We saw him dressed and on the sideline, he was pumping up the other players and I'm assuming doling out advice. Does anyone know if he didn't play due to the issues stemming from last week's game or something new?
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
As far as we know, he was cleared to play. So, BB was selected to start the game and I never felt a time that I thought it would be a good time to give Hooker a shot. I hope he is ok, but I have to wonder if we have assumed the gap between Hooker and Burmeister was larger than what is true. Neither have a great arm, but BB extended some plays last night that Hooker wouldn't have.
BB played great. I am guessing we would have seen him more if he wasn't injured for a few weeks there in the middle of the season.
I agree with this. We saw a side of BB that didn't show before which was scrambling to get off a clutch pass. BB seems good with decision making and has good athleticism, he just very clearly lacks the arm strength and zip that you generally need from a P5 QB in the passing game.
No inside info on the question. But totally understandable that BB started, and based on his performance, totally understandable that he played the whole game. I'm a supporter of HH, and have to give CJF credit for his QB decisions vs UVA.
Have to agree...yesterday was the first time in a while that Fuente didn't give us something to complain about. A complete team performance it was great to see...and against the Hoos no less. Good stuff.
I complained about that reverse that went backwards, it wasn't a good time, and made zero sense.
Hahaha, this is where coaches/play callers just can't win. Every time a play like that works out everybody praises the players. Every play that doesn't, it's always, "that was such a horrible call, these coaches are holding us back!!"
What if it was a good call, but UVA just happened to be lined up in the right defense to defend it? Heck, That double reverse play usually works for big gains.
You haven't watched much VT football this year. We've run that cutesy double reverse multiple times this year....it hasn't worked once.
It was an awful playcall at an awful time and on the edge of FG range.
Double reverses work when the team you're playing isn't expecting them. When you run them every single week out of the same formation, you are either a bad or a lazy playcaller.
I'm not against the double reverse but if you're straight up beating them, which VT was at the time then why resort to a play that puts you 6+ yards behind the line of scrimmage. Line up and run the ball down their throats some more.
And if it works it just looks like you're running up the score instead of just straight old fashion ass beating. It wasnt right for the place it happen i the game it happened.
I like how the offense punted once while the game was competitive and people are complaining like the offense was a problem.
That's my take as well.
I am not trying to complain about the offense, just one call that seems to happen all the time at VT. This happened under Loeffler even more so. If you have an oline winning battles and running at almost 6 ypc why get cute. Just dominate. Overall Corn called a great game that the players were able to execute. We probably could have scored more if we wanted to, but up three scores, shortening the game more sense even if that limited what wa called.
Having a tight end return punts is a huge complaint I have. Why the hell is he out there? There's 98 receivers, running backs and corners on the team. Hard to believe Mitchell is the best one at this point in the season and if that's the case, that's something to complain about. We are so lucky the muffed punt didn't bite us in the ass.
In previous games, specifically against Liberty and Miami, the return specialist was a WR and he muffed the punts which led to TDs for the bad guys. So Mitchell apparently was our best option.
Our punts should be returned by Blackshear, he's our slash guy and a solid athletically
I think we tried that. He let all of the punts land in front of him.
So fumbling/turnover is better than letting it land in front of you...not so sure about that coach.
Didn't say that. The choice is not fumble or not field the punt. The preferred option is to catch the ball; so the ball does not roll 20 yards on the ground. Just said Blackshear was not the answer because he could not catch the ball in the air. If you're not going to catch the ball, put everyone on the line and try for the block.
Sorry. Wasn't accusing you of saying it. Just face palming that the coaches would decide fumbles over letting it bounce.
Then that's a massive problem that lies solely on this coaching staff. We recruit a ton of receivers and none of them can catch? Our identity used to be Beamerball, scoring on special teams. Now we have to put a tight end back there, with no threat to run it back and we just hope he doesn't muff it and shit the bed. The coaching staff should take one of those scholarships and give it to a game-breaker who relishes punt returning and excels at it. Give your team the best chance to win, not hamstring them.
Agreed - find a fast player - teach him how to field a punt and catch the ball. Shouldn't be that hard. You have months and months to train a couple of kids to catch the dang ball and run it back when there's some light. If Mitchell is the best option...we need to coach up another player to learn how to return punts.
That's the perfect thing to do during spring ball. . .
wouldn't you think we'd be trying to get at least 3 guys doing it every spring though? And guys from different classes? This is a classic example of "don't put all your eggs in one basket"
blaming not being able to find a punt returner on not having spring practice is ignoring the bigger issue. We should have guys out there practicing every year. And they shouldn't all be seniors. There should be AT LEAST one or two players on the team who have dedicated significant time to this before this season.
You also need to practice it, too. Even if you've done it before. Everyone seems to want to dismiss the lack or reps for these things. This isn't Madden, where you just put the guy in and he does it.
Tayvion Robinson returned punts last year - why was he ineffective this year?
is there no time for that during regular practice? Are the players not allowed to devote extra time to practicing things themselves without the coaches present?
I just think it's strange to blame COVID for VT having so much trouble finding a punt returner. I haven't watched other teams closely this year...is punt returning an issue that lots of teams are having?
I might add that finding a punt returner is not a struggle that is unique to this year. So, the lack of spring ball is no excuse. This goes all the way back to a few years ago when we had Hazelton back there with a pulled hamstring. He was just fair-catching everything so that we didn't lose additional yardage on the roll. The fact that we have had multiple seasons where we cannot find one skill player who knows how to reliably field and return punts is squarely on the coaching staff. It is totally embarrassing.
This is not justify keep Fuente or excuse playcalling, clock management or anything else, but it seems that its being glossed over.
There probably isn't a lot of extra time to devote during regular practices for this. Practice time is limited (20 hrs per week, I think). I am not sure what restrictions were in place during the season for the players to spend time outside of official practice on this stuff. Normally, the time that is expended on their own is during the offseason and summer, but the players weren't on campus then.
It seems to me that there is a complete lack of understanding by some people of the impact no spring or summer ball had on our team with some of the uncommon circumstances we had this year. We had players (BB and his receivers, Hoffman, Blackshear and Herbert) in major roles who did not get to rep with the 1's until fall camp (and that was limited due to injuries and quarantines). We had a new DC with new DL coaches who were implementing a new system - which normally happens in spring ball. The only reps they got were in fall camp. We had a major shuffle in the secondary due to injuries and an opt-out that put players who needed those Spring and Summer reps to be game ready in addition to learning a new system.
Fuente post game: "I felt like he gave us the best chance to win under the circumstances"
he also nodded when media was asking if he had more confidence with BB throughout the week.
We finally let BB throw more than he ran, and we gave the ball to our best runner more than we had QB draws.
33 points, converting 3rd downs and only one turnover was the result.
27 of those in the first half. Then the 2nd half shenanigans.
I'm sure this has been mentioned before, but the second half looked like classic Frank "turtle up" offense and rely on the defense to hold them - which they did in this case. It was almost refreshing to see it...almost. I'm very glad the D held up, but I'm certainly not to the point where I would start executing that philosophy in the 3rd quarter.
Part of it is that the BB run offense isn't designed to sling it around the yard; it's all run plays and short passes. I don't even think we were trying to score so quickly at the end of the half, UVA's defense just missed tackles twice in a row that went for long TD plays.
We weren't. Fu called them "bonus points" on the post game radio with Laze and basically outlined how you play conservatively there unless you get some quick chunks...unless you have the '85 Bears defense or Lawrence Taylor on D.
that comment alone should be grounds to fire with cause.... we have been running out the clock into half for 5 years
And that's his philosophy. You don't agree with it (and that's fine), but that's how he manages the game.
In Fuente's defense, the statement of "those are what we consider bonus points" was also followed up with a statement saying: "usually in that situation we're just looking at getting into field goal range"
So he was in fact looking to score before the half, but was only expecting 3 points instead of 7. Therefore the "bonus points" he is referring to is 4.
Hooker was cleared, Burmeister was chosen as the starter after his performance versus Clemson, pre injury.
Thought BB played his best game of the year by far yesterday.
not just that, but he graded out the best of any QB in week 15.
inb4 the comments about fuente not knowing what PFF is
In my opinion. I dont feel like Hooker was 100% the entire year.
I believe he was still struggling with that shoulder issue. Possibly additional injuries as well. My opinion...no sauces
Wonder if it had anything to do with that, "Go back out there or you'll never see the field again" comment.
Wut
That was the rumor that sent Hooker back onto the field against Clemson where he fumbled for a second time.
Just feel something is not right with Hooker medically, he doesn't seem the same. Hopefully the off-season helps him to get through whatever it is.
I think you misspelled transfer portal...
Flyguy Im with you on Mitchell! I'm also sick of this QB yo-yo stuff. That's all on fu. FU needs to dooo.
Buy him out!
That's the problem, he's doo'd too many times
BB looked great against UVA, missing their best player....teams with good defenses will just sit on everything in a 10 yard box, take him out of the game.
If we have WRs that can win on the outside, he can throw fades.....but realistically we need a QB who forces the D to defend more of the field.
I'd be hesitant on saying he can throw fades. He has missed on them so far.
Yea he had Mitchell in a very favorable matchup in the endzone and he sailed it way out of bounds. All he has to do is throw it in the field of play and it is very likely a TD.