Does anyone think we are prepared enough for big games or bowl games? Seems like we either get blown out or fall short at the end. Is the effort there? Is it because of lack of recruiting over the last few yrs or has beamer got too comfortable? is it coaching? I just wanna find the root of the problem and fix it. I wanna see the players and the program succeed. I am by no means attacking beamer, I just want to know other peoples opinions
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
That's what happens when you play good teams. They have a good chance to beat you. This year was a perfect storm of injuries, lack of talent, turnover and a very talented opposing QB perfectly equipped to beat Foster. Sometimes the ball doesn't bounce your way. Deal with it, learn from it, move on. Beamer's the guy to lead the program for the foreseeable future.
We do struggle against dual threats for sure. And Ucla is a very talented football program. It just seems like every big bowl game we are getting destroyed. Ill be honest I didn't expect to win today regardless, but I also wasn't expecting a blowout. Just made me wonder why
Look at the injury report. 2 All-American CBs, starting TE (probably our best offensive player), starting RB, backup TE, starting QB (2 picks that result in touchdowns = good way to get blown out). We were at a talent disadvantage going in. Throw in injuries and poor tackling, top the whole thing with a couple turnovers, and you've got a blowout.
Im definitely looking forward to the offensive talent we have coming in.
100% in agreement...there is no shame in talking about the injury impact in this one; we had more than just a few of our star players out.
Nearly all would be a better description.
The guys left standing at the end of the game were Gayle, Maddy, Edwards, Fuller#4 and Brandon F.
For impact, you think if Fuller#3 was on the field their QB would have rushed for so many yards? No way. Mark effing May would be crowing about the All American CB instead of making the error of thinking VT is in decline instead of resurgence.
There was lots of effort and flashes of things to come (I really like the big on effort guys like Rogers).
But you can't put the ball in the hands of your playmakers if your playmakers are not on the field.
I'm mildly surprised that this is even possible, but the Kyle Fuller loss has seriously been underrated. I think Maryland and UCLA have different storylines with him in there as well.
There is a reason why he made all American despite missing the last 1/2 season.
One viewing of the first Q against GT and if one does not realize how special he is, then there is no mental hospital big enough to hold all those psych problems.
I've been meaning to look up the stats and post about this, but haven't had time. My theory is that because Kyle Fuller is such an asset in run support, Bud can blitz and play aggressively with significantly less risk of a giving up big rushing yards. By limiting the run, we force the team to pass. If our opponent must pass, They must deal with Kendall/Facyson. It's a lose/lose for the other team.
Each player on our defense is important, but Kyle Fuller is the most irreplaceable. Without Kyle Fuller, our defense is good. With Kyle Fuller, we have a top 3 defense in the nation and a 2 loss team.
I had the same theory.
i wouldn't agree that we always get blown out in bowl games. In recent memory we've beat 2 good teams (Cinci 08 and Louisville 05), beat 2 average teams (Tennessee 09, Rutgers 12) took 3 very good teams down to the wire even tho we should have won (Michigan 11, Kansas 07, Auburn 04...only bowl blowouts in recent memory are Stanford 10 and UCLA 13
The problem is that we're 0-3 in 'down to the wire games'. There was a clear difference in (on the field) talent against Stanford/UCLA. That was understandable. The close games hurt the most.
How do you think Stanford and Bama felt after their respective BCS bowl games? Even the elite teams aren't immune to heartbreak.
Stanford probably felt really sore, that game was physical. I think that Alabama thought 1) we should be in the title game 2) We are the better team, we will put it out.
But that OU Qb kept making plays. That was fun to watch.
Well, we're 1-3 if you count Rutgers but point taken.
Also...I know a lot of people write off Cincinnati as somehow "not a true big win" or "not a true bcs win"...but just ask 2012 Florida or 2013 Baylor who lost to Louisville and ucf respectively who are also from the big east and were both ranked #21 while Cincinnati was ranked #10 I think...and I think it becomes pretty clear that these games are not gimmes and do count.
Couldn't agree more.
If you look at Rivals data the past five years for UCLA, you can see they've recruited a lot better than we have. Their coach is young and aggressive. They were far better prepared, but they had the talent edge going in. Think about how many Bruins you saw on both sides of the ball who were better than our best.
"We" can't find "the root of the problem and fix it." All we can do is hope that the coaching changes we've made will improve recruiting and performance.
One school recruits in the richest football talent heavy state in one of the largest cities in the country as a backdrop with a school rich in national championships in all sports. The other recruits to Blacksburg, Va and has put the tiny town on the map. Switch Frank and Mora and you could argue that UCLA would be much better and VT would cease to exist.
this times 1000
Well said. Great Point. VT football will rise again.
I think some of it has to do with how we prepare for bowl games. The execution and fundamentals dropped off, even from players who normally execute at a higher level during the regular season.
We tend to recruit talent at around 30th in the nation on average. It should be noted that these are both offensive and defensive players, but I refuse to believe that we are recruiting worse offensive players than a UTEP or New Mexico. We may very well be recruiting an 80th ranked offense, but certainly not a 118th ranked offense. So, I too am puzzled by just how bad the offense's output is.
This question has been on my mind for a few years, too. I think it comes down to a few things, and I think the magnitude of their effect is in this order:
1) Hokie fans travel well. "Wait, what?," you say? "This is a reason we don't play well in bowls?" Yup, and here's why: VT fans travel, therefore we are an attractive bowl team to select, therefore we get a 'higher' bowl game, therefore we get a better opponent. So I think the fact that we are an attractive team for a bowl to select due to our fan following and coach gets us a better bowl than we sometimes deserve and we end up playing a team that is probably a step above us. I think this happens on a fairly regular basis. That brand recognition will really get after ya.
2) We tend not to win big games. There must be something going on here, because, as we always hear, we have a very poor record against very good teams. "Wait," you might say, "but everyone has a bad record against good teams." You're right, but most teams that have been as good as us also generally have a few wins against equal or higher caliber teams, or at least a few more than we do. Arizona beats more good teams than we do.
3) I gotta think at this point that we treat the bowl like a holiday/vacation. I know Beamer has said that he has tried to turn bowl games into a business trip, but I still feel like it's a bit of time off for everyone. I have no evidence to support this statement, just gut feel. Can't blame them, though, I wouldn't want to spend my xmas break between semesters on business if I were still in college.
Those are my thoughts.
Losing bowl games is disappointing, but if its to better teams in better bowls than its a overall WIN for the program. Bowls that come to mind: Cal, Stanford, UCLA, Mich. and others... recruits want to play in big bowls, as long as the opportunity is there we should NEVER shy away from the bigger games just to get a bowl win against a lesser opponent. 'GO BIG!!' - Frank's M.O. for decades. Happy New Year!
Bowl games are a reward for a good season and they are sacrificing their holidays ina way for the bowl. I'm OK with however they approach it. Though, I would think they are focused on winning - athletes don't like losing!
case in point-
on a 3rd and forever play late in the 4th Qtr- B. Facyson's receiver caught a pass and got the 1st. The game was well out of reach. Brandon went down to the turf after the play- he looked hurt. I soon realized he was simply disgusted that they got the first down. He wanted to make the play when it really didn't matter all that much. He showed on that play how much of a competitor he is even when it doesn't make a huge difference in the outcome.
As for point #3 - I think it depends on the year. I think , THIS YEAR, they used the practices for guys who'll be here next year and not so much for the starters. Other years, it has been all business. We tend not to win either way, though most games are competitive.
Like I said on an earlier thread it's up to the powers that be to fix the shit mess and teach and drill basic fundamentals of football. My initial inclination is yes Beamer is comfortable. However, he did demote/replace Stiney and Newsome with Loeffler and Grimes. Beamer has never had a killer instinct. I think that Bud Foster will most likely get us over the hump for that MNC or, at the very least, improve our record against programs that we have the ability to defeat but end up losing to. I think Foster will also fix that nagging playing down to the level and exorcise it once and for all.
Not knocking Beamer overall for what he's done for our program, but over the last dozen years or more it has looked like Beamer hasn't prepared enough for bowl games. His record overall now is 9-13. Granted 21 straight is better than all but one program, so that's the up side to it. But we always seem to lose one or two and then win one. Usually it's not a BCS bowl game that we win as well. We do play higher ranked/skilled teams though. But that also being said perhaps they should be more prepared by now. I wasn't expecting a whole lot for this one though and losing Logan was big. Just hate to see us break down as much as we did today. Looking forward to see how the offense matures over the next few years with the newer classes.
I'm not entirely certain that's all on Beamer, though. I can think of more than a few bowl games we lost because of bad plays by one or two people. Georgia comes to mind...we were winning that game, and 4 turnovers by our QB within 20 yards of the endzone we were defending turned that game around.
I'm reminded even of the NC game against FSU. We were winning that game, lost 3 key defenders to injury and a key offensive player, and things turned around.
The past couple of years have seemed a little lackadaisical, though. Not sure what's going on...but luck is a bitch sometimes. Sometimes everything goes your way. Sometimes everything goes against you. We seem to be one of those "everything goes against you" teams. Save one muffed punt return, we didn't have anything go right for us in that game. I mean, how do you throw a 15 yard unnecessary roughness flag for that hit, and then not call it targeting? "It was a clean hit" Well, if it's a clean hit, how's it unnecessary roughness?
Anyway, I digress. I'd love to actually start winning our bowl games more often than not, but luck never seems to extend us the courtesy.
Tech has to MAKE their own luck. But they have REALLY got to turn this shit around and win these fucking games.
How many other teams have 9 bowl wins in the past 21 years?
Bowl wins since 1992:
Florida State - 14
Georgia - 13
Florida -12
Alabama - 11
USC(w) - 11
Texas - 11
Nebraska - 11
Penn State - 11
Utah - 11 (an impressive 10-1 since 1999)
Auburn - 10
Michigan - 10*
Boston College - 10 (including an impressive 8-bowl win streak from '00-'07, lost last 4 though)
Texas Tech - 10
Wisconsin - 10
Boise State - 9
Oklahoma - 9
LSU - 9
Ohio State - 9
Syracuse - 9
TCU - 9
Oregon - 9
Interesting tidbit: FAU (2), Louisiana - Lafayette (2), Idaho (2) and Eastern Michigan (1) are the only teams with a 1.000 bowl winning percentage.
Worth mentioning: From 1994-2006, the all-powerful Notre Dame had a 9 game bowl LOSING streak. Ouch.
Also worth mentioning: UVA has won a TOTAL of 7 bowl games and own a delicious record of 7-11.
*Let's face it, it's really 9.
So there ya have it, out of the 126 FBS teams, all of 21 have as many or more bowl wins as VT. You may notice that the majority of said teams are the big boys with all the financial/recruiting/other advantages that have been discussed. Not bad company to keep.
*EDIT* Just for funsies, had the Sugar bowl gone the other way, the number of teams with # bowl wins >= VT's drops to 13.
*EDIT* UNLV has been removed from the ranks of the bowl unbeatens. Sad day for the rebels.
UNLV lost this week
Alas, my info was 2 days behind.
Zumwalt.
And...I used to think we'd keep it close against a Texas A&M or FSU (closer than most), but towards the end of this game I saw a few things. Hundley lulled us to sleep and then started throwing it up deep towards the end, with success. The one touchdown they threw on every down, and then ran it in on the last play basically untouched. Our kids were focused on the game plan (stop the run, take some short passes if necessary), but got blinders on. Maybe youth, maybe our tactic was used to their advantage, etc. I don't know. Some things to work on before the next big game.
"Those West Coast teams, they'll get after ya!"
Seriously, if ever Hokie Football had an Achilles Heel, it's been playing those teams.
I think A&M with Manziel would be a disaster for us. The biggest problem we've had all year has been QBs who can make plays when the called play breaks down, and Manziel is the best in the NCAA at that. Don't forget, though, this happens to everyone. We had Vick, who carried us to a MNC game with that skill. Vince Young did it for Texas. Hundley is great at it for UCLA, Mariotta is great at it for Oregon, Winston can do it, Braxton Miller can do it, Nick Marshall can do it... looking across the NCAA landscape, lots of the best teams out there have a QB that can do this. Hell, Logan can do this, too.
I think Logan could have taken us, but the lack of skill positions around him made us one dimensional and easy to stop. We have a lot of heart though...
Our tackling wasn't that clean, but let's not forget that this was a good game until LT3 got knocked out by dirty hits McGee. I think once the team knew LT3 was out and Leal was trying to be Superman the wheels came off. LT3 was having a pretty good game to that point and had he stayed in the score would've closer.
love it
Logan was 3/11 passing for 46 yards at that point. He was not having a good game except for one monster run. That was not how he wanted to end his career at Tech.
Sad but true.
He was sharp running beyond that one run; he was averaging about 12 yds on his other runs. Those passing stats obviously aren't great, but the offense was doing ok and they were still very much in the game. Hundley's passing stats weren't much better at that point in the game either.
Tough to argue with the facts. We have as many BCS bowl wins as UCF and still have fewer than Boise State. We have missed chances to get big wins (Sugar Bowls against Michigan and Auburn both 3 point losses), missed chances to get big wins we should have had (Orange Bowl, Kansas, REALLY Kansas!?!?). And we don't close out games we dominated (Peach Bowl in 06, 21-3 lead at the half). There have been near misses, blowouts, and close calls. But VT is not a great team, we are a good team, but not a great team. If you want to look at the two biggest wins in the program over the last 10 years, we have a top 2 win against a conference opponent (one that was coming off a national title, but still a CONFERENCE opponent we play every year) and then a BCS win over a tepid Cinci team. Thats it and thats not much. We do carry a stigma with our horrendoes record in bowl games and against top 5 teams and there is really no defending that. Just be happy that we are trying to scratch and claw our way through a very competative sporting landscape.
But we also have (BCS Bowl Victories) > = (BCS Bowl Victories by about 110 other FBS programs combined).
I think your point is fair, but what can I say, glass half full.
True. But for those that think VT is in the national conversation of football powers, I'd say we are more a regional power with a well run program; hardly knocking on the door of national discussion
Ahhhh while not the BCS we had a 28-10 win over Texas in the Sugar Bowl. We have beaten Auburn, but some time ago. Beat Texas A&M in a hurricane. Miami ... yes many times. LSU win in Lane Stadium, WVU when they were highly ranked several times. We beat Bama in the Music City Bowl before they were great. Clemson when they were ranked in the top 10 and we were down, Clemson in the Gator Bowl. Our team has just as many wins against quality teams as they have lost to quality teams. I don't county Michigan as a loss in the Sugar Bowl, the catch in the end zone was a touchdown. Then again, Michigan would have gone for it on 4th down, might have made it, scored a touchdown, and we lose in the next overtime. BTW, the Michigan QB was a dual threat and Foster shut him down.
Foster had Kyle and Ton on that game, right?
No. He did have Granpappy Jebediah Fuller and Abraham Exhume (this was before the family changed their name following the war).
Look guys I'm going to say this and stand by my opinion boldly. I'm a fan of the game first then a Hokie fan. I'm not a delusional fan and will never be. A loss is a loss I said it once before I don't believe in moral victories or feel goods. I've seen it before where others say well we had a lot of injuries and yes that is VERY true. In my book we still had to play the game with or without them hurt players don't stop the game.
How long have we known that Malleck was going to be out? I understand we had our two best db's on the team out, but how long have they been out? Just about the whole season right for Exum and half of it for Kyle. It was a tough break, but injuries happen all the time and its apart of the game, but I refuse to listen to others say well we loss, because we had too many players hurt that's an a excuse whether you want to admit it or not that's what it is! I don't want to hear excuses we got beat bad whether its on the offense or defense I don't care who anyone wants to blame it on individually. Its a team sport has always been and will always be! We came into this game unprepared and have been for the past few years before the coaching changes. I know this is harsh and it may make some mad and that's not my intentions I'm tired of everyone blaming it on recruiting and lack of offensive talent. If that's the case then why was our defense scored on the way it was during the game? Haven't we recruited better talent than offense...oooh but wait it goes back to the injuries and every other excuse in the world. I don't want to hear Beamer didn't miss that tackle or drop that ball because coaches are fired every day for the players performance...That's just the way the game is. I'm not blaming it on Beamer, but to some degree if you change all of the pieces around the HC and nothing changes then what? I'm not at all mad at the new coaches or Beamer both of them for that matter. This is to delusional fans all I ask is if your a fan of football be fans of football before being fans of VT. Because I will call it how I see it and its my opinion I respect others on here and will never attack or go after anyone on here. This isn't a rant after any particular fan here. I'm just saying how I've felt about this past game and past 5 years I am just tired of excuses for not playing up to standards that we want to see from VT year in and year out. And once again this is not about the new coaches that was or has been hired. I'm not displeased with VT so please if this post sets people the wrong way I apologize, but that's not my intentions but please don't say something like you should stop watching VT play, when I've been following this program since I was a 8 year old.
Sorry Hokies If anyone is offended I had to say this...Whether you agree or not with what I just said that's fine but you may not like me after saying this but just respect the way I feel.
GO HOKIES can't wait till spring.
So why does a MAC team lose to an SEC team? My money is on the difference in overall talent level. Going into this game, we were at a talent disadvantage. That fact was compounded by injuries to key players. This is a more talented team with Malleck, RVD, Thomas, Fuller, Exum, Edmunds and Cline on the field than it is with them on the sideline. I'm not saying we surely would have won with those guys playing, but you can't deny that their losses didn't help. This isn't a PS3 game. You can't just plug the next guy in and do everything you normally do and get about the same result. The starters are the starters for a reason and their loss hurts. We're all looking forward to next season with more overall talent in the program and (hopefully, knock on wood) a healthier team.
Up fvcking vote this because it is solid.
Being deep at every position is critical for a team to go the distance.
I think the HOKIES have lost around 20 starters (injury/other) since this time last year.
TWENTY. Personnel is key
Once again...Your speaking to me as if I don't know the game of football sir didn't we know that list before we play the game? This goes back to what I'm saying every year its always an excuse. There's no excuse for losing besides calling it what it is....a loss. If we would have beaten UCLA this wouldn't be a issue with injuries. In fact it wouldn't be a issue at all. Teams have great players get hurt every year and those players step up injuries are going to happen its apart of the game, but I won't use it as an excuse to say its holding this team back...And PS3 game lol sir....smh please stop with all of the analogies...lol that was good though I must admit!
I would disagree with your point. Look at Georgia they had a sick team, maybe even SEC NC team and the injury bug started to hit and they couldn't get healthy from then on. Its not like it was 1-2 guys going down. but more like 6-7 and in different games. Kyle, Exum, Malleck, Cline, Logan, Edmunds, Wang, and many more. You can't expect to recruit 3-4 starting quality players in every position to win. So yeah injuries definitely hurt this team, it would have been a different outcome for sure. Practice is Practice and game speed is much more different than the speed at practice no matter how much you try to emulate it.
You do realize that there's a track record of VT not performing well against top ranked teams? This isn't my opinion its fact... We won with what we've had before we got top ranked talent so why is this any different? We recruit better than Duke but yet they beat us so let me guess they have better players to fit there system is the reason why we loss...? Then when our team plays bad we say its because we have to many injuries to overcome. Like there's no other team in the country that had injured players that are valuable to there team. I mean UGA had a bad year with injuries, but judging by there score to there Bowl game they seemed to be closer than ours were at the end, but we'll say it's because the team we played was better than there's. Next we'll say that they were bad matchups...smh Bottom line is this coaches get fired everyday because there players aren't performing good enough or star players were injured... Look for me I'd rather people keep it real than sit here and use excuses. We're just not playing good as team right now that goes for defense and Offense i'm not so much looking into stats but consistency our defense hasn't been consistent either although it's been more consistent than our offense which was expected and held true for the most part. You can't go from playing elite one week and struggling against BC one week . To me besides recruiting that's what separates great teams from average it's consistency.
This is and will be the last I'm mentioning this topic but it is what is...
Maryland had 3 times the injuries we did. Consistency is a problem.
Maryland also dropped all kinds of games while they were dealing with those injuries. They got a couple people back and did a decent job toward the end of the year. We lost people at the end of the year when it hurts the most.
So its understandable that we lost to Maryland...? Consistency is a problem.
I'm just wondering how you pulled out the "it's understandable we lost to Maryland" from what I said. Nice extrapolation from my comment. /sarcastica
My comment was more on the fact that Maryland was lighting people up at the beginning of the year. If they stayed healthy and didn't have the injuries they had, they were the shockers of the ACC. They got hit with injuries and lost a lot of games.
Even many other teams that are doing well, if they get hit by the injury bug, they stop winning games, they aren't able to build consistency. I'm not labeling it as an excuse, or a "it's understandable we lost". I'm labeling it as "shit happens" and injuries cause inconsistency. There's no offense or defense in college or the pro's that's simply "plug and play", particularly when that offense or defense relies on a couple players as the keystone to the offense. Those players go out, and it takes a bit to find rhythm again.
most of our recruits are better than dukes players, even our 2nd stringers. But yet they play at a much higher level because they have an unbelievable coach. I understand your reasoning here and I agree with you for the most part im just asking that you look at it from other perspectives as well
I'd say the QB's were equal when we played them. And by equal I mean 4 picks worth.
When you say that we have better players I won't contest that. But that isn't the problem that we face. It has taken Duke 5 years under cutcliffe to get the correct players to fit his system and coach them in the system to get the results they had on the field this year. Our previous Offensive coaching staff didn't have any kind of coherent plan for recruiting. We didn't get OLs or WRs or QBs. We got a bunch of TEs and Athletes and converted them into OLs WRs and QBs. That is not a recruiting recipe for success.
We need to focus on getting the 'best fit' players instead of just 'raw talent' players. That is what David Cutcliffe has done at Duke. We also need to coach the players into the system. That doesn't happen over night. It doesn't happen in a season. It takes time. Duke has been slowly and progressively improving. They didn't just flip a switch this past off season and turn into a formidable opponent. It has taken half a decade of recruiting certain types of players for certain positions and then coaching them into a system for more than 1 season. We'll get there. Just be patient.
ill buy that for 500 alex lol
TSL had a good article previewing that game and surprisingly, Duke actually had a talent advantage, just going off of NFL draft projections (not ideal, but still a decent indication of talent). OL and WR were better across the board. Obviously, we had a defensive advantage, but the talent level at Duke is nothing to scoff at. They had the players to win 10 games this year, that was no fluke or "miracle" coaching.
Go back and look at their recruiting ranks for those players. We're the rankings off for those players coming out of high school? Maybe. Were they coached up to play to that level? Probably. We use to do the same. The guy steering the ship sets the direction.
Most of dukes players were 2 and 3 stars coming out of highschool. Crowder is prolly dukes best player and he was a middle of the road 3 star. They just got coached up really well. And have developed nicely
Don't forget it's not just when they are out for the whole game, it's when they need a break.
Wonder why we fade in the 4th Q?
Depth. That's part and parcel with recruiting.
These young guys spell the seniors to keep the glucose available at the end of the game.
Wow TechHokie13 thanks, i just had an Ahhhh Haaa moment ... the problem with a lot of the young studs on this web site who complain the most that we are not 13-0 and playing in the title games is their concept of reality is warped by playing on their PS3 or so ... Get out there and play a game if you think it is so easy to achieve a title game season. Get your bell rung a few times, cut right when you should have cut left. Leave the game console at home for a change. Go get a taste of the real world
This is funny to me that you've said this please don't assume that because I'm blogging here that I've never played college football before. I'm 26 years old and I've played college football before. Please please don't assume that just because we're young that we don't know what we're talking about... There's some people on here that I think are very knowledgeable about the game of football. But I can assure you what some of us are saying isn't far off....smh old timers! Have a seat lol jk
I echo your sentiment.
Believe me, I understand. I'm just sayin, even as a guy who played football in high school and rugby in college (no, I'm not 6'2" a cut 190 and run a 4.5 40. Why do you ask?), it's easy to oversimplify things a bit and wonder why things do/don't happen a certain way. It's easy to want to generalize and even to look around at other successful programs (Auburn, Bama, UC,LA, etc) and wonder why we can't have the same. My point is that we shouldn't get caught up in all that and appreciate what we've got, which is pretty darn good. Temper expectations to reality (we don't have a huge fanbase or ridiculous financial resources or outstanding athletic facilities, for starters), savor each and every win, and keep the faith that eventually, things will click and it'll be our time.
I understand where you are coming from, but last yr and this yr was hard to watch all around. I don't mind losing if were playing good. I hate losing and looking like a peewee team
Once again, "only" winning 7-8 games during a "down" year isn't bad at all. I hate losing as much as the next guy, and yes, sometimes I let football scores influence my emotional well-being. Still, things could have been much, MUCH worse the last couple years. Ask UVA. Happily, unlike for our Neighbors to the North, things legitimately appear to be looking up for VT. Let's hope for a good spring to get us started in 2014.
Id be on suicide watch if we was close to resembling LOLUVA haha. I do agree that in a down yr 8-5 is not shabby at all
Yes, and case in point ... Mark May predicts last night Bama 45 OK 10 for the Sugar Bowl. Things didn't turn out the way Bama expected, even with all those 5-star players. For those who did see the score OK 45 Bama 31
That may be true Hokiefan4life but what do you know about running an organization? Hiring and firing people? Getting people motivated, knowing when to make changes and knowing when to stay the course. And, at what level did you play football? So playing football makes you and the other ding-a-lings experts? How much coaching have you done? Athletic Director?
logan did have more than 7 completions tho lol