Natural Gridiron Selection
The statistic was one Jim Grobe didn’t know for sure. It wasn’t entirely clear if he wanted to.
“I don’t know how much more possession time Duke had than we had,’’ Grobe mentioned as Tuesday’s gathering to eat chicken and talk football.
At which point Ben Doster of Rivals.com piped in with the answer.
“It was 16 minutes and 14 seconds,’’ Doster interjected.
“You knew,’’ Grobe said, deadpan.
Several times over the last four or five years that Grobe has explained his change in offensive philosophy. In many ways it’s akin to gridiron Darwinism in that you adapt to survive. Since arriving at Wake in 2001, Grobe has seen a proliferation of big play offenses in college football where teams are able to score from anywhere on the field in the blink of an eye. And once they do rip off the 80-yard run—or 66-yard pass and catch as Tanner Price and Chris Givens had against Duke—then the momentum gained can often be irreversible.
As a result, time of possession is rarely the first stat Grobe checks after a game.
“We used to feel like possession time was important,’’ Grobe said. “It would be good if you could have a lot of points and possession time.
“But what we found was that points are more important that possession time. We even felt back when we were a wishbone team, when we were running Georgia Tech’s offense, we still needed a couple of big plays during the course of a game. And if teams could keep us from having a few big plays we were in trouble because that ball control doesn’t put points on the boards. If you’re kicking a lot of field goals you’re in trouble.
“So I think big plays are important on both sides – limiting them on defense is really important.’‘
Grobe’s evolution also had a great deal to do with personnel.
“Skinner’s the one that screwed the whole thing up,’’ Grobe said in reference to Riley Skinner, the Deacons’ record-shattering quarterback from 2006 through 2009. “We were fine until he came along.’‘
His playful joshing about Skinner forcing him to throw more than his natural tendencies wanted him to gave him the opening he needed to brag on his coaching staff. And he admitted he and his offensive coaches, in particular offensive coordinator Steed Lobotzke, had to go back to school in order to fully utliize Skinner’s uncanny abilities.
“We’re not like some teams that can go out and recruit certain positions to play a certain scheme— because we don’t know who we’re going to get,’’ Grobe said. “We’re just trying to get the 15 or 18 best football players we can find, and once we get those guys then we bring them together and try to figure out what’s best for them. And that’s one of the things that I feel really good about our coaching staff.
“We had almost totally committed to running option football with Cory (Randolph) and Ben Mauk and then all of a sudden Cory graduates and Ben goes down and here’s Riley Skinner. And Skinner, he’s probably not slower than me, but we’d have a heck of a foot race. So with Riley we’re into throwing it a lot. We had to learn how to throw the football with Riley because we’d never done a lot of that.
“So we had to really work hard to do that, and that’s one thing I’m very proud of our staff, trying to take the talent that we get and put them in an offensive and defensive scheme that we could be competitive with.’‘
The emergence of Skinner allowed for a smooth transition to his successor Price, who has been decidedly partial the big-play approach since his glory days at Westlake High School in Austin. Of course it only works when a quarterback has weapons at his disposal, and at Wake, Price has been throwing to very possibly the deepest and most talented receiving corps in school history.
He and Givens alone would be a nightmare for defensive coordinators everywhere. Through seven games, Price has already connected with Givens for plays of 79, 66, 60, 47, 44, 41, 40 and 37 yards.
“I’ve always been a fan of the big-play offense, just because it really changes the momentum of the game,’’ Price explained. “When you’re able to score quickly it really swings the momentum and momentum is something that plays a big factor in football games. It has a lot of power. So when you can change momentum like that, you can change the game. Time of possession isn’t as important because teams are able to strike so fast that they can score in seconds.
“It’s definitely important if you can control the ball and capitalize off that and get points. It’s definitely important. But the way offenses are today it just seems like teams can score really fast. If the opportunity presents itself, you definitely want to capitalize.’‘
Back to the main page.
By Dan Collins on 10/26/2011 (1:46 pm)
Comments
All of my qeustions settled-thanks!
Coralyn on 11/04/2011 (10:05 am)
Dan, the one thing not mentioned about time of possession is resting your defense and keeping the opponent’s defense on the field. When you are limited in depth on defense I would think time of possession is an important factor in the 4th quarter.
Backfin on 10/28/2011 (11:50 am)
To paraphrase Coach Grobe, I’ve never seen a good team with a bad offensive line. Along with a young, inexperienced defense who struggled in ’09 that was the difference between the ’06 team and the ’09 team. The line of ’06 kept Riley’s uniform fairly clean. Anyone who saw the Clemson in ’09 or sat through the ’09 Miami game when Riley got knocked out of the game in the fourth quarter knows that our O-Line during that season was, at best, mediocre.
Again, there was a vast difference in the defenses as well, but to lose five games by a total of 13 points is something most of us will never forget.
Another thing that gets lost in this discussion is that losing two coaches like to Mullins and Hood left a big void on the staff.
GO DEACS!
Deac Fan on 10/27/2011 (11:49 am)
Matt is right; Brian Thacker is clearly wrong. “I don’t know why it’s so hard for (Brian) ... to accept that.”
Dick H on 10/27/2011 (11:08 am)
I have to respectfully disagree with Brian. I think Skinner’s best year was his senior year. If you note his games against Maryland, N.C. State, and Duke that year, he was incredible. He had never had games like those in his career. The reason Wake had so much success his freshman year was because the defense was so good that they could just dink and dunk on offense and score enough to win (prime example - the ACC Championship game that year). Skinner did not get dramatically better as his career went on because the offensive line got worse and worse. He only did as well as he did because of his amazing ability to see the entire field quickly, to duck away from pressure, and to make accurate throws. Though never a cannon-armed player, his arm did get stronger through the four years. And, with such a bad offensive line, the coaches had to utilize him because the running game just never really did much during his tenure. So Wake made it to three bowl games during Riley’s tenure and just missed by one game his senior year. A lot of that had to do with Skinner’s ability to get the team enough points with smoke and mirrors. And that is why the Deacs went 3-9 last year and got blown out so many times without him.
Matt on 10/27/2011 (10:13 am)
I don’t agree that Skinner’s best year was his freshman year. He was every bit as good in his senior year as he was as a freshman. Wake did have a better team in Riley’s freshman year.
Nice to see that Coach Grobe has adapted to the offensive changes in the game. The offense looks great this year. That being said, winning time of posession is still a good thing, if all those time consuming drives end in points.
Johnny on 10/27/2011 (9:57 am)
What Riley did really well in 2006 was not lose games for the Deacs. We went to the Orange Bowl that year because the 2006 team was the BEST defensive team in Wake’s history…also had a pretty good kicking game.
John G on 10/27/2011 (9:17 am)
Complementing Skinner is great. But recognize his best season was his freshman season. If his skills caused a brilliant change in scheme by the coaches to utilize his unique talent, wouldn’t his best season be as a senior? THIS is what the coaches don’t recognize. It is a blindness that causes them to abandon the style of football that Oregon used last year and Wake used the 2006 OB year. We didn’t win because our players were great. We won because Riley’s freshman year scheme put the players in a position to succeed.
I’m all for the ‘big play’ offense. But in my history of watching ‘big play’ teams, they generally blow the other team out. Teams that win by less than 1 score are never ‘big play’ teams no matter what the coach titles it.
If you put these players in the scheme you put Skinner in during the 2006 season, these players will be successful beyond their wildest dreams. I don’t know why it’s so hard for our bright coaches to accept that since it was their scheme. Our success was due to the coaches and the system in 2006, not Riley (who had less success as the coaches changed the scheme for him).
Brian Thacker on 10/27/2011 (1:23 am)
Does this mean the team is one step closer to being one of those teams that can go for the jugular in the fourth quarter and put other teams away?
DC on 10/26/2011 (10:59 pm)
I like to control time of possession. Big plays are great and do change or keep momentum but it also keeps the D on the field more than I would like!
Ken Green on 10/26/2011 (3:22 pm)
Always the disclaimer first. Grobe forgot more about football yesterday then I have known my entire life…...That being said, I know who needs to win time of possession when we travel to Death Valley and it need not be Clemzin.
Doug on 10/26/2011 (3:14 pm)
Page 1 of 1 pages
