Mike O’Cain Q&A, Part I: ‘We probably needed to throw the ball more on early downs’
Remember that Q&A I tweeted about last week with quarterbacks coach Mike O’Cain? Well, now that the combine stuff is over, I finally have the time to post it.
Like the ones I did with Bud Foster and Bryan Stinespring, I’ll split this one into two parts. The first is more about play-calling in general. The second has more to do with personnel.
What were your feelings coming out of the Sugar Bowl?
“Disappointed, in that first of all that you lost in a controversial way, but more than that is that we didn’t finish some things like we needed to on a couple of drives. You get the ball in the red zone three times and you end up with fourth-and-1 and not making it and kicking two field goals. That’s disappointing to you. But if you take that part out of the game, if you take out the red zone, I was really pleased with how we played. I felt like we did what we needed to do, we controlled the football, we kept the football from a very explosive offense. You wanted to keep the ball away from them. It’s kind of like playing Georgia Tech. You call a game based sometimes on what other people do as well. And our defense played lights out, and they kept the ball away from them as well, but at the same time as a play-caller, you have that in the back of your mind as well. You want to give them as few opportunities as well. So I really was pleased with the way we played from the 20 to the 20 or 10 or whatever it may have been in any situation. Just disappointed that you end up kicking some field goals and not scoring touchdowns.”
Do you feel like that epitomized what had been a season-long issue?
“No question. That’s something that we went through this morning [last Wednesday] is looking at every red zone play from the 25 in — every game, every play — and looked at it. And going back and looking at it, briefly, the biggest thing that killed us down there were turnovers and penalties. Other than that, I don’t mean to … very seldom did a defense stop us. When the game was on the line. We had some situations late in games, the North Carolina game for example, we had the ball down there with 45 seconds to go and we run the ball four times. We’re not trying to score in that situation. We want to run the ball, wind the clock out. I don’t really count that. But we stopped ourselves more. I know you can say that a lot of times. But penalties kept us … I think we had five or six penalties down there that were drive-stoppers or that we didn’t overcome. They weren’t necessarily drive-stoppers, but they put you behind the eight ball. And then we had six turnovers in the red zone. And so obviously those take points away.
“So that’s 11 times right there. I don’t have all the stats yet; that’s what I’m working on now. But that’s 11 times where things we did to ourselves kept us scoring points. So yeah, to answer, if we went back and looked at one thing that was the most disappointing thing of the season, you would probably say the red zone opportunities. And a lot of those were early situations. I think we turned the ball once against East Carolina, had a penalty against East Carolina. So two against East Carolina. One against Arkansas State. Two against Duke. Two red zone interceptions against Duke. A red zone interception against Clemson in the championship game. So just summarizing that, that’s probably the most disappointing part.”
Do you go back and analyze your play-calling in those situations? Do you think it was too conservative at times?
“We probably were. Yeah. No question. And again, there were obviously reasons that you call what you call. It could be a situation in the game. It could be what you’re trying to do to a defense. Again, if you’re trying to keep the ball away. I mean, you can go down there and throw it three times and you may score and you may not score. There is a philosophical approach that we have to our offense in the context of this team. You know, we’re not just an offense going out trying to score every time. Now, obviously that is your goal. It’s an offense going out there, compatible with our defense and our special teams and working to win the game. So sometimes that affects how you call the plays, if that makes sense. It’s not just going out there and haphazardly … that has some effect.
“But overall, yes, I felt like looking back we probably needed to throw the ball more down there on early downs, particularly. And that’s something that we analyze and will go back and do. And I don’t think that’s something that’s a revelation today. I think we knew that halfway through the season. And sometimes you have plans of going in and doing something different and for whatever reason that doesn’t happen. And that’s kind of hard to explain unless you’re in the heat of the moment or you know all the communication that’s going on. But I think those are some things that we know and some things that we’ll answer in the offseason.”
Looking back at your first year calling plays, how do you think that operation worked? And what do you think you can improve on in a second year?
“Overall I felt that it went really well. There were maybe five times, six times over the course of a season — well, maybe 10 times; let’s say 10 times — that I didn’t get the play in for whatever reason. Me not getting it called early enough, a miscommunication between the guys signaling in an hearing me or the guys signaling in and Logan [Thomas] reading it. There were probably 10 times during the course of the season where it was communicated late or improperly. But other than that, I thought it went well. I thought overall the communication went really well.
“There’s always things that in calling a game … take the bowl game for instance. The first thing you do after a game is you look at yourself. What could I have done different to make a difference in that ballgame? And what would you do differently in that ballgame? And I’m not sure there’s a whole lot I would have done differently. Maybe thrown the ball a little bit more in the red zone. But there were a couple times where we had run-pass options calls, we had the possibility of a pass called. Well, the first two plays of overtime, they were run-pass options. And they played pass defense. They had five in the box, so to speak. That’s why we ran the ball in those deals. So it was up to Logan to make that decision at the line, run or pass. So what sometimes looks like a run — and it is a run, I’m not going to take it away — but there’s a reason it was a run. It could have been a pass tagged to it because they played a soft look and gave us an opportunity to run the football. That’s why it was a run.”
Did your role on gameday change too much from what it used to be?
“Yes and no. Where in the past I was the suggestion provider, I was making suggestions to Stiney, he was making the final decision. We were side-by-side in the press box. Now it’s kind of a role reversal. And we’re talking communicating. And not just Stiney, but Curt [Newsome] and Shane [Beamer] and Sherm [Kevin Sherman], we’re all constantly, ‘What do we need to do next series?’ You don’t really have a lot of conversation during the series. Most of the conversation that takes place is when the defense is out there and you’re trying to make some decisions. How do we want to attack them the next time? This is what we’ve done? How do we attack them the next time we have the football? So you take all those suggestions and write them down and that’s how you approach the next series.
“Now, it may be, for example this next series we may need to throw the ball deep. We’ve got to throw the ball down the field over the course of the next series. Now, it could be the next play. It could be the third play. It might be the fifth play. Let’s say we’re talking between series, if we get the ball on the 20, the next first down we’re going to take a shot. So things like that that are communicated. And what haven’t we done that we want to get done. Of course you get up there sometimes and you’ve got a list of things to do and you can’t get them all called. But this is something going into the game that we want to get done but we haven’t done yet. And this could be the beginning of the second half, the end of the first half, whatever it may be.”
Were you prepared when you took the play-calling role of the visibility and criticism that comes with it?
“Oh yeah. Having been a head coach and an offensive coordinator, you’ve been there and you’ve done it over the years. And you know you’re not going to make everybody happy. The only time everybody was happy was after the first play of the season when we scored a touchdown the first play of the game. [Laughs] So I assumed everybody was happy after the first call. After that, somebody was upset. We should have thrown it or run it or thrown a screen or whatever. So yeah, you understand that. That’s just part of it. Most people out there feel like they know what you ought to be doing. And you live with that.”
What goes into your offseason preparation? Do you tweak things in the offense? Do you take bits of what other schools do?
“We’ve talked with Texas a little bit. And we’re constantly talking. Even during the season we’re talking with people. You know, sometimes to get confirmation for what you do. Sometimes to just maybe get a little bit different wrinkle or something. So that’s what we’ll do. We’ll go back and analyze everything that we did and tweak it. For example, red zone. What do we need to do better down there? And it starts with probably having to throw the ball more, No. 1. On normal downs. When I say normal downs, first down, second down. And when you say open it up, and I guess that’s the term that everyone wants to use, but throw the ball more. That might be short. That doesn’t necessarily mean throw the ball in the end zone, but become a little bit less run-oriented on first down down there. That’s just one example of how we’ll tweak it.
“Now, how do we want to do that? Then we’ll take every play that we’ve run, and I say every play, but sometimes we might run a play only three or four times a season, game plan against a specific look. But the plays that are the meat and potatoes of our offense — was it good? Was it bad? Why was it good or bad? And do we want to continue with it? Does it still fit? There was one play that we ran, did not run it particularly well this year, but last year it was the best play in our offense. And this year, it’s hard to explain why, maybe because you ran it a lot last year people looked at you and defended it better. So we’ll look at that. How can we tweak it? Was it what we were doing? Was it what they were doing that made the play not work as good? Then the other thing is, how can we tweak that play? That is, run it from a different formation, give the play a little bit different look. Things like that we do over the course of the spring. It’s just analyzing.
“We’ll be a different team next year. We won’t have the same running back. We won’t have the same offensive line. We’ll have four different offensive linemen in there. And a lot of this we may not know until we come out of spring practice, but there are some things that we may have done well because of David [Wilson] and the four offensive linemen, we may have to change a little bit of a philosophy because now we’ve got four new offensive linemen and a different tailback, basically a rookie tailback back there. So we’ll begin to learn more about them during spring practice.”
March 1, 2012 - 12:01 AM
It seems that a lot of thought and work go into the plays that the team runs and into the play calling for each game.
Coaches know a little bit more about what they are doing than the average fan might realize.
Next season will be different on offense, and therefore the coaches will have more work to do this spring and in the preseason next season.
Let’s go Hokies !!!
Good to know that he is introspective, willing to admit error and wants to improve. All of the elements of a good coach are here for fans to see. He said a whole bunch more than Stinespring without helping the opposition. Good interview. Thanks.
Introspective is good, but what about when it doesn’t give you the right answer? The only thing he would have done differently in the Sugar Bowl is throw the ball more in the redzone??? What about the rest of the field? Our WRs had a major advantage against their DBs. Why not exploit that? Their DL was rock solid against runs up the middle and runs they had seen before. Why not show them something new?
Grrrr…..
Coaches know a “little bit more” than the average fan? They live, breathe and eat football 24/7. It is their occupation and their vocation. They don’t get to second guess themselves in the heat of battle. It is not an exact science and never will be. Hindsight is definitely 20/20 in any sport. God Bless coaches on every level that think it is worth being critzized by amateurs.
Andy, good interivew. Would love to hear Frank Beamer respond to this interivew. Explains a lot about what us fans gripe about. Doubt we will ever be anything more than what we currently are with this mindset. Not great, not really bad, just consistently wanting to be better.
Zman, I agree.
There is obviously a stark difference between Stinespring and O’Cain. At least he admitted that he was too conservative with play calling at times. Stinespring would have said, “I don’t second guess myself.”
I think O’Cain’s experience as a HC and OC is obviously a boost. It also helps he was a former quarterback and a Clemson player, no less.
I am really curious to know what he had to say about the title game debacle.
Nothing is going to change on the offensive side of the ball. Numerous times we’ve heard Beamer and others say we need to roll the pocket and change the “launch point” on passing plays. Didn’t do it when game time rolled around, just talk. Same will happen with throwing the ball more on 1st and 2nd down or in the red zone. O’Cain admitted they don’t want to score every possession. We’re no longer living in the 1970′s. The game has evolved but the Hokies offensive staff and Beamer have certainly not. That much is quite obvious. Who is calling to interview O’Cain or Stiney for offensive coordinator? They should be getting job offers if they are good at what they do.
“If you take out the Red Zone…”
What a ridiculous statement. Red Zone failures are why Tech lost the bowl game. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is your W-L record. Once again, VT lost a bowl game and to me, the offense ineptitude is the reason behind that. Controlling the ball is all well and good, but you better come out with a W or you’re a failure.
“we’re not just an offense going out trying to score every time”
Andy, could you ask Mike what kinds of plays we call when we’re trying to score versus what kinds of plays we call when we’re not trying to score?
Could you also ask specifics on what we’re trying to do when we’re not trying to score, i.e. set up the punt team and/or defense so they can hopefully get us the ball back?
Finally, when we get the ball back, how do we then decide if want to try and score?
I understand the advantages of ball control and field position, but I also understand that the team with the most points wins, like when we played Michigan, Clemson, Stanford, etc.
When I first read “we’re not just an offense going out trying to score every time”, I interpreted it like several of the commenters. But I think we missed the key word “just”. I don’t think O’Cain is saying that there is ever a drive where we would not ultimately want to score, but sometimes the priority is taking time off the clock or controlling field position.
Until we get a new OC and revamp the Offensive coaching staff, we will continue to be really consistent in our division and maybe our conference now that other schools have upgraded their coaching. Two views come from our fans; 1) be happy with what we have been doing (10+ wins ACCCGs) and 2) those of us who would desperately love to fill the empty NC trophy case. Our offense has been mediocre due to coaching/playcalling (mainly from Stinespring) and the defense has been lights out consistently from Bud and a bunch of hungry young players. Can you imagine if our Offense was as innovative, adaptive and productive as the Defense? I would love to have Foster’s Offensive equal on the Hokies staff. Additionally, we will not consistently get the elite offensive recruits that it will take to get us to the NC game with this staff and philosophy. Go Hokies!
Fans have the right to be critical of coaches at the college and pro level. They pay ALL the bills with their hard earned money and fill the stadiums with their time and passion for the team. Without them, players would be performing in an empty field somewhere. O’Cain wants less criticism than the average high school coach gets on a weekly basis. Here are a few proper responses to fans’ opinion of play calling.
It comes with the territory.
I appreciate the passion our fans have for Hokie football.
The fans are a big part of our success and we as coaches realize that.
I realize our fans only want us to be the best football team we can be.
Instead, we get defensive answers and belittled as not knowing much. Tell me who gets defensive when asked a question? A GUILTY person, that’s who. Well, Mr. O’Cain, if you knew what you thought you did, you would have other colleges knocking down your door to hire you as their OC. So be critical of us fans all you want. Your real criticism is with every head coach in the nation who would not dare hire you to run their offense.
At no point in the interview did I think O’Cain got defensive. If anything, he shed some light on how the decision making process goes and that it’s not as simple and blankly saying, “Throw the ball more” as a fix to Tech’s offensive philosophy.
I don’t understand why some are shocked that Frank Beamer’s offensive philosophy has as much priority on eating up the clock as on scoring. He’s always enforced that, regardless of which assistant is tasked with doing it. Jerry Claiborne disciple through and through. 1960′s era football, through and through. it will stay that way for the next decade, too, until he retires.
As a coach I know that sometimes your trying to run the clock, play keep away, etc… I know that running the ball – playing power football is a staple of the VT program anyone that follows knows that. What I don’t understand is why we cannot be more creative in our red zone formations. Run in the redzone – use the power I two tight formation, but let’s mix it up – spread defenses out then run. Throw on occasion to one of your 6’4″ receivers that has a 43″ vertical(MD7). Signing out – Go Hokies
I agree with what others have said,Until Beams hangs it up nothing is going to change on offense except the names on the uniforms..U would think Shane would try and get things going but guess that won’t happen..
I like what I heard. More forthcoming and willing to admit mistakes, something missing from Frank and Stiney’s interviews. I am probably in the minority, but I saw improvement last year on O. Yes, a lot had to do with Wilson, LT and a veteran OL, but it seemed the O gelled a bit faster than in years past. LT came on real fast last year unlike Tyrod who took a while and perhaps that too can be attributed to the coaching. The conservative red zone stuff though will be a top down change in philosophy starting with Frank. I will say, given the changes coming up for the O next year, I am glad the D should show even more improvement over last year.
#14 Unfortunately, I think you are right. The more things change, the more they…
VT lost the Sugar Bowl game because the coaches forgot how they got to the 20 yard line- just about every time, although my memory of the game is now fading. Coach O’Cain was more forthcoming than Beamer and Stiney, but I am not reassured. I think we will see more struggling in the RZ this year. I agree with a few others here- it is going to take a new OC to overhaul VT offense with Beamer’s permission, or else Shane B. convinces his Dad to change some fundamentals.
Shane is only on board so he can be ‘The Anointed One’ to mimic his dad as long as Frank retains any shred of authority within his sycophantic ‘Nation’. Shane might be different, but who knows? Nobody can tell until well after Frank sniffs his way onto the back deck.
It really amuses me the reverence towards Frank, and the equivalent promises by FB’s sycophant’s that Shane will be the polar opposite to Frank (ONLY) in the instances where Beamer is defective. But they refuse to admit he’s defective in ANYTHING – yet spout about how Shane will be perfect in all the ways Frank is not, even though they claim Frank is perfect in all ways.
I guess Fancy Gap is a magical place…
Not sure how often I have to repeat this – the OC does NOT matter, Frank Beamer calls the shots in all cases. Beamer wants this offense, he NEEDS this offense, and we all know how that goes…
AB – ‘Coach Beamer, did you order the red zone runs?’
FB – ‘You can’t handle the truth!’
BS – ‘What did we do wrong? We did what they told us to do?!?…’
Some day soon, I’ll do the full parody…
I have become more and more disappointed with the football coaching staff(Foster and Shaun B. excluded; e.g., giving Shaun the benefit-of-the-doubt based on his tenure and his association with the SEC).
On the other hand, I maintain that VT football players have the athleticism to play at all levels; well beyond that which we have seen over the recent past. VT has great players, excellent abilities and they would excel if the coaching staff knew how to further develop their skills.
The problem as I see it, is that the coaching staff does not know how to develop a game plan, adjust as necessary to win and develop great talented players that would execute a game winning plan given the call to do so. VT coaching staff continues to play-not-to-loose; rather than make the hard, controversial calls, allow the players to execute those calls and play-to-win every time the team hits the field. Likewise, I believe the players would feel a vote-of-confidence if given the opportunity to make gutsy calls.
Football complacency set in a few years back with fans and coaches. The coaching staff has gotten comfortable with large salaries, winning the ACC championship (which is no honor based on weak ACC football)and then bragging about attending bowl games that were mostly lost? Fans are mostly happy with what we have been given.
Just another thought, if the coaching staff is so good, why are they not recruited and offers made by other Division 1 conferences? And it has been said that FSU, Penn State and VT are the most coach tolerant of the NCAA football programs.
The dust will be in the trophy case for many more years. ACC football will remain weak for many more seasons and especially as long as 4 of those ACC schools in NC do not know that there is any ball other than a basketball.
Here is one fan who wants more. Go Hokies! Go to the SEC, some day some way? And until then get a challenging schedule that will prepare for that transition and not have us making excuses. Play as if every game is for the NC.
Is it just me or is this just another VT coach saying the problem is the players and not the coaches? I would like to see VT take the next and last step but, fire Beamer? Give me a break. Somehow get him to change his offensive approach? That would be good. People seem to forget what a non entity Tech football was before Frank Beamer.
“And you know you’re not going to make everybody happy. The only time everybody was happy was after the first play of the season when we scored a touchdown the first play of the game. [Laughs] So I assumed everybody was happy after the first call. After that, somebody was upset. We should have thrown it or run it or thrown a screen or whatever. So yeah, you understand that. That’s just part of it. Most people out there feel like they know what you ought to be doing.”
Andy, you don’t think this statement is a defensive posture?
And sometimes you have plans of going in and doing something different and for whatever reason that doesn’t happen.
I think that epitomizes the offense. Do what you do best and just adjust based on what the defense gives you. Don’t change it.
No, I don’t think that’s defensive. I think that’s him laughing at the fact that it’s such a highly visible — and easy to criticize — position. He’s fine with that. He knows it comes with the territory.
I don’t know how much anybody has heard O’Cain speak, but he’s one of the least defensive coaches I’ve been around. Just not his style.
O’Cain calling plays is the biggest change Beamer has made in years, its a baby step in the right direction, too little to late to capitilize on VTs rise and window at something bigger that a Conference Title, tough to think “What-iF’ if he had the balls to make the change while Fosters defense were #1 those years past, ugh. VT missed out on capitilizing on a BCS bowl win last year when it had a record setting back in Wilson, two of the best wide outs in VT history playing together, a senior laden offensive line, a dynamic and physically impossing tank for a Qb and a top 10 defense. Anyone holding their breath about meeting Saben and Company in a few years? Or how bout going to the Horseshoe against Meyer?The SEC and other big time programs make changes quickly, it took Beamer 10 years to make the change away from Stiney, and still didn’t let him go. No doubt VT coaches know more about football, but it didn’t take a football mind to know when VT was going to run up the middle. The only time we scored a TD in the Sugar Bowl was on a penalty in the endzone on a pass interferene, the 1 time they threw a ball that crossed the goaline in regulation. And Beamer owes ever ticket holder to that game a full refund for calling a timeout to set up a fake punt at midfield when our defense was playing that well. He goes conservative ALL SEASON only to decide to use his ‘football’ mind. VT will be good, a family atmosphere where we can be happy to dominate the ACC, be ripped apart by top tier teams, and lose all bowl games, but I guess its better than UVA.
It’s easy to talk in the off season but when Tech gets in the red zone next year we will see if anything changes. I thought this would change last year but nothing was different. I told my son before the Michigan game that Tech had the best team but they would not win because of the play calling. They proved me right, and if I could see that before the game why does it take the coach who is getting paid not to figure it out until March!! Oh well, if changes are not made next year we will be getting another dear john letter next March explaining that they are going to make changes the next year. We still love you Bud Foster, and thank you for the wins we do get.