Friday Q&A: September 30, 2011

Share on your favorite social network:
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail to someoneGoogle+share on TumblrShare on Reddit

Playcalling, recruiting and the spread offense are all major topics in
today’s Q&A. Also, David Hood, senior writer at, joins us for
some quick questions about the Clemson Tigers.

1) Comment on the offensive play calling of Mike O’Cain. Most specifically,
what differences do you see this year, so far?

Chris Coleman: I get this question every week, and I always refrain from
answering it. How is it different? Do you mean how is it different from last
year to this year? Or how is it different from the way Stiney would be calling
plays in 2011?

2010 and 2011 are different years, with different personnel. Tyrod Taylor and
Logan Thomas are very different quarterbacks, both in terms of skill sets and
experience. We’ve seen a different type of read option this year, and we’ve seen
more read option in general. When Tech ran the read option with Tyrod Taylor in
the past, he was always the outside option, and the running backs were the
inside option. With Logan Thomas, it’s the other way around. He is the inside
option because he is so big, and David Wilson is the outside option because he
is so fast.

Different read option, and more read option … those are the only
differences I notice between Mike O’Cain and Bryan Stinespring. Other than that,
Tech’s plays look about the same to me, and that shouldn’t be surprising. It
wasn’t realistic to expect a different looking offense, because Frank Beamer is
still the head coach at Virginia Tech.

I, and probably you as well, have been watching Tech football for years. The
Hokies run the football up the middle, and they work playaction. They’ll make
adjustments each year based on personnel, but the school of thought is the same
each year. The only significant change in the Tech offense I’ve ever seen was
after Bryan Stinespring took over as offensive coordinator, and he visited the
Indianapolis Colts and other teams and added elements of their passing game to
the Tech offense. Prior to that, Tech’s passing game was pretty Mickey Mouse.

Some formations are different these days. For example,