Before addressing the Duke game, I want to take a brief look back at the N.C. State game and how the critical match-ups identified helped determine the outcome of the game. Last week�s game with N.C. State had a number of intriguing match-ups to watch. I identified three key areas that I believed to be critical to the outcome in the game: (1) the pass rush and penetration off the edge (from the defensive ends); (2) using slot receivers (the inside receiver in a two-wide formation) and tight ends over the middle; and (3) the vertical passing game. In retrospect, all three aspects were clearly part of the game plan for each of the teams.

Both teams needed to neutralize the opposing pass rush off the edge and the two teams took entirely different approaches in the game, both with about equal success. Tech overloaded formations generally to the strong side (placing more players on the wide side of the field), often lining up two tight ends (Jeff King and John Kinzer) next to each other. By unbalancing the formations, N.C. State�s defense was forced to shift to match Tech�s numbers on the one side of the formation, providing Tech the opportunity to double-team the defensive end with the tight ends and tackle and force the other defensive end to maintain run responsibility (if the defensive end took a wide angle on his rush, then he would essentially be taking himself out of the play on a run). This offensive strategy by Tech effectively slowed N.C. State�s defensive ends with the Pack later using twists and stunts (the defensive tackle or linebacker loops around the defensive end), as well as blitzes, to create pressure. In the end, State�s superb defensive ends � Mario Williams and Manny Lawson � had a limited impact on the outcome of the game, with Jimmy Martin in particular having an outstanding game against Lawson.

N.C. State, as expected, used shorter three- and five-step drops to offset Tech�s pass rush. The Pack�s new version of the west coast offense isolated receivers and backs on Tech�s linebackers and strong safety with considerable success. N.C. State�s strategy was to take advantage of the relative inexperience of Tech�s inside linebackers (Vince Hall and Xavier Adibi), rover (Aaron Rouse), and field corner (Roland Minor) in recognizing and reacting to the multiple formations and crossing patterns presented by the west coast offense. Essentially, the quick passing game of State offset any pass rush from Tech. As anticipated, Tramain Hall had a big game, particularly when isolated against Tech�s linebackers, but Aaron Rouse also came up big with two interceptions and a number of big plays. State�s tight end, T.J. Williams, was also a factor in the passing game, but the Wolfpack�s wide receivers were relatively quiet, generally running deeper crossing patterns to clear out for the underneath passes.

The lack of a vertical passing game for N.C. State was not a surprise, since Jay Davis� weakness is his lack of arm strength on deep passes. Tech looked to be setting up some deep throws for Marcus Vick throughout the game, but he was only able to connect with Justin Harper on one fade and just missed a couple of others. I believe that Tech was trying to set up a deep throw later in the game, particularly on the final drive when Vick was sacked. Tech used some different formations with their wide receivers, such as the four-wide �diamond� formation, to overload one side and create a one-on-one match-up on the opposite side, but Vick was never able to take advantage of that potential mismatch. Overall, the N.C. State game was a fascinating study in football strategy and, as I stated in my projection for the game, I would not be a bit surprised to see these two teams meet again in the ACC Championship game.

Looking at the personnel match-ups for this game, the game appears to be one-sided with only one or two players on Duke�s team that might start for Tech (go to the Subscribers� Board to see if you can guess who I think these players are). Duke�s strategy will obviously be to �out-scheme� Tech, since they are overmatched in a head-to-head battle. On offense, I fully expect to see multiple formations and numerous trick plays from Duke, and on defense, I believe we�ll see lots of stunts and blitzes to try to create pressure on Marcus Vick; Tech will likely counter with some basic, hard-nosed football. The worst strategy that Tech could take would be to �over-complicate� the offense when the Hokies clearly have the superior personnel. In other words, Tech shouldn�t do anything to beat themselves by �over coaching� and creating mistakes.

Virginia Tech�s offensive game plan may just look like an extended �middle drill� from practice � hard-nosed, smash-mouth football running the ball up the middle. Tech needs to establish dominance of the line-of-scrimmage early in the game with the Hokies� long-time strong suit � the power running game. I expect to see a lot more of the fullback in this game with Jesse Allen (6-0 243, r-Jr.) and Carlton Weatherford (#39, 5-10 220, r-So.) seeing quite a bit of action. Tech will still use the two (and sometimes three) tight ends and some multiple receiver formations, just to keep Duke honest, but for the most part the Hokies will likely revert back to basics.

Codey Lowe (6-2 240, r-Jr.) is a tough, hard-nosed middle linebacker who specializes in run support. He has limited range and generally won�t be a factor in the passing game, but his role in this game is clearly to stuff Tech�s inside running game. Jesse Allen�s role is simply to take the middle linebacker out of the play on inside runs. Allen has gained notoriety on the message boards as another success story in Tech�s well-documented walk-on program. Allen, through hard work and shear determination, is a physical, aggressive fullback who excels at the head-to-head �wham� block, so his match-up with Codey Lowe will be fun to watch.

I would also expect that Lowe will be seeing a lot of Will Montgomery (#66, 6-3 301, r-Sr.) in Tech�s zone-blocking on isolation running plays (linemen are responsible for a given area as opposed to a specific man and the running back just reads the holes). Tech�s offensive line should prove to be more than Duke�s defensive line can handle. Duke has a couple of solid defensive linemen in Casey Camero (#51, 6-5 280, Jr.) and Eli Nichols (#52, 6-4 260, r-Jr.), but overall Duke will likely struggle against Tech�s superior size and strength in the trenches.

Once Tech establishes the line-of-scrimmage in the running game, look for some big plays on play-action passes. The safeties will start to creep up to support the run and that will open up some deep passing lanes that could potentially break the game open. Tech needs to read the safeties (#23 Brian Greene and #27 Chris Davis) to see when the deep pass comes available and a potential mismatch at cornerback can be exploited.

East Carolina consistently went away from second-team All-ACC cornerback, John Talley (#11, 5-11 180, Jr.) and picked on converted wide receiver Deonto McCormick (5-10 190, Jr.). McCormick has probably had nightmares of East Carolina�s JUCO- transfer wide receiver, Aundrae Allison, who caught 10 passes for 164 yards, mostly off of McCormick. McCormick appears to stay too high in his back pedal which makes him susceptible to double moves (e.g., starting on a post pattern and changing to a corner route). Allison is an extremely quick player and he turned McCormick around consistently throughout the game.

I�m sure Tech has studied the Duke-ECU tape closely, and will certainly try to exploit this match-up. Duke will try to provide help for McCormick, but if the safeties are concerned with the running game, then they may be a little slow in providing assistance. Josh Hyman (5-11 188, r-So.) is generally Tech�s best route runner and he would seem to present a mismatch for McCormick. Tech�s wide receivers should play physically with McCormick on running plays to make him more susceptible to the stop-and-go on play-action passes. Any of the Tech wide receivers should be able to exploit this match-up with Eddie Royal (#4, 5-10 174, So.) also presenting lots of problems for Duke�s cornerbacks.

Just as Tech coaches will have analyzed the Duke-East Carolina game closely, the Duke coaches will watch the N.C. State game and see that Tech can be exploited in the short passing game. Luckily, Duke does not have any player with the talent of N.C. State�s Tramain Hall, but they do have a pair of quality tight ends that could be used effectively on underneath routes.

Ben Patrick (6-4 270, r-Jr.) is probably Duke�s best all-around offensive player, earning honorable mention All-ACC honors last year. He is a physical player with decent mobility and excellent hands. Duke often uses two-tight end sets with Andy Roland (#89, 6-4 235, Sr.) often seeing the field in an H-Back role. Both of these tight ends have extensive experience and can present some problems in the passing game. Duke will use their tight ends out of various formations, so Tech must recognize these sets and position the defense appropriately.

Aaron Rouse (6-4 221, r-Jr.) will once again be tested by Duke, as will linebackers Xavier Adibi (#11, 6-2 224, r-So.) and Vince Hall (#9, 6-0 236, r-So.), on underneath crossing routes. While Rouse made some huge plays in the N.C. State game, he was also out of position at times, and Duke will likely try to exploit his �over-aggressiveness.� Rouse, Adibi, and Hall need to stay disciplined in their pass coverage assignments and recognize the routes more quickly in this game. Duke�s only chance at consistently moving the ball will be in the short passing game, and if Tech can take that away, the Blue Devils have little chance to win.

East Carolina�s defensive ends presented a problem for Duke�s offensive line in the game last week, so you know that Tech�s edge rushers will be bringing the heat. Duke�s quarterback, Mike Schneider (#7, 6-2 215, r-Jr.) is experienced and generally a solid performer given time, but ECU seldom gave him time to throw. Duke actually seemed to move the ball better with Curt Dukes (#12, 6-1 225, r-Jr.) at the helm, but he is primarily a runner. While his speed and power outside were effective against ECU, Dukes will not have as much success against Tech and his limitations throwing the ball will likely mean that Schneider sees the majority of action. However, Schneider will need to release the ball more quickly given the pressure that he will surely face from Tech�s defensive front.

Duke�s right tackle, Demetrius Warrick (6-7 300, r-Sr.), was converted from defensive tackle last spring and, while he possesses the physical attributes to play offensive tackle, he is still learning to play the position. Against East Carolina, he was aggressive blocking on running plays, showing good mobility and generally being effective despite the lack of technique. However, he is still a �work in progress� on pass protection. He uses his hands fairly well, but his footwork needs improvement if he expects to handle the speed rush from Chris Ellis (6-4 255, r-So.) and Noland Burchette (#96, 6-2 252, r-Jr.). Ellis and Burchette should have big games against the inexperienced Warrick.

The left tackle for Duke, Lavdrim Bauta (#77, 6-5 280, r-Jr.) also struggled against the outside rush by ECU. He has played guard for most of his career and he did not appear to be comfortable with pass blocking techniques from tackle yet. The interior offensive line for Duke appears to be their strength with Tyler Krieg (#66, 6-4 300, r-Jr.) being their best lineman. His match-up with Jonathan Lewis (#56, 6-1 296, Sr.) should be the most competitive in the trenches.

TSL Pass Home