We're never gonna know stuff like this. Frank keeps the wagons too tightly circled. But when decisions like this get made, I can't help but think the decision got handed down by Papa Bear himself.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Isn't it funny how picking a running back and sticking with them resulted in a victory? Crazy how running backs seem to get into a rhythm with more carries.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Just for fun, here's Leonard Fournette by number of carries on consecutive plays in a row this season. I pulled out goal line runs since those could throw the numbers off a little (though he doesn't have that many).
Carry 1: 11.08 yards/carry (66 carries)
Carry 2: 9.55 yards/carry (33 carries)
Carry 3: 1.56 yards/carry (16 carries)
Carry 4: 16 yards/carry (5 carries, one of which was 62 yards so that throws the numbers off)
Carry 5: 6 yards/carry (2 carries)
Of his 16 carries where it is his 3rd carry in a row, his longest run is for 7 yards. So are we saying he's out of the groove after his 2nd carry but back in the groove after his 3rd carry? Or maybe that there is no such thing as a groove and that repeatedly pounding the same back doesn't really do much?
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
repeatedly pounding the same back doesn't really do much
However in Fournette's case he knows 100% he will be feed the ball 10-20+ times so he prepares for that every game. Confidence is huge in terms of how you play. Yes Fournette is an absolute beast but he also is getting the necessary carries along with a decent o line push (credit to Jeff Grimes) to show he is the man.
2nd TD drive started with a run of 15 and then 7 yards and a 2, yes I get that this is 1 time that Travon was able to put together 3 plays of good yardage but obviously it worked so why go away from it.
Again my main issue is with the way we substitute backs. Let a back get a clear series and then if the offense does well and it turns into 7 we should continue to use that package of plays Why outsmart/outcoach yourself into thinking that the D will all of a sudden come up with an adjustment in between series.
I have no issues with VT using 3 backs as long as its proven/stats show it working. I have a huge issue with the way the packages/substitutions are being done. Whether that's a Shane issue a Lefty issue or both I have no idea. The last 3 years VT has not had a back go over 700 yards for the year, but from 2007-2011 VT had backs go for 992, 1265, 1655, 854 & 1709 yards?
One ACC coach told me back in the spring not to buy the optimism surrounding VT. Said their run game last year was as bad as he had seen.— Andrea Adelson (@aadelsonESPN) October 3, 2015
That's along with Narduzzi saying something along the lines of I didn't lose any sleep worrying about the VT running back group isn't something you want to hear.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
"Yes Fournette is an absolute beast but he also is getting the necessary carries along with a decent o line push (credit to Jeff Grimes) to show he is the man."
He also gets a break (even during a series) because LSU realizes that repeatedly giving him the ball leads to diminishing returns, just like with every other back.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
he also gets the ball 15+ times a game. We can barely get 1 back to average 8 carries a game-> our so called starter get 7.5 carries a game and our co starter also gets 7.2 carries a game.
VT gives their RB a prolonged break by playing 3 other RB's before RB1 gets to go back in.
I am all for a RB getting a break, it worked very well this past week Sam came in and gained some yards and was able to let Travon get a breather. Once Travon was ready to come back in he did.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Does this show ineptitude of Shane in not being able to recognize which RB gives us the best chance to win, or is trying to please all the RBs part of the culture under Frank?
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I don't think it's indicative of Frank's culture. Every time previous we've heard the term "stable", it's been because we had truly remarkable NFL caliber backs.
While Shane's use of the term may be premature, it's beyond obvious that his motivational cliche came at a detriment to the team. At 7 YPC consistently, one back has set himself apart from his "stablemates" thus far this season.
Being able to recognize when Travon is dinged up and needs spelled is what I'm worried about. Shane might have a malicious compliance tantrum and get that kid hurt.
I think the communal timeshare is indicative of Shane's culture and I think somebody put a stop to it. Shane can always learn and overcome but he had way too much say in the rotation before last week
True, wild speculation. I tend to believe Shane has more say in the rotation than you. I got off on a tangent thinking about how Motley, shaken and ineffective, stayed in seemingly too long at the end of the Pitt game. While it parallels the need to know when to leave guys in and take guys out, it had nothing to do with Shane. My bad
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
You can't be serious.
You really think Shane's went with RB by committee defying our OC'?
I don't think for a minute Loeffler is that big a wuss.
I don't believe Frank would allow Shane to be insubordinate.
This is about the worst crap I've seen written about a VT coach: "Shane might have a malicious compliance tantrum and get that kid hurt."
You should be ashamed.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I think the fact that the entire online community realized that the running back rotation made no sense, and the fact that Frank Beamer had to step in and force his hand in who should be touching the ball is certainly a display of incompetence. To Frank's credit, I think he often ends up arriving at the correct decisions, but it takes him way too long to finally make the obvious changes (e.g. Stinespring, Newsome, focusing more on recruiting, etc..)
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Should be nothing to do with Frank's culture - remember Shane's predecessor for the prior 20 years was often criticized for being too loyal to a particular back. Early in his career Hite admitted he fed a RB too much. His later years, he stuck with a 2 back rotation (usually 2 series for RB1, 1 series for RB2). Ask David Wilson about the culture of getting everyone on the field when he was on a roster with Evans and Williams.
This approach sits with the current offensive staff and I believe Frank may have stepped in to set them in a different direction. Every year we seem to have to simplify the playbook and personnel groupings around game 5. You'd think the "time to get back to playing VT football" reset speech would be on the calendar each year for 2nd week of Oct - simplify playbook, get player makers the ball, physical football, etc.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I don't know that we can say with any confidence that Loeffler was the one making the "RB by committee" decision. Don't forget that just a couple weeks ago, Foster admitted to being surprised with Stroman starting at CB. At least on the defensive side of the ball, we see that position coaches have the authority to determine who gets playing time. It seems reasonable to guess that the offensive staff works the same way.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
My guess would be that there are some plays/packages that Loeffler designs for a specific back and probably mostly situation-dependent (e.g. short-yardage plays) and then there are other plays/packages that are mostly drive-sustaining and have less dependence on which back(s) is in. So at any given time, Loeffler is calling plays/packages and then Shane is inserting backs that best fit the play/package AND best fit who Shane thinks is ready, needs a blow, might be hurt, etc. The problem is that he's hung on too long trying to be fair to all our available backs, of which none have any glaring faults and each has their own little something to bring to the table. Finally someone, Frank probably, stepped in and said "Listen...the stats, tape, TheKeyPlay fans, whatever show that McMillian is moving the chains the best, so we need to make him our workhorse so we can get the ball downfield and score points."
That's just my guess/opinion. As a side note, super happy to see Edmunds and Coleman wholeheartedly supporting McMillian scoring despite him having taken snaps away from them. Good guys, they all are.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Shane's comments definitely have me worried for sure.. It almost sounds like he's again apologizing to his senior and junior rb for not being involved. Just let it go, let it goooo. Play the kid that gives you and the offense the best opportunity to win.
If Jc starts out hot let him gooooo, if Trey starts hot let him goooo, if Travon starts hot let him goooo. I think its fair to say we all think highly of JC, Trey and Travon and just want to see the best one out there. If that changes game to game so be it. If we can get 98 yards on 11 carries with a gain of 50+ for a td each game by 1 of the 3 backs we have we will be doing pretty good.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
What I really don't want to see is against Miami that JCC is the guy and that Travon doesn't get a snap. Now instead of rotating the backs in a game, he rotates who the back is for the entire game.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
11 carries by McMillian with 8 by Rogers, 9 by Motley and 4 by Stroman isn't what I'd call a feature back system...either by the distribution of carries or number of carries by the top ball carrier.
Frankly it doesn't look that different from the previous system to me...it still looks to me like "running game by committee" just with different names. In fact, it's almost exactly like the Pitt game except the QB rushed less and the RBs ran more.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Against Pitt, we had McMillan, Edmunds, and JCC get at least a couple of carries. Include Rodgers (technically a fullback) and Motley, and that brings the total up to 5.
Yes, there were 4 different people with carries against NC State, but Stroman had just moved to full-time wide receiver.
I think the point that is being made is the fact that ONE running back got all the carries. Not 3 different backs
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Exactly we used 1 RB.. that same RB was able to be used in the passing game and multiple different looks in the running game without tipping off the play we were running.
I'd bet tons of $$$ that if McMillian ran the sweep fake instead of Stroman and either JC or Trey got the carry it wouldn't have turned into a 59 yard TD. Not to say JC or Trey are not good backs but McMillian's speed in space and vision helped him turn a 10-20 yard gain into 7 points.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I mean our fullback got a huge gain on the same play. Let's not give Mcmillian a cape just yet. The difference in that game had a lot more to do with blocking than the running back.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I would say that the fullback getting that many touches says a lot about the whole running back corps. As for his yardage, is there any correlation to him getting yardage in two tight end sets or other situations that would explain the difference?
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Idk his runs seem to be the normal runs that JCC usually gets? This past week Sam had the big run on the same setup as McMillian's. Agree that Sam getting that many touches says a lot about the RB group as a whole.
Based off NC State game if I'm Lefty I go for the same game plan. It worked and the o line blocked well enough to open some holes.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Except it was 3 RB's. If Rogers wasn't a running back, what was he? If Stroman wasn't a running back, what was McMillian on the jet sweeps he ran in previous games?
Not to take anything away from McMillian's run, but I'll bet $$$ that Edmunds, JCC & McKenzie (when healthy) all make big yardage -- if not a TD - on that play as well. It was the perfect play, well executed. All McMillian had to do is sort of make one guy miss. Edmunds & JCC have certainly had sizable runs out of less. And if you read the NC St boards, they talk quite a bit about the lack of LB and defensive secondary speed.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Just curious, but when Motley ran, was it the coach's decision or Motleys? If the play breaks down and the QB scrambles to salvage a few yards, I'd say you can't count those plays against the number of carries per runner. Remember, we are looking at how many plays were called by the coaches for each runner (not how many ended up going to each). Typically these will be the same, but in the case of the QB, I can see a lot of instances where he's attributed with a running play even if it wasn't called that way.
If it turns out that all 9 of those carries for Motley were called carries, then your point stands. We had essentially 3 running backs splitting carries more or less evenly. however, if Motley chose to run (whether from a play breakdown or a show by the defense), then we're looking at two main backs, with one of them getting 50% more carries than the #2 back. The #3, change of pace guy is getting a third of the carries #1 gets and that only on gimmicky runs. I'd say that's a lot better than splitting carries evenly like we had before.
On top of that, we can call a play with Motley, Stroman, Rogers, and McMillian all lined up and the defense has to account for all the options. I'd say that's a good position to be in and shows improvement over where we were against Pitt.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I would be curious how many snaps McMillian saw. I think part of establishing rhythm is just being out on the field and focused on the game. Even if the back isn't being handed the ball, he is still part of the play and has a role in it. Even teams that run air raid offenses tend to have one back that sees the majority of the snaps.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
That is a great point. It probably helps that he gets to read the defense on the field rather than from my sideline and he got to play a part in the passing game.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I think someone had the '1992 Dave Braine to Frank Beamer' conversation with Shane. Remember in '92 Frank was called in to Dave's office after going 2-8-1 and told 'this is a business, its not about friends, and you need to make changes". He had to let go several coaches he had been with a long time.
I think Shane needed to be told the same. I understand his view.... Anyone whose been around JC Coleman knows he's a total class act, great guy and you'd want to make him happy. I'd imagine Trey is the same type of kid.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I don't think anything remotely like this happened. I think they looked at NC St and saw that they were vulnerable on the edge and to misdirection -- and the best way to set it up would be an occasional run by McMiIlian between the tackles.
My guess is that match-ups will continue to play a role in who is used and how they are used.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
If you're right about who plays being a match up decision, then there is no hope for this coaching staff Shane. McMillan is so far and away the best back, to take carries away from him is just goofy.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Comments
We're never gonna know stuff like this. Frank keeps the wagons too tightly circled. But when decisions like this get made, I can't help but think the decision got handed down by Papa Bear himself.
Most definitely Il Papa. He obviously reads TKP.
Joe Lanza
At this point it doesn't matter, only that it was made.
Isn't it funny how picking a running back and sticking with them resulted in a victory? Crazy how running backs seem to get into a rhythm with more carries.
Yes. Someone showed a lot of imagination and took a big risk to go with a crazy idea like that.
/s
but but but there are no stats that show a running back gets more in rhythm as he gains carries/S
McMillian's long TD run was his 3rd carry of the 2nd half. Are we saying he was in a groove after two carries?
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2009/can-running-backs-ge...
RBs actually saw their performance decline when they got more consecutive carries.
Stop it with the facts and figures...people's minds are made up.
Just for fun, here's Leonard Fournette by number of carries on consecutive plays in a row this season. I pulled out goal line runs since those could throw the numbers off a little (though he doesn't have that many).
Carry 1: 11.08 yards/carry (66 carries)
Carry 2: 9.55 yards/carry (33 carries)
Carry 3: 1.56 yards/carry (16 carries)
Carry 4: 16 yards/carry (5 carries, one of which was 62 yards so that throws the numbers off)
Carry 5: 6 yards/carry (2 carries)
Of his 16 carries where it is his 3rd carry in a row, his longest run is for 7 yards. So are we saying he's out of the groove after his 2nd carry but back in the groove after his 3rd carry? Or maybe that there is no such thing as a groove and that repeatedly pounding the same back doesn't really do much?
I agree
However in Fournette's case he knows 100% he will be feed the ball 10-20+ times so he prepares for that every game. Confidence is huge in terms of how you play. Yes Fournette is an absolute beast but he also is getting the necessary carries along with a decent o line push (credit to Jeff Grimes) to show he is the man.
2nd TD drive started with a run of 15 and then 7 yards and a 2, yes I get that this is 1 time that Travon was able to put together 3 plays of good yardage but obviously it worked so why go away from it.
Again my main issue is with the way we substitute backs. Let a back get a clear series and then if the offense does well and it turns into 7 we should continue to use that package of plays Why outsmart/outcoach yourself into thinking that the D will all of a sudden come up with an adjustment in between series.
I have no issues with VT using 3 backs as long as its proven/stats show it working. I have a huge issue with the way the packages/substitutions are being done. Whether that's a Shane issue a Lefty issue or both I have no idea. The last 3 years VT has not had a back go over 700 yards for the year, but from 2007-2011 VT had backs go for 992, 1265, 1655, 854 & 1709 yards?
That's along with Narduzzi saying something along the lines of I didn't lose any sleep worrying about the VT running back group isn't something you want to hear.
"Yes Fournette is an absolute beast but he also is getting the necessary carries along with a decent o line push (credit to Jeff Grimes) to show he is the man."
He also gets a break (even during a series) because LSU realizes that repeatedly giving him the ball leads to diminishing returns, just like with every other back.
he also gets the ball 15+ times a game. We can barely get 1 back to average 8 carries a game-> our so called starter get 7.5 carries a game and our co starter also gets 7.2 carries a game.
VT gives their RB a prolonged break by playing 3 other RB's before RB1 gets to go back in.
I am all for a RB getting a break, it worked very well this past week Sam came in and gained some yards and was able to let Travon get a breather. Once Travon was ready to come back in he did.
Does this show ineptitude of Shane in not being able to recognize which RB gives us the best chance to win, or is trying to please all the RBs part of the culture under Frank?
I don't think it's indicative of Frank's culture. Every time previous we've heard the term "stable", it's been because we had truly remarkable NFL caliber backs.
While Shane's use of the term may be premature, it's beyond obvious that his motivational cliche came at a detriment to the team. At 7 YPC consistently, one back has set himself apart from his "stablemates" thus far this season.
Being able to recognize when Travon is dinged up and needs spelled is what I'm worried about.
Shane might have a malicious compliance tantrum and get that kid hurt.I think the communal timeshare is indicative of Shane's culture and I think somebody put a stop to it. Shane can always learn and overcome but he had way too much say in the rotation before last week
True, wild speculation. I tend to believe Shane has more say in the rotation than you. I got off on a tangent thinking about how Motley, shaken and ineffective, stayed in seemingly too long at the end of the Pitt game. While it parallels the need to know when to leave guys in and take guys out, it had nothing to do with Shane. My bad
You can't be serious.
You really think Shane's went with RB by committee defying our OC'?
I don't think for a minute Loeffler is that big a wuss.
I don't believe Frank would allow Shane to be insubordinate.
This is about the worst crap I've seen written about a VT coach:
"Shane might have a malicious compliance tantrum and get that kid hurt."
You should be ashamed.
Trust me, far worse things have been written about our coaches.
Not true. See 2004. No NFL backs in that stable.
I think the fact that the entire online community realized that the running back rotation made no sense, and the fact that Frank Beamer had to step in and force his hand in who should be touching the ball is certainly a display of incompetence. To Frank's credit, I think he often ends up arriving at the correct decisions, but it takes him way too long to finally make the obvious changes (e.g. Stinespring, Newsome, focusing more on recruiting, etc..)
Should be nothing to do with Frank's culture - remember Shane's predecessor for the prior 20 years was often criticized for being too loyal to a particular back. Early in his career Hite admitted he fed a RB too much. His later years, he stuck with a 2 back rotation (usually 2 series for RB1, 1 series for RB2). Ask David Wilson about the culture of getting everyone on the field when he was on a roster with Evans and Williams.
This approach sits with the current offensive staff and I believe Frank may have stepped in to set them in a different direction. Every year we seem to have to simplify the playbook and personnel groupings around game 5. You'd think the "time to get back to playing VT football" reset speech would be on the calendar each year for 2nd week of Oct - simplify playbook, get player makers the ball, physical football, etc.
I did. It was in my post the other day.
After reading Shane's quotes from the presser today, I really don't think it was him.
I don't either. Neither do I think he did that committee crap against Loeffler's wishes.
He's RB coach, not OC
I don't know that we can say with any confidence that Loeffler was the one making the "RB by committee" decision. Don't forget that just a couple weeks ago, Foster admitted to being surprised with Stroman starting at CB. At least on the defensive side of the ball, we see that position coaches have the authority to determine who gets playing time. It seems reasonable to guess that the offensive staff works the same way.
My guess would be that there are some plays/packages that Loeffler designs for a specific back and probably mostly situation-dependent (e.g. short-yardage plays) and then there are other plays/packages that are mostly drive-sustaining and have less dependence on which back(s) is in. So at any given time, Loeffler is calling plays/packages and then Shane is inserting backs that best fit the play/package AND best fit who Shane thinks is ready, needs a blow, might be hurt, etc. The problem is that he's hung on too long trying to be fair to all our available backs, of which none have any glaring faults and each has their own little something to bring to the table. Finally someone, Frank probably, stepped in and said "Listen...the stats, tape, TheKeyPlay fans, whatever show that McMillian is moving the chains the best, so we need to make him our workhorse so we can get the ball downfield and score points."
That's just my guess/opinion. As a side note, super happy to see Edmunds and Coleman wholeheartedly supporting McMillian scoring despite him having taken snaps away from them. Good guys, they all are.
Shane Still Don't Know ...that boxing glove is the trouble for sure!
That boxing glove might be his greatest achievement. We haven't fumbled much this season.
there you go...you jinxed us...
Shane is too busy trying to be a middle school coach and making sure everyone gets a chance to play so I would guess Loeffler or the elder Beamer...
Isn't it obvious by now that Sam Rogers made that call?...
I think Travon McMillan may have made the call with his excellence.
He certainly made it for next week after Friday's oerformance
Shane's comments definitely have me worried for sure.. It almost sounds like he's again apologizing to his senior and junior rb for not being involved. Just let it go, let it goooo. Play the kid that gives you and the offense the best opportunity to win.
If Jc starts out hot let him gooooo, if Trey starts hot let him goooo, if Travon starts hot let him goooo. I think its fair to say we all think highly of JC, Trey and Travon and just want to see the best one out there. If that changes game to game so be it. If we can get 98 yards on 11 carries with a gain of 50+ for a td each game by 1 of the 3 backs we have we will be doing pretty good.
What I really don't want to see is against Miami that JCC is the guy and that Travon doesn't get a snap. Now instead of rotating the backs in a game, he rotates who the back is for the entire game.
if a back gets rotated game by game (and doesn't produce) then that would be some Mickey Mouse Bullshit.
11 carries by McMillian with 8 by Rogers, 9 by Motley and 4 by Stroman isn't what I'd call a feature back system...either by the distribution of carries or number of carries by the top ball carrier.
Frankly it doesn't look that different from the previous system to me...it still looks to me like "running game by committee" just with different names. In fact, it's almost exactly like the Pitt game except the QB rushed less and the RBs ran more.
I don't think it was the same.
Against Pitt, we had McMillan, Edmunds, and JCC get at least a couple of carries. Include Rodgers (technically a fullback) and Motley, and that brings the total up to 5.
Yes, there were 4 different people with carries against NC State, but Stroman had just moved to full-time wide receiver.
I think the point that is being made is the fact that ONE running back got all the carries. Not 3 different backs
Exactly we used 1 RB.. that same RB was able to be used in the passing game and multiple different looks in the running game without tipping off the play we were running.
I'd bet tons of $$$ that if McMillian ran the sweep fake instead of Stroman and either JC or Trey got the carry it wouldn't have turned into a 59 yard TD. Not to say JC or Trey are not good backs but McMillian's speed in space and vision helped him turn a 10-20 yard gain into 7 points.
Exactly. Before McMillan's run, when was the last time we had a 59 yard touchdown run?
2014- Shai had a 39 yard TD run
2013- Trey had a 77 yard TD + Chris Mangus had a 76 yard TD
2012- JC had an 86 yard TD + Logan Thomas had a 73 yard TD
damn fat fingers
I mean our fullback got a huge gain on the same play. Let's not give Mcmillian a cape just yet. The difference in that game had a lot more to do with blocking than the running back.
our fullback also has outplayed Trey and JCC the whole season in terms of running .
JCC + Trey have double the carries Sam has but only 41 & 15 more yards? Something isn't right there..
36 for 146 yards
37 for 120 yards
18 for 105 yards
That is kind of like saying that a tight end that leads a team in receiving is also the better wide receiver. The two are defended differently.
kinda disagree.. a rb with double the touches should have more than a 15 yard difference on a FB. maybe that's just me
I would say that the fullback getting that many touches says a lot about the whole running back corps. As for his yardage, is there any correlation to him getting yardage in two tight end sets or other situations that would explain the difference?
Idk his runs seem to be the normal runs that JCC usually gets? This past week Sam had the big run on the same setup as McMillian's. Agree that Sam getting that many touches says a lot about the RB group as a whole.
Based off NC State game if I'm Lefty I go for the same game plan. It worked and the o line blocked well enough to open some holes.
With a few extra wrinkles of course. Loved the counter action off the jet sweep fake.
Except it was 3 RB's. If Rogers wasn't a running back, what was he? If Stroman wasn't a running back, what was McMillian on the jet sweeps he ran in previous games?
Not to take anything away from McMillian's run, but I'll bet $$$ that Edmunds, JCC & McKenzie (when healthy) all make big yardage -- if not a TD - on that play as well. It was the perfect play, well executed. All McMillian had to do is sort of make one guy miss. Edmunds & JCC have certainly had sizable runs out of less. And if you read the NC St boards, they talk quite a bit about the lack of LB and defensive secondary speed.
Just curious, but when Motley ran, was it the coach's decision or Motleys? If the play breaks down and the QB scrambles to salvage a few yards, I'd say you can't count those plays against the number of carries per runner. Remember, we are looking at how many plays were called by the coaches for each runner (not how many ended up going to each). Typically these will be the same, but in the case of the QB, I can see a lot of instances where he's attributed with a running play even if it wasn't called that way.
If it turns out that all 9 of those carries for Motley were called carries, then your point stands. We had essentially 3 running backs splitting carries more or less evenly. however, if Motley chose to run (whether from a play breakdown or a show by the defense), then we're looking at two main backs, with one of them getting 50% more carries than the #2 back. The #3, change of pace guy is getting a third of the carries #1 gets and that only on gimmicky runs. I'd say that's a lot better than splitting carries evenly like we had before.
On top of that, we can call a play with Motley, Stroman, Rogers, and McMillian all lined up and the defense has to account for all the options. I'd say that's a good position to be in and shows improvement over where we were against Pitt.
I would be curious how many snaps McMillian saw. I think part of establishing rhythm is just being out on the field and focused on the game. Even if the back isn't being handed the ball, he is still part of the play and has a role in it. Even teams that run air raid offenses tend to have one back that sees the majority of the snaps.
That is a great point. It probably helps that he gets to read the defense on the field rather than from my sideline and he got to play a part in the passing game.
I'm not going to say is was me, I'm not going to say it wasn't me.
I think someone had the '1992 Dave Braine to Frank Beamer' conversation with Shane. Remember in '92 Frank was called in to Dave's office after going 2-8-1 and told 'this is a business, its not about friends, and you need to make changes". He had to let go several coaches he had been with a long time.
I think Shane needed to be told the same. I understand his view.... Anyone whose been around JC Coleman knows he's a total class act, great guy and you'd want to make him happy. I'd imagine Trey is the same type of kid.
I don't think anything remotely like this happened. I think they looked at NC St and saw that they were vulnerable on the edge and to misdirection -- and the best way to set it up would be an occasional run by McMiIlian between the tackles.
My guess is that match-ups will continue to play a role in who is used and how they are used.
If you're right about who plays being a match up decision, then there is no hope for
this coaching staffShane. McMillan is so far and away the best back, to take carries away from him is just goofy.You and I disagree completely.