
After Virginia Tech came back from an early 17-point deficit in historic Notre Dame stadium, I searched the film for the "magic" adjustment. The catalyst that triggered a huge Hokies' comeback and 34-31 win. In its inaugural game against the Irish, Tech seemingly couldn't play a down throughout the opening 15:53 without some kind of brutal result. Then, absent a momentum swinging play, the Hokies began to methodically execute their offense, and the defense sprinkled in some stops. Before you knew it, the Hokies found themselves back in the football game, and despite all kinds of adversity they looked poised and comfortable in a situation where many opponents have been bitten by the luck of the Irish.
Justin Fuente's observation and message at halftime was simply "we gotta play better". The Hokies could have pointed fingers and fell apart. They could have succumbed to the mindset that the non-conference tilt didn't matter in the Coastal Division race. Instead, the Hokies played better. The secondary executed its coverages properly. The defense got stops against the run. Jerod Evans consistently hit open receivers in front of Notre Dame's soft coverage. And as Tech's confidence swelled, its side of the scoreboard lit up, and Notre Dame's opportunities were limited.
Down Three Scores Inside Zone Read Changes Momentum
After two drives filled with fumbles, bad snaps, and drops, Virginia Tech found itself down 0-17. Instead of panicking, Brad Cornelsen simplified the offense by interchanging five wide receiver sets with simple inside zone reads. For weeks I've noted how opponents repeatedly crash their defensive ends inside on zone reads, yet Evans never seems to pull the ball and keep it. He keeps on inverted veers and veer reads (plays where the back and the quarterback go to the same side). However, I don't remember a play when he has faked a handoff going one way, and then kept it going away from the dive.
This inside zone highlights the opportunity presented to Evans if he kept after the read. Evans gives to Steven Peoples on an inside zone. The Notre Dame defensive line crashed into their inside gaps, and the linebackers all fill from tackle to tackle.
Sam Rogers drives 290 pound DE Isaac Rochell (No. 90) to the inside and pancakes him. There isn't a defender in the path of a keeper before free safety Drue Tranquill (No. 23). Also note that while Peoples was effective against the Irish, having a back that can cut off a block — like Rogers' — into open space will only make Tech's offense better.
Apparently Cornelsen noticed all the space, because the Hokies went right to the read option. This time, Rogers aligned as the H-Back to the boundary, and whammed across on Rochell. Rochell is human and I am sure remembered Rogers pancake earlier in the drive. He squeezes to the inside with his hands up to protect himself.
Rochelle, Tranquill, and LB Greer Martini (No. 48) all bite inside on Peoples. Evans pulls the ball and has a wide open lane to the end zone.
Unfortunately, Cornelsen largely abandoned the inside zone game for inverted veers and veer reads as the game progressed. Additionally, the Hokies struggled run blocking in the red zone. The offensive line seems more effective driving the opposition off the ball on inside zones and I hope to see more of that against Virginia.
Curl against Soft Man, Fade Against Press
Notre Dame used a game plan similar to Georgia Tech's to defend the Hokies' passing attack. The Fighting Irish aligned in man coverage and played very soft to take away vertical routes and slants that Isaiah Ford and Bucky Hodges have excelled on all season. The Irish defensive staff rolled the dice that Evans wouldn't be accurate enough to work underneath the deep coverage.
The Hokies responded with a combination of short curl and in routes. On this play, Isaiah Ford wide to the boundary in the five-wide set, curls up in front of freshman CB Donte Vaughn (No. 35), and then breaks a tackle for an easy first down.
Note that all three field-side receivers curl, and Ford wasn't Evans only option. Rogers, who I believe caught all four of his catches on the same route, broke completely free from LB Nyles Morgan (No. 5) on a 6-yard in.
Cam Phillips preceded his ankle breaking score against former Tech recruit Jalen Elliott (No. 21) with a catch on a curl when he and Ford aligned in a twins look to the field-side.
Notre Dame stuck with soft coverage, and to his credit, Evans was accurate and took the easy chunk plays.
The Fighting Irish didn't change things up often. When they did, they pressed Hodges and Ford on the outside, and continued to play soft on the slot receivers. When the Irish pressed, it looked like Evans automatically checked to a fade route, or he would motion Rogers into the backfield and run a slot post off of inverted veer play-action. Phillips had a nice catch (and the tip-turned-interception) on the post pattern. The fade produced better results, including this teardrop catch by Ford and a terrific back-shoulder adjustment by Hodges for a touchdown.
Those passing concepts carried the Hokies through the comeback. They were repetitive and predictable, and Notre Dame couldn't do anything to stop it. Hopefully Cornelsen can find the right mix of short passing and get the running game going to open up play-action to take advantage of a Virginia secondary that's given up 253.5 passing yards per game this season (No. 92 nationally).
Errors in Zone Coverage Plague the First Half
For the Virginia Tech defense throughout most of the first half, play could not have looked much. The Hokies were unable to account for QB DeShone Kizer (No. 14) on inside zone runs, which is an ongoing issue. Even when defenders were in positions to make plays, Kizer and the Notre Dame running backs looked physically superior as they made Hokie defenders miss or ran them over. Every run seemingly ended with a solo tackle by a defensive back who was being driven backwards.
When Notre Dame was forced to go to the air, receivers were running wide open all over the field. A quick check of the film revealed that the Hokies were running a variety of zone coverages where a defender would identify a receiver and then match up with him. Time and time again, two defenders would track one receiver while a different receiver broke open.
The Hokies particularly had problems against trips formations. On this play, Notre Dame aligns in trips to the field-side from the VT 13-yard-line. Equanimeous St. Brown (No. 6) runs a corner route from the inside slot. Chris Finke (No. 10) runs a quick in route. Out wide, Kevin Stepherson (No. 29) sits down in a short zone hoping to draw the corner away from helping deep on the corner route.
The Hokies should be fine. Rover Terrell Edmunds rotates from the boundary side across the formation to take the inside slot on the corner. Adonis Alexander has a deep third with outside leverage, so even though Edmunds has to run a long way to track the slot receiver, any throw that leads the receiver would likely be intercepted by Alexander. Underneath, Mook Reynolds and Chuck Clark are both playing an outside leverage posture. Everything should be covered. The Hokies have four defenders to cover three receivers.
When Finke breaks inside, Reynolds hands him off to Clark. He then should read Kizer to anticipate the throw. Kizer rolls into the field and is staring down Stepherson the whole way. For some reason, it looks like Reynolds sees St. Brown running to the corner and decides to sink underneath the route. At that moment, St. Brown is triple covered and Stepherson is wide open. In order for Bud Foster's zone schemes to work, the defensive backs have to know their own assignments and then trust their teammates to be in the right place. The Hokies ultimately managed to force a field goal attempt. However, Notre Dame hit a handful of big plays on busted zone coverages, including Miles Boykin's 18-yard score to put Notre Dame back up 17 in the second quarter.
Hokies Improve Coverage in Second Half
In the second half, the Hokies played more man free coverage. However, they didn't abandon zone coverage. They switched back and forth and Kizer never looked comfortable with his reads down the field. On this first-and-ten, Brandon Facyson covers the deep third. Reynolds plays outside leverage and covers the short flat. Clark and Terrell Edmunds bracket the corner route.
Notre Dame is max protecting on the play. The short flat looks open. However, that is a long throw into the wind with Reynolds reading Kizer's eyes. Clark picked a similar long throw earlier in the game. Kizer correctly throws a ball to the corner where, realistically the throw will carry out of bounds safely.
Even when Notre Dame faced man coverage and had rub routes designed to pick coverage, the Hokies were able to stay in close contact with the receivers. On this play, Notre Dame runs a post-wheel combination to the boundary. Alexander sinks deep and then jumps St. Brown on the post route.
Upon second look, Kizer has nowhere to go with the football. Anthony Shegog tracks the wheel route perfectly. Terrell Edmunds is tight to the vertical route from the field slot. Clark and Facyson perfectly cross to take the post and wheel route to their side. Alexander knocks the football away without drawing a pass interference call.
Alexander delivered his best half of Virginia Tech football since donning the Hokies uniform in the final half against the Irish. He was perfect in man coverage. He was responsible in zone coverage. And when Foster blitzed him off the edge when the Irish went trips away from him, Adonis made numerous sharp solo tackles around the line of scrimmage. Alexander's play warrants recognition.

Comments
Excellent French. Thank you!
I made the comment during the game while watching with friends: Evans may throw one of the best passes on fade routes that I have seen from a VT QB. At the same time, I love the 'common sense' strategy adjustment of Cornelsen: Take what the defense gives you.
The simple adjustment on his part/Evan's checks on the receiver's routes proved huge at eating up the 2nd and mid range yardage situations. Ford and Phillips made some nice plays with their feet too after the catch.
My only complaint about Corny is that it took him too long to recognize that the defense was giving him man coverage with Isiah and Bucky on the goal line. The Notre Dame defense was covering the QB read/keeper that we run almost exclusively inside the 10 yard line.
I can agree with that. In some instances, I have felt that we depend on Evans a little too much for his feet - very similar to the Logan Bulldozer plays of Loeffler's days.
Caveat - I'm not a strong Xs and Os guy, so this is a layman's take.
I suspect this goes back to an ineffective OL in run-blocking....which we also had when Logan was our QB. My hunch is our O coaching staff (then and now) realized our OL just couldn't consistently block well enough to rely on the RB rushing game. Instead, we show an OL pass-blocking scheme, with QB drop-back. Then, allow the QB to see the seam and run. And, in both cases you are doing so with a big QB who will fall forward for another 1-2 yards.
On the surface, I think that the running QB is an integral part of the Coach Fu/ Corny offense. I would be surprised if we are seeing significantly more QB rushes than we saw at Memphis the last few years.
I think it's safe to say we are seeing significantly more QB rushes than Memphis did.
Evans has 150 carries on the year.
Lynch had 87 carries in 2015.
Lynch had 113 carries in 2014.
Lynch had 88 carries in 2013.
Remember how much we relied on Logan's legs? Logan had 162 carries in 2013. Evans is about to blow that out of the water.
Edit: Jerod is tied for 74th in total rushing attempts in the nation. These are the QBs with more attempts than Jerod.
NAVY (243)
LOU (209)
KENT (195)
OSU (164)
MSST (163)
HOU (159)
ARMY (158)
USF (157)
VT (150)
Leg for research. These are my favorite kind of comments.
I think the difference between how CornFu is using Evans and how Lefty used Logan is that what we are seeing right now is still Fuente's scheme, adjusted to account for Evans' running ability and our struggles with RB running between the tackles. The 2013 offense was a stopgap resulting from Lefty's scheme not being able to be installed to any successful degree in one summer, and Logan not really being the type of QB Lefty wanted to run it. Meanwhile, I get the impression that this is the authentic Fuente scheme, customized to Evans' skill set
Yep, good analysis. And seemingly, we haven't run much read so far. Once we trust Evans and Jackson to actually read the DL, it will be more effective.
As much as our running game seems to have been a struggle, that's mostly a perception of the RBs. I think we are 4th in the ACC in rushing, 20 ypg greater than Clemson (70 ypg > UVA with the great Smoke Mizzell).
Yup. Our problem isn't the running game. It's specifically RB runs between the tackles. And we're finding ways to offset that weakness. Once it's no longer a weakness, this offense is going to be really, really good.
In regards to read plays, I have a sneaking suspicion we might have to wait for Josh Jackson to see a heavy dose of that. I don't know why (I can't point to anything concrete, it's just a hunch) but I think making the right read quickly isn't going to be one of Evans' strong points. We've seen too many mesh point issues where Evan seems to wait too long to pull the ball out. Just like how Motley has trouble sending pressure in the pocket, I'm not sure those mesh point issues are something Evans can be coached past.
I'd be curious to see Evans vs LT as a % of offensive plays.
But the point remains that Evans is being used (overused, IMO) extensively.
So far in 2016 there has been 508 rushing attempts in 11 games. Evans has 29.5% of those attempts.
In 2013 there was 493 rushing attempts in 13 games. Logan had 32.9% of those attempts.
While Logan carried a higher percentage of the rushing burden, Evans is being tackled more. If we play 13 games this year, Evans is on pace to rush 177 times. "Blow that out of the water" in my previous post might be a little bit of an exaggeration, but Evans is looking to take about one extra game worth of hits over Logan.
% of total offensive plays is what I was curious about. My guess is LT was the offensive focal point on an appreciably greater % of plays than Evans.
However looking at the nominal number of running plays does illustrate one of the big downsides of running a faster offense and thus more offensive plays - key players, especially the QB, can take a lot of hits.
Is there any way to know what percent of the runs were called QB runs vs read options vs pulling the ball down because he was not comfortable throwing? He seems to run a lot on what appear to be designed throws.
GT has at least 186 rush attempts by their QB, but that's 2 QB who have started games. Stunningly, Thomas has more pass attempts than rush attempts. I don't think that any QB since PJ took over has had more pass attempts than rush.
Yep, I am surprised. Good on you for doing the leg work.
Nice write up, excellent to see al lthe second half adjustments which this team has had so much trouble with the last few years
French - was there also a difference in blitzing between the 1H and 2H? I didn't notice much in the first and very little QB pressure. In the second i noticed a few more that really rattled Kizer.
Not much blitzing and D line plays assignment ball which doesn't allow to pin ears back and go. Second half a lot better just need better run fits from second level.
Seems like Adonis signed with Tech not very long ago, and he's already producing. Hats off to him and the work he's put in.
Barring injury, he's nearly halfway done with his time at VT.
So what do I do on my first day of thanksgiving break? Rewatch the ND game!
Does switching between zone and man free fall under the category of disguising coverages?
Somewhat- its more showing zone and playing man and vis versa as "disguising" coverages
I thought the tipped-ball interception was going to kill momentum and end our surge. I'm glad they were able to move past that.
French, I'd echo some of the comments above. Any comment on the blitzing difference between the 1st and 2nd half, or was the difference just simply better play by the secondary as you say?
There was a little more blitzing, but I think that was always part of the game plan. They couldn't blitz early in the game because Norte Dame always seemed to be in favorable down and distance situations. Better coverage and mixing and matching seemed to confuse Kiser, and a bunch of the time he didn't have anyone to throw to in the second half. The blitzing got some pressure, but compared to most games Kiser wasn't under a ton of heat most of the game.
French et al:
seems like there was a play later in the game where Evans tried to pull the ball back from Peoples on a read and there was a fumble...looked like Evans could have run forever. was that an inside zone read?
Ekanem and Alexander had big second halves, AA's individual efforts in coverage led to multiple 3rd down stops to give us some three and outs. I still think Alexander could be an elite corner for us. Not surprised to see the simplicity behind our pass game play calling, very happy to see it executed consistently for the first time in what feels like a few weeks.
Baron quietly had another huge game, that kid is electric and he will be greatly missed next year.
You're correct, we will miss the Baron von Wood, but we've got great guys in Settle and Walker. I have all the confidence in their talents and abilities.
So basically, something, something...improve on improving??
Playing better = better play?
Great to see the team improve as the games goes on. That 1st Q wasn't a lot
of fun. It's neat learning all these concepts.
Thanks French great as usual, what's wrong with Facyson? Everytine it's coming his way he appears 15 yds off the receiver. Is it soft coverage or another issue?
I'm not sure if you have answered this elsewhere, but on ND's long TD run, can you explain the responsibility of Mihota there? One would think he has contain, but it looks like he needed to spill. Thoughts?
Also curious about this, haven't rewatched it but in real time and one of the commercial break highlight replays it looked like multiple players may have made mistakes/been out of position with Mihota potentially being one of them.
Mihota had Kizer on the keeper... Motu overran the play and got swallowed up and Terrell bit on Kizer and over commited, so he could not get the spill from the interior.. Motu and Terrell had very poor technique on the play- Mihota was fine in terms of assignment. Bud called it a "cluster"..
I would need to see the pre-snap alignment, but if we had Terrell/Tremaine positioned on Mihota's outside shoulder we often crash the back every time and leave the linebacker aligned outside to account for the QB. That is how we usually play GT and have done so against several read option QB's. If this is the case, Mihota should have potentially been crashing to take the dive.
edit: Haven't found a good presnap look but from a highlight replay it doesn't look like we had an alley defender aligned to take the QB and Terrell got caught very flat footed, and Moto caught in traffic being out of position
The ND 2nd half TD drive is an interesting animal, and I covered it in my original draft. Despite their success early, ND abandoned the inside zone read in the second half until the Phillips INT. Then, they ran it two times before Adams big run.
I think Mihota had dive and messed up the call because Terrell was going hard to the QB in the alley and the rover taking the QB was how they defended IZR most of the game. It is possible that Mihota was right, but if he had QB Kizer had him best to the edge.
After that, the Irish again abandoned the IZR, which was clearly their most effective running play. It was confounding. Fortunately, while Matt Johns and Kurt Benkert are elusive in the pocket, I have not seen UVA use much read option.
Count on seeing a ton of UVA read option then, am I right?
This is what I originally thought. Looked like Mihota second guessed himself because he wasn't in position to stop the QB and he wasn't in position to stop the dive and he looked very tentative. This would also explain Terrell looking like he got caught totally flat footed if he was planning to take the alley and suddenly tried to redirect to the back going up the middle.
If you watch the play (I don't know how to make that available for everyone or I would... sorry, old guy swag), Chuck Clark is lined up 4x1 over the uncovered, eligible TE and has pass first responsibility. Mihota who is lined up, also on the strong side, is in the 4i technique and appears to be the guy responsible for the QB on the zone-read, he does his job and forces the QB to give.
The zone-read, by nature, is a zone running play which means the OL is taking a step in the direction of said running play (in this case showing which way the RB would go), they go left and the DL and LB's follow. Every gap is accounted for with the exception of one... That is the gap that appears to be the responsibility of Motu (lined up 4 yards off the line over the B gap on the strong side) who flows a bit to much and eventually gets cut off by the Offensive Tackle who chipped Barron and hit the 2nd level to take out an over pursuing LB (Motu).
I'm not so sure any LB in the country taking that same pursuit angle would have the physical ability to then get off that block and make the play. As poorly as Motu seemed to play that, ND did equally as as good a job blocking.
Edit: Somehow I missed the response by French before I posted this... would love to know if my assessment is inaccurate here.
Without knowing the defensive call, it is impossible to tell. Based on how they defended the IZR vs Duke and Norte Dame the rest of the time, and based on Mihota and Edmund's body language, I thought Mihota was crashing on the dive in the B gap, Motu had the A gap, and Edmund's had the C gap/ QB. I am pretty convinced that Mihota or Edmunds busted the call because VS trips away, Motu has to fill that A gap. Ideally you'd love to see him read the play and shed to get over, but that is a quick hitter and a really tough play.
Motu didn't have a great game, and this doesn't look great for him. But, I don't think he busted an assignment here.
Motu really has become the fanbases defensive fall guy on every play.
True, but the mike spot kind of lends itself to the scapegoat role.
Thank you French! Question though... If it is in fact an issue with Edmunds, would that indicate that the entire alignment was off on that play? Edmunds was on the weak side and couldn't have possibly made it over to the QB had he kept it.
Terrell Edmunds- not Tremaine. He was in centerfield because Clark was flexed out to the passing side strength. Sorry for not clarifying.
Without digging into the stat book, probably our best game in the 'yards after the catch' category. Very nice to see, to say the least!
CJ's yac on the 62 yd play exceeded any prior game.
Without digging into the stat book, probably our best game of the dropped passes by our opponents in the second half. The two things I took away were that Edmunds should probably be missing the first half of the UVA game and that Notre Dames receivers forgot how to catch a football after halftime.
I thought the same thing. VT execution (and play-calling) got better, Notre Dames' execution got worse. There were some Notre Dame plays where passes were just plain dropped on critical downs.
Sorry for the slow responses folks. I am hunting today so I am just looking at the phone on oaccasion
Bit late to be finding your Turkey. Hope you have a backup.
For the love of all that is sacred to hunters everywhere, hang up and kill something!!!
In my experience, the deer always seem to wait until I'm distracted or indisposed before appearing.... So checking your phone may actually improve your chances!
Tony gets it. The first two deer that I ever harvested both entailed me waking up from a nap and they were standing in front of me.
My first deer was from my great uncle's back porch after spending several hours that morning and again that afternoon/evening in tree stands on his farm not seeing anything.
If I'm remembering the story correctly, one time my dad shot at a deer missing it, but hit another one on the other side of some brush.
Orrr, and more likely, they are there but you don't notice them because you are distracted or indisposed. Just playing devil's advocate here, and given my often expressed disdain for cell phones in most situations, I'm not to be taken seriously by anyone under 60, I guess.
Simple questions. What does it mean when Evans claps his hands and lowers the right hand?
He is telling the center he is ready for the snap
Happy Turkey Day to All!
loluva sucks.
true story ... no embellishment, i had not been drinking that much, see friday untappd checkins.
In the upper section for away fans. Right after we went down 17-0, I went to the restroom, in restroom.
ND Bro (who was not small): "Fuck Virginia Tech"
me (i'm ok sized myself): /ignore
ND Bro louder: "Fuck Virginia Tech"
me: /ignore
ND Bro louder still: "FUCK VIRGINIA TECH"
me: looking right at him <10' away: "FUCK YOU"
ND Bro: "FUCK VIRGIN.....
me: "NO, FUCK YOU"
ND Bro: /surveys the room "There's a lot of Hokies here." (all Hokies in the head, but him and his boy)
me: ...
ND Bro: "garble, garble we all good"
me: "good, i have to piss"
VT storms back. I don't want to take the credit, but in hindsight I probably should have let his jawing ride, but in this case 3 was the magic number.
btw, this my only negative ND fan experience. I had a fantastic time from fans, ushers, parking lot attendants, band members, you name it.
Should have told him Rudy was offsides, would have ended the conversation.
The only fitting response was the score (VT win) at the end of the game.
Post game pee, am standing at trough and in walks guy stands at other end of trough and yells "LETS GO" well the entire bathroom of men peeing yells "HOKIES" all while making sure not to make eye contact.
Excellent! You followed rule#2 of men's room etiquette.
My final analysis:
Offense- stick to what you do best, tailored to what's working.
Defense- I think Mom put the leftovers behind center.