West Virginia defense stands out in victory
The West Virginia defense was stout against Marshall, giving up just 207 yards to the Thundering Herd. It's the second game in a row that WVU held an opponent to less than 250 yards of offense.
West Virginia was just the second team this season to hold Marshall running back Darius Marshall to under 100 yards. Marshall finished with 82 yards on 25 attempts. Coming into the game, Marshall was averaging 147 yards per game.
MU quarterback Brian Anderson completed less than 50 percent of his passes (17 of 35) for just 149 yards. He also threw two interceptions.
"Our defense kept us in the game," WVU coach Bill Stewart said. "We are very proud of them."
• West Virginia is now 9-0 all-time against Marshall.
• In the series, Marshall has only led going into the half once. That game, in 2006, West Virginia also came back to win.
• With 103 yards on the ground, Noel Devine moved into fifth place on the Mountaineers' all-time rushing list. He now has 2,650 yards in his career.
• The Mountaineers wore gold jerseys and white pants for the first time in program history. Stewart also wore his blue sweater vest for the third game in a row. Stewart is 3-0 when wearing the vest.
• Current Miami Dolphins and former WVU star quarterback Pat White was in attendance at Saturday's game. He got to see his brother, Coley, play in his first career game. Coley came in for Geno Smith in the fourth quarter. Coley did not throw a pass, but he rushed three times for seven yards.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.