http://www.freep.com/story/sports/college/michigan-state/spartans/2016/0...
Just an article on how the co-OC at Michigan State wants to find one guy to carry the ball. I know the one back carries 35 times a game is gone, but I wish our coaches would have had this approach for the past few years.
How will the new coaching staff utilize all the backs on the roster?
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
"HUH"
"Sorry, I thought I heard my name"
Derrick Henry would like a word with you.
But in general, yes, you don't see much of that any more. Doesn't mean one guy can't carry the ball ~20 times a game though with a couple more getting more like ~5 per game.
Historically, Fuente breaks up his carries between several runners so you might be disappointed.
And just what does History have to do with football??
Everything!!!!
WE BAK DOE!!!!
More like, "U Broke!" Am I right, Warren.
Are these the hyenas from The Lion King
Biggest gripe was not how many we used but how we have used them. TOO many times we saw rb's swapped in and out and could call the exact play.
Trey Edmunds comes in on 3rd and short... hmm prepare for a rb draw up the middle.
JC comes in prepare for a zone read.
Exactly. Ideally, Fuente/Cornelson has some sort of play call for every back that's catered to their skillset. I trust the new folks far more with our running back rotation than I did Loeffler and Little Beams.
Yep. It was so obvious.
I'm hoping to see McMillian as #1 and Shai #2. McClease comes in every now and then since it sounds like he is a threat catching the ball.
Lil' Beams.
I like it.
Not our problem anymore
Well, at least you warned us that you're doing little more than beating a dead horse. But yeah, Fuente's history shows us that you'll likely be disappointed if you want a RMFW or DW or DE type of workhorse back. That's just now how it really works anymore. Having a running back rotation like we did the past few years was a) not VT-specific and b) not necessarily bad (contrary to popular belief).
I think there is a little more rotation than maybe some other schools, but I wonder how much of that is just to the fact that he didnt really have any lead backs to work with at the time, or if it was a two headed situation. I expect Travon, Shai, Sam to get a good amount of carries, maybe even McClease and Coleman Fox whos looked pretty good in the rare snips we get.
Do these numbers include the QB? Seems like they would.
Yeah It definitely does, itd be a lot of work going through and pulling out rushes only by Running Backs, i just dont know the rosters well enough to do it quickly, obviously, I know the starting QBs for the most part but not sure about the wildcat quarterbacks for other teams.
It's not necessarily the idea of a running back rotation that people hated. It was how it was applied. A true workhorse back getting 30+ carries a game is no longer the norm. RBs taking alternating series or a guy coming in when the main back needs a breather is to be expected. But our RBs were practically swapped out every play in some drives and could never get into any kind of rhythm. We saw how important that was with McMillian at the end of last season and with JC at the end of the season before that. On top of that, when certain backs were in, any defense worth a damn knew the handful of plays that were possible with that particular back.
To make a ridiculous analogy, Look at Hawkeye or Green Arrow (depending on your Marvel/DC preference) and the specialty arrows they have in their quivers. If the dude pulls out an exploding arrow, everyone knows something is about to blow up. If he pulls out an arrow with a grappling hook on the end, you know what's next. We used our RBs like specialists. They might as well have trotted out there with a short list of potential plays taped to their helmet.
Fortunately, whether anyone thinks it was Loeffler's or Shane's fault is irrelevant, since they are both gone.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Your tendencies become very obvious when you start substituting in a certain player with a certain skillset in a certain situation, and your playcalling becomes very easy to predict. I think Loeffler started trying to keep the defense honest by doing the opposite of what was anticipated sometimes, but the problem you run into with that is having a back like Coleman running up the middle between the tackles on 3rd and short is likely to be unsuccessful.
I think the ideal situation is to have a group of RBs who all have fairly well-rounded skill sets, allowing them to be subbed in or out in a number of different situations. That unique combination of size, speed, blocking ability, and hands. Having backs who are more proficient at one or a few of those criteria than the others is okay, but at least they are able to execute the entirety of the playbook and keep the defense from keying in on cues based on personnel.
May the best man win and always have a fresh set of legs.
If Marshawn Williams is healthy and/or Deshawn McClease doesn't redshirt, we will have another crowded backfield.
Don't hold your breath on Marshawn Williams. Coaches saids hes limited this spring. I am pretty sure McClease is a redshirt freshman.
Marshawn needs to redshirt this year (medical or otherwise) and McClease redshirted last year so he will be in the rotation this year.
I think the difference between trying to translate those comments to VT's offense is that MSU's offense relies on the run game in a different way, that requires there to be one bruising, workhorse back instead of 3-4 backs that all bring different qualities to the table, and also scavenge for carries and share the load, but 1 of those is the alpha back, per se. If we had just one workhorse, he'd probably be overly exhausted by game 4 in a high tempo offense without splitting carries.
Teams with a great rb don't rotate and put up good numbers.
Teams with 2 great rbs rotate and achieve excellent numbers.
Teams with average rbs rotate and put up average numbers.
Teams with average rbs that don't rotate put up average numbers or less.
I feel like we're struggling to accept the truth that we would have been option 4. If the offensive staff should be faulted, it was not trusting McMillian a little sooner, but they aren't the first coaches to be hesitant with green talent.
Literally all I could think of when I saw this. But, in my head it was the horse on the treadmill. Sorry buddy, don't downvote me.