn't looked to be his normal self yet, last word is he will be redshirting
I have been vocal with my discontent regarding the RB rotation. RBs need to get into a groove. They can't do that when they're getting 5-10 carries a game. I'm very much against the RB rotation and I have been from the get-go. I don't know if it's Shane or Scot calling the shots but I think it's detrimental to the success of our offense. We're not going to be able to bail out our defense if we continue this way.
Amen
I don't mind the RBs splitting carries.
What I DO mind is, with all the RBs we have, the QB getting more carries than all of them combined. (I classify Rogers as a FB for the sake of my argument)
Especially because we'd really be in hot water if Mot got hurt.
Where is Billy Hite - please call coach Shane. Even when he rotated backs, he at least let them get a series or 2 before pulling them. It seems these guys are rotating after every play so that no one can find a rhythm.
It would be nice to see what Trey, Travon or Shai could do with 10-15 carries in a row vs. this merry go round approach. Tough to get the hot hand otherwise.
Hey Joe, can we get one of the guys who goes to media availability to ask shane/scot what the chances are we'll see a two back rotation in the next, I dunno, decade?
They have said they'd do this but then never do. Can we someone ask them when they plan on backing up their words?
I think they've said this every offseason, then the season starts and they go right back to rotating every single play
The problem is nobody is earning more carries. I don't have much faith in Shane, but it also seems readily apparent that we don't have a quality RB. Is McMillian really a RB? He runs a similar package as Newsome.
Travon has run more than jet sweeps. He has lined up in the eye, and offset, and he has looked quicker, more elusive, and committed more than any RB on the roster IMHO. I dont even think it's close. And by the way, he's not a Newsome type. He's 6 ft plus and 200 lbs plus. He runs with power, and has done so ever since his days at Hylton. He could be special if they would just commit 80% of the run plays to him. I sit befuddled when I watch the games. He just looks totally different then the other guys, so I can't for the life of me figure out why they don't commit to him.
80% that's an elite backs numbers.
I can almost remember the days when we had one of those.
The coaches aren't playing McMillian like a feature back. They are treating him like a scat back at best. If he was a feature back like Wilson, Williams or Evans, we would be seeing that as a reflection of his responsibility.
I understand the desire to project onto McMillian the characters of a feature back. But it's probably not real. He was a QB 24 months ago. We know the other guys are just serviceable backups (Trey and JCC) or potentially elite backs who very well may never regain their form (williams and shai). In a lot of ways, McMillian is our last shot. I don't have any problem giving McMillian 80% of our carries, but I'm not expecting Ryan Williams if we did it. He's probsbly somewhere between Keith Burnell and Brandon Ore.
Ore was 1st team all ACC one year, if McMillan can come close to that I'll take it... but it would be nice to know why he isn't being used as a feature back, is it his size, pass blocking, inexperience at the position, or is it that they just don't see him as a feature back at all?? To my untrained eye he looks the part as much as anyone we have
I see him right now as a threat but not a feature back. Maybe he can grow into one, but right now he's being used as a tool to highlight his strengths and disguise his weaknesses.
I may be skewed from watching him in high school, but I would bet he'd be one of the top RB's in the ACC if we committed to him. He ran all over everyone at the highest level in high school. If he were an RB and not a QB in high school, I think he would have been one of the top RB's in his class. And from the limited carries he's gotten at Tech, he's done nothing to change my opinion, for whatever that is worth, which I concede really isn't much. I do think the staff will come around to him, so I suspect time will tell if he is feature back quality.
Yep, he just likely isn't capable of 80% of the carries. He is getting basically zero between the tackles carries (our OC has a very east/west running scheme in general). Right now, he's successful because he is a change of pace guy. If you put him in every series, his weaknesses are going to highlighted.
I keep hearing we have a RB rotation problem. I don't see that, I see a rb talent problem. If we had better RBs, we wouldn't have a rotation problem. That said, Shane doesn't seem to be getting the most out of his guys either.
We don't have a superstar RB. But we definitely don't have a talent problem. In 2012, we were starting Michael Holmes at tailback. That's what a talent problem looks like.
Why are we thinking that McMillian can't run inside? Look at him. He's not some scrawny shrimp.
A lot of the time it's not size. It's the coaches not trusting his vision or his ability to hold onto the ball.
I think the Ore comp is a good one. And yes, that would be pretty damn good.
Well, he also could be Burnell, who had a lot of talent but wasn't an every down back.
My guess is that McMillian is so new to the position that they are limiting to a very small package that highlights his strengths. One of my concerns with the Offense is that we package our talent to plays to much. When Deon Newsome is in, we are running fly sweep. It seems to me you can determine our plays by personnel grouping more than most
They'll bring Newsome in to fake the sweep. We've done it a few times each game. It's just not very noticeable because we tend to focus on the result of the play, not the fake or the pre-snap motion that preceded it.
Okay, so Newsome also fakes the sweep.... But when Newsome is in, we don't go five wide and run slants and go routes. Because Newsome isn't seen as a real WR. I don't see how we are treating McMillian like a real TB either, seems that we are boxing him into this fly sweep role. Why is that? Probably because that's what he is good at right now.
JCC didn't look good on Saturday, but he's looked pretty good the rest of the year. I don't have a strong opinion on the RB's, but I could support a focus on him. It worked late last year.
this is the exact issue...we have enough talent in our RB room that we could probably focus on any 1 of the backs and that would result in a pretty serviceable running game. JCC was pretty much the only back getting carries late last year because everyone else and their brother was hurt. When he was getting a bulk of the work he played well. He said himself that once he's able to get into the groove of a game everything slows down for him and he's able to see the holes and make good positive yardage runs. I'm sure that would be true for any one of our backs. It frustrates me to no end that we continue to attempt rotating through all of the backs. I get the sense that Shane is a 'crowd pleaser' type of person and he's made promises to these backs that they'll play so he feels obligated to give them all carries to the detriment of this team. If he wants his RB room to be successful and highly regarded like the DL room, he needs to narrow the carries down to 1 or 2 guys with at least 80% of the carries going to the #1 back. Unfortunately, Shane is proving the theory of insanity by continuing to throw 4 RBs at a wall and expecting them to stick. None of them are.
Branden Ore was a good attitude away from being a very good tailback for us. When he had his head on straight, his production rivaled Darren Evans. For some reason, the chip in his shoulder grew to be more than he could bear.
Now that I think about it, some strong parallels between Branden Ore and Joshua Stanford.
Giving a bunch of carries to one guy would not be the panacea fans seem to think it would. I'm very skeptical that that is our problem, and that it makes much a difference either way. Giving more carries to mediocre running backs won't make them great running backs. If we play Player X, we'll complain about how Player Y should get a chance. I think arguing about the RB rotation comes from looking for a magical solution that just isn't there.
This isn't directed at OP. I'm just generally skeptical that the RB rotation makes a big difference. That said, I'm also not opposed to giving somebody a shot as a true lead back. I just wouldn't say Shane is doing anything wrong by not doing that.
JCC last 4 games last year. That. Is. All.
I just can't get on board with this sentiment. Yes, the running backs basically sucked yesterday with the exception of McMillian. That's the first time they've looked terrible this season. Why did they look bad? I honestly don't know. I'm waiting for Mason's review.
Looking at the distribution chart above, we have three tailbacks sharing the load more or less evenly, all of whom until yesterday were averaging 4+ YPC. Would two be better than three? Maybe. Based on JCC's performance yesterday, he might have gotten demoted. But coming into that game, all three tailbacks in the steady rotation were posting good bum numbers.
After the three main backs. We have Shai getting garbage time carries and a fullback who carries it a couple of times a game. Add in a running quarterback and some received receiver jet sweeps and there were are. I still only see a potential problem with having a three back rotation instead of two.
All that said, we're still doing well running the ball. Our running backs are averaging 5.0 YPC, which is actually half a yard MORE than when you average in quarterback and wide receiver carries. We're 42nd nationally and 7th in the ACC in rushing. (For perspective, 11.25 yards per game is what separates us at 7th from North Carolina at 4th.)
The rushing game and the running backs are fine. Let's wait for Mason's review to figure out why the run game stalled against the Pirates, and then see if it gets back on track against Pitt before we panic.
We have more than enough to worry about with the defense. For the most part, the offense (including the run game) has exceeded expectations.
Good post.
I'm not necessarily offering up a solution so much as ask a question that continues to linger in my mind. I like the idea of having a RB#1 and a RB#2 who would get less carries. So I'm not even thinking about "2 or 3 guys splitting the carries".
We are averaging 4+ yards per carry, but that is skewed by having played Furman and Purdue. I'm anxious to see how those numbers shake out over the next couple of games.
In any event, the production is much better and that is a positive thing!
Good post but I think we need a little clarification.......what are these 'bum numbers' you speak of??!? Is this like dork magic?
Hmm. Trying to think how a bum number could be anything other than... a zero...
If SB wants to rotate backs, fine. But at least let them stay in for the whole series. Each time the whistle blows, the running back must be thinking "am I staying in?" If SB thinks rotating backs is confusing the defense, it's not. Its confusing our running backs. After each play, our back needs to be thinking about the next play, not if he will be in or not.
I just want us to line up in the damn I formation and run it down their throats. This pistol is garbage is getting old for me. With the backs we have, they need to be heading downhill before they get the ball.
I think I get it. Now that the preseason is over, they have auditioned all the backs and will be ready for the regular season, where a 2 back rotation will flourish.
The running back rotation is a popular rallying cry right now but I have wondered if the onus is all on Coach Shane Beamer. I wonder if the personnel groupings are already set so when a play is called the personnel assigned to that grouping go out on the field. If that is the case Coach Loeffler may assign the players to groupings instead of Coach Shane Beamer leaving a RB out for the series or making a decision on each play as to which RB plays. On a slightly Devil's Advocate note, it seems like a lot of people want to go back to being a power running team. A couple years ago it was more popular to wish for a better passing offense and quit running so much. I just want to start winning consistently again however that is accomplished.
this a fantastic piece of artwork..
I am wondering if I can use this for my ACC RB roundup??
It's....glorious...
I cant wait for next year when Shane can rotate between Trey, Travon, Shai, Marshawn and Mcclease. They can each get a hearty 2 carries per game after you factor in the 25 QB draws run by Motley/Lawson.
Might as well throw in Rogers and Peoples for shits and gigs