Saturday's game against Georgia Tech was one heck of a missed opportunity for this young Hokies squad. Despite putting up huge offensive numbers in the passing game, controlling the Yellow Jacket's flexbone option offense for long stretches, a sloppy performance that featured numerous breakdowns in terms of executing individual assignments, coupled with some inopportune play-calling at critical moments and three brutal interceptions by Michael Brewer, snatched victory from the jaws of defeat. In the midst of all the breakdowns, there were som some terrific performances. Corey Marshall was fantastic on the inside for the Hokies, and Dadi Nicolas played a terrific game after some breakdowns on the opening drive. The offensive line protected Brewer better and started to get some movement for Shai McKenzie, who was having a breakout game. Cam Phillips and Isaiah Ford continue to develop, and the Hokies got contributions from Demitri Knowles and Kalvin Cline. Take away a handful of throws from Brewer, and he had a spectacular game. But, this team's margin for error is so small that they can not overcome critical mistakes and a lack of trust in their teammates to execute the game plan properly.
Defensive Breakdowns on Option Assignments
Stopping the option requires the same thing from all 11 defenders. Each player must honor and complete his assignment, win a one-on-one physical battle and trust his other 10 teammates to do their job. Early in the football game, some of the Hokies' stalwart defenders did not play solid assignment football.
On Georgia Tech's first offensive play the Yellow Jackets run a triple option to the right (top of the screen.) Kyshoen Jarrett jumps to the inside, taking the dive.
Dadi Nicolas also got sucked inside on the dive when he should be zoned in on the quarterback or the pitch (at least based on Jarrett taking dive). That means four defenders (Jarrett, Williams, the defensive tackle, and Dadi) are grabbing at the dive fake! Once Justin Thomas gets outside on Nicolas, Detrick Bonner finds himself on an island with the quarterback, the pitch man, and a lead blocker. Bonner's assignment on this play is the pitch and he doesn't have help outside, so he takes outside leverage on the blocker. This leaves a huge lane for Thomas until the inside pursuit of the defense (in this case, Donovan Riley, who is aligned as a field side safety to the bottom of the defensive formation) can make the tackle. Again, if Dadi doesn't chase the dive fake and lets Jarrett, Williams, and the defensive tackle take the dive, he is squarely in position to force a rushed pitch by Thomas.
Later in the same drive, the Yellow Jackets run the triple option at Nicolas again. But, this time Deon Clarke (who is aligned just behind and outside of Dadi) also jumps on the dive.
Thomas reads Clarke diving, and runs outside of his contain. Again, this leaves Riley all alone with the QB, the pitch man, and the lead blocker. The problem gets compounded when the Yellow Jacket wide receiver crack blocks inside on Riley, leaving Chuck Clark unblocked to take on three players. Clark falls down. Brewer may have had his Yakety Sax touchdown recovery, but this play really is a comedy of errors that all starts with Deon Clarke's assignment breakdown.
However, the game plan was solid when executed properly. Here, Clarke is again stacked on Dadi's outside shoulder. Georgia Tech again runs triple option to the boundary.
Dadi takes the dive. This time, Clarke takes the quarterback and forces the pitch. Chase Williams is clean and scrapes to trip up the dive, and even if he misses, both Bonner and Riley are there for support. When everyone completes their assignment, Georgia Tech wasn't getting any yardage. The Hokies held on the drive by using a stunt to confuse Thomas, but again, it would not have worked without assignment discipline.
Foster sends a run blitz, with Clarke darting through the guard-tackle gap to take the dive. Riley crosses behind Clarke to take quarterback. Dadi Nicolas does a fantastic job of fading to the outside to keep quarterback contain and support against the pitch. Chuck Clark defeats the block of the A-Back. The key to the play is Nicolas. If he had crashed too quickly on the dive or the quarterback, Clark doesn't have the opportunity to shed his block and the pitch man likely gets the first down or scores. This completely goes against Dadi's instinct to chase the ball. He did a great job here.
Those assignment busts could have been compounded, but Georgia Tech didn't capitalize. Chase Williams (who played a whale of a game) over-scraped twice, leading to a long run by Laskey in the second quarter and a long run by Thomas in the third. Kendall Fuller tried to come up in run support instead of staying in man coverage when Thomas was showing pass on 4th-and-2 early in the second quarter. Only an inaccurate throw by Thomas prevented a touchdown. While the Hokies don't play this kind of system again, elements of option football are key components of North Carolina, Boston College, and Virginia's offensive systems.
Offensive Line Chemistry—Trusting Your Teammate to Execute
Trust in a teammate to complete an assignment doesn't just impact the defense. It impacts offensive line play, significantly. As of late, I've been bombarded with complaints about the offensive line. Some are warranted, but it appears to be more singular breakdowns and a lack of chemistry or "trust" in each other that is plaguing the front.
On this play, Trey Edmunds runs the ball on a sweep. The play is well blocked at the point of attack. Jonathan McLaughlin and Bucky Hodges seal the defensive end and tackle inside. Augie Conte and Caleb Farris pull and lead around the end. It looks like the Hokies have a big play in the making.
Conte pulls around the outside of Hodges block and seals the Yellow Jacket defensive back to the outside. Farris has the assignment of turning up inside the block and sealing the scraping linebacker inside. But, seeing Hodges start to lose a little bit of ground, Farris chips the defensive end engaged by Hodges. The linebacker scrapes free and makes the tackle on Edmunds. If Farris gets a piece of that linebacker, this may be a touchdown. Farris also can't see the running back, and doesn't know that Trey has made it to the edge. That lack of trust in Hodges making the block caused Farris to try and help versus complete his own assignment. That lack of trust sometimes has merit. Here is the exact same play, but this time, Hodges seals the end inside.
Farris executes his block on this play, but Hodges loses his seal on the end, and the end trips up Edmunds. It gets old to hear, but again, failure to execute one block results in a potential big play turning into a pedestrian 4-yard gain. Keep in mind, Hodges is the backup tight end, and has only played the position in a blocking role since the spring. It isn't surprising that he isn't a finished product blocking, but it isn't like the Georgia Tech defensive line was blowing up the offensive line every play. In fact, sometimes the design is part of a bigger package and the offensive line has nothing to do with the tackle.
This looks like a package play. Shai McKenzie gets the ball on a weak inside zone. It seems to be packaged with a quick bubble screen by the wide receiver at the top of the screen.
Note the safety to the top of the screen. He is supposed to support the corner against a screen, but at the snap, he is bolting in a direct line towards McKenzie. The corner is backpedaling at the snap. If Brewer pops up and flips the ball out to Byrn, it's a huge gain. Instead, Brewer hands the ball to McKenzie. Gibson does a good job of sealing the end outside. Teller does a terrific job of sealing the defensive tackle inside and driving him downfield (getting good push has been a problem with the starting group, even when they are solid on assignments.) Unfortunately, that safety is unaffected by the screen feint, and McKenzie can't make him miss or run through him in the hole. This is a well blocked play that looks bad because of the result.
Despite not dominating the line of scrimmage, the offense got whatever it wanted in the passing game time and again for the better part of three quarters. The line protected extremely well. Ford, Byrn, and Phillips got seperation and made plays down field, and Brewer made throws until the Hokies got into the red zone. In the red zone, Brewer rushed a throw to a wide open Ford on a slant to kill the first drive (resulted in a field goal). On the second drive, Brewer took a coverage sack instead of getting the ball out, and then on third-and-goal, Hodges was wide open down the seam, but wasn't looking for the football because he was a diversion route to pull the safety deep so Phillips could run a dig route. The Georgia Tech safety abandoned Hodges to cut off Phillips, and Hodges never turned his head around.
On the third drive, the Hokies finally started to get some movement up front. That push came on one of the most basic plays an offense can run: power. I have discussed the concept before. On the play side, the tight end lets the d-end get upfield to seal him outside. The front side linemen block down. The back side guard pulls around, and leads through the hole with the fullback. The tailback follows their blocks. Unlike zone blocking, there is a clear, defined location for where the ball needs to go and the back doesn't have the responsibility of reading zone blocks for a cut. Either the hole is there, or you improvise.
After a beautiful third and long conversion to Isaiah Ford on a dig route (that featured Marshawn Williams doing a wonderful job picking up the blitz), Williams was rewarded with two consecutive power plays. Here is the first.
Cline seals the end out. McLaughlin doubles the defensive tackle with Conte and then slides off to the linebacker. Rogers leads through the hole and chops down the blitzing safety. Wang pulls around and seals the linebacker to the inside (with help from Demitri Knowles, who crack blocks inside on the play.) Williams does the rest. This is terrific push up front, especially at the point of attack by McLaughlin.
Loeffler gets them lined right back up, but this time the power blocking gets adjusted because Georgia Tech aligns the defensive end inside of Cline and moves the linebacker up on Cline's outside shoulder. Cline blocks down, and Rogers seals out the edge defender.
Cline drives his man back into the endzone, and Wang kicks the linebacker to the outside. Williams isn't going to get a much easier touchdown. This is so well blocked, I wish Loeffler would utilize it more often.
Chasing Defeat
Despite some of the defensive breakdowns and the execution errors by the offense in the red zone, the Hokies dominated the first half (four drives, three scores) and most of the second half. Two small windows where the Hokies committed a series of critical errors at the end of the second quarter and the end of the game snatched defeat from the arms of victory.
The first series of breakdowns started after the Hokies forced a quick punt on the drive following Marshawn Williams' touchdown. Georgia Tech's confidence sagged, and then Brewer completed a beautiful fade route to Cam Phillips down the right sideline to get out of a third-and-15 in the shadow of his own end zone. Loeffler decided to go for the kill; a deep throw off play-action.
The Hokies run a three-man route. Byrn runs a drag, Ford runs a back side post route, the receiver split to the field (can't make a number) seems to run a fly. Georgia Tech drops under the crossing route for Byrn, and there is a corner and a deep free safety over the top. It wasn't open. Edmunds is in the game at tailback, and instead of staying in his hole off the play fake, he immediately goes outside to help Hodges with the defensive end. The middle linebacker slips in behind Edmunds and rushes the throw. As a lifelong quarterback, raised by a family of quarterback, Brewer must understand the game situation. Tech has 10-point lead. It is first down. All the momentum in a game where retaining possession is absolutely critical is with the Hokies. He can't throw this football.
Then the Hokie defense starts to breakdown. After a couple of positive plays, Chase Williams busts a coverage assignment. Georgia Tech motions an A-Back across, leaving two A-Backs and a wide receiver to the wide side of the field.
Fuller has the wide receiver going deep. Riley is shadowing the motion man (indicating man coverage to Thomas). Normally, the other shallow safety (the Hokies are using Riley as a third safety), in this case Jarrett, would have the stationary A-Back. But, Jarrett is blitzing on the play, meaning that Chase Williams has the stationary A-Back (Deon Hill, No. 31). Hill leaks to the right flat, and Williams eyes are looking right into the backfield. Hill is wide open, and since both Fuller and Riley have their back to the football running downfield with the receiver, it becomes a huge gain. Follow that play by a simple rollout where Jarrett and Bonner both lose outside contain, a borderline personal foul (Thomas stepped out of bounds after Clarke left his feet), and then Jarrett getting trapped inside again by the A-Back on another rollout and GT thunders back into the game with a touchdown.
Those were veteran players blowing assignments, not freshmen. This just isn't good enough when you need a stop to prevent a huge momentum swing. The offense recovered enough to get a field goal before the half, but you knew at that point that things were going to be tougher than they should have been in the second half.
The third quarter was much of the same. The Hokie defense performed better, and Foster's game plan of forcing the quarterback to keep early, take hits, and then switch things up to force a bad pitch paid off. Thomas pitched behind his A-Back on a counter option on Georgia Tech's first drive of the second half. Unfortunately, the Hokie offense couldn't capitalize, and some of that fault lies on Scot Loeffler. On the touchdown drive, the offense ran the power and jammed the ball right down the Yellow Jackets' throat, but on first down Loeffler got cute (which is becoming an alarming trend).
If there is one thing that Ted Roof was certain of coming into this game, is that if J.C. Coleman is the tailback, the Hokies probably are not running power. Coleman is in at tailback, and the Hokies are in a power alignment. The defense knows this has to be a pass, a reverse, or something quick to the outside. Loeffler calls a counter-pitch, using Knowles motion to try and get the defense to pursue to the bottom of the screen. It doesn't work.
Coleman is unable to get by a defender. McLaughlin and Hodges execute a beautiful pin and pull block, with Hodges sealing Kyle Travis (No. 43) inside and McLaughlin steamrolling the corner. Coleman is one-on-one with safety Jamal Golden (No. 4) who motions back with Knowles but stays at home. In the red zone, running backs have to win one-on-one battles with an unblocked defender. Coleman has an angle on Golden, and he doesn't even wrap his arms, but Coleman runs out of bounds. That just is not good enough. If he gets the edge, this is either a touchdown or at least he should fall forward for 4-5 yards. Instead the Hokies find themselves behind the sticks. On the next play, the Hokies were flagged for their fourth illegal substitution penalty. The video doesn't indicate who was responsible, and neither does the official play-by-play.
On the video, you can't see who ran off late, but Shane Beamer was tearing into somebody on the sideline, so I assume one of the running backs screwed up. The drive stalls after a sure fire touchdown to Hodges on a crossing route gets tipped at the line of scrimmage, and the Yellow Jackets block the chip shot field goal.
The next critical veteran breakdown came at the start of the fourth quarter. The Hokies forced a three-and-out, picked up a first down on a 15-yard gain and then a 9-yard gain. On second-and-one, the Hokies ran an inside zone with Williams to get the first down. Williams gained plenty of yardage, but David Wang was called for a chop block penalty. What happened?
Georgia Tech executes a stunt on the back side, with the linebacker blitzing to the inside and the defensive tackle stunting to the outside. Wang makes the correct play by taking the linebacker. Gibson should take the defensive tackle (who is less of a threat) or move on to the next level. Instead, Gibson sort of collides with Wang, who didn't need the help. This is a mistake by Gibson. It puts the Hokies behind the sticks. Farris then jumps offsides making it second-and-20. Loeffler, as you would expect an offensive coordinator to do in a second-and-long situation with a lead, calls a screen, and Brewer gift wraps a pick six for the Yellow Jackets.
By the virtue of good fortune, the Hokies score on their next possesion and were in a place we've seen before. Virginia Tech has fourth quarter lead and the defense is well rested. Everything was on schedule for Bud Foster as the defense forced a three-and-out capped off with a beautiful sack by Nicolas. Now, it was time for the Hokie offense to put the game away with a long, grind them down type of drive. But Loeffler, whose game plan was brilliant up to that point, didn't trust his offensive line and Shai McKenzie to ice the game.
You could see the Yellow Jackets let down on McKenzie's first down run. The Hokies run inside zone and Gibson, Farris, and Wang pick up the Yellow Jacket blitz and open up a big hole. McKenzie finishes the run by punishing the Yellow Jacket safety.
At this very moment, I thought the game was won. The Hokies were going to line up and pound the demoralized defensive line, move right down the field, and either use up the clock or score the clinching touchdown. My serenity lasted one play.
Loeffler calls a quick wide receiver screen out to the left, I guess hoping to catch Georgia Tech in another blitz. Instead, he should have trusted his line and tailback.
First, Brewer snaps the ball with 27 seconds left on the play clock. There are six minutes left in the fourth quarter and VT has a touchdown lead. The opponent has trouble playing from behind with their option offense. There's no reasonable explanation for snapping the ball with 27 seconds left on the play clock. As a football purist, this may have made me more angry than Brewer's second interception. Ford misses his block on the screen, and it's almost another pick six. Cam Phillips gets tackled for a 4-yard loss, which eliminates almost any chance of another run on third down. The last four Hokie running plays had gained 9, 4, 10 (not including the yards after Williams' fumble), and 6 yards. Line up and let your offensive line and tailback win the game.
With a lead and less than five-and-a-half minutes left on the clock, Foster's defense delivered, putting Georgia Tech into 4th-and-15. Then, all hell broke loose.
I was critical of Foster during the game for using man coverage, but reviewing the film, it turns out that Foster was running a double coverage on Smeltzer. Smeltzer runs a deep in route. Foster has the correct coverage, with Derek Di Nardo (who had barely played to that point) and Chuck Clark bracketing Smeltzer.
On this play, there has to be a clear understanding of leverage. Di Nardo goes underneath and to the outside of Smeltzer's route, taking away the deep comeback that Smeltzer had beaten Kendall Fuller on earlier in the drive. With Di Nardo going outside, Clark has to maintain inside leverage on a dig route. This means that Clark has to be playing at a depth where Smeltzer can't just plant and break to the inside without anyone being between him and the ball. Unless Di Nardo was supposed to have inside leverage (and therefore busted the coverage by going outside), Clark can't allow this to happen. If he is going to be beaten, it has to be on a go route to the outside, which is a much lower percentage throw and the sideline acts as an extra defender. This is way too easy for the offense.
The secondary still had chances to put the game away. Bonner dropped an interception off a deflection on the next play. The following play, Foster brings Clark on a corner blitz. Riley has over the top deep coverage as the safety. In that coverage, the safety has to be deeper than the deepest receiver. Thomas gave a great pump fake, Riley bought it, and the Yellow Jackets tied the game.
And, despite all this, the Hokies still had an opportunity to win the game, either in overtime or with another two-minute drill. Brewer's pedigree in these situations is strong, as he lead critical scoring drives to win the game against Ohio State, tie the game against East Carolina, and generate a field goal to cut the Georgia Tech momentum at the end of the first half.
Unfortunately for the Hokies, Brewer made a poor read on a simple smash route concept to put the Hokies chance of winning on life support. The interception was especially frustrating since Brewer had executed the smash route perfectly several times earlier in the game. The concept is simple. The outside receiver runs a quick out, and the inside receiver runs a deeper route (either a deep out route or a corner route.
Back in the third quarter, the Hokies execute the smash route properly. Demitri Knowles, who had a solid game after languishing on the bench for several weeks, runs a hitch past the first down marker on the boundary. Kalvin Cline runs a corner route.
The quarterback reads the corner. If the corner sluffs off on the deep corner route, the quarterback throws to the near receiver. If the corner is in cover 2 and plays the short route, the corner route is open.
Brewer reads the corner dropping deep into a cover three, and he hits Knowles for an easy first down. All game long, Georgia Tech dropped that corner deep, and when Brewer wasn't killing the Yellow Jackets with dig routes, he was hitting that quick hitch or out for numerous key first downs.
That is, until the final Hokie offensive drive. Again, the Hokies call the smash route to the boundary. Again, the Georgia Tech corner plays behind the out route marking the corner route. But, for reasons that only he can answer, Brewer throws the corner route.
The cornerback backs off the out route, as he had numerous times throughout the game. Instead of taking the easy 5-yard completion, Brewer forces the ball into triple coverage. Again, this is a one-read route. If the corner is behind the hitch, that's where the ball goes. This is a brutal decision, and it likely means that Mark Leal will at least get more repetitions in practice this week. Brewer can't be that careless with the football. Of Brewer's three interceptions, two came on first down, and one was with a huge lead and good field position. As a quarterback, he has to understand when you may or may not need to force a ball in, and when you need to live and fight another day. The Hokies just are not good enough yet to overcome that kind of carelessness with the football.
We are a third of the way through the season; one that began with such promise. The win over the Buckeyes now stands on the precipice of becoming a lost season. Every team remaining on the schedule has a matchup with can be tough for the Hokies to deal with, and at the same time, Virginia Tech is talented enough to run the table. Coach Loeffler needs to start to show some trust in his offense to execute without so much emphasis on different packages and matchups. I would expect that Frank Beamer may intercede some this week, and ask for Loeffler to give McKenzie and Williams more touches. I'd like to see Coach Foster devote a significant amount of time to leverage in zone and man coverage for his defensive backs so we can see more coverage variety against teams that can throw the football.
Getting the season back on track starts with a win against Western Michigan. The Broncos are not a powerhouse program, but they have won two consecutive games and their offense is averaging 41 points a game. The Broncos have their own big freshman tailback who can make plays from the spread formation. 6-0, 220 pound Jarvion Franklin has rushed for 542 yards on 82 carries this season, for an outstanding average of 6.6 yards per carry. The Hokies can't treat this game like a scrimmage designed to work out the kinks.
Comments
A fourth of the way through the season? You are optimistic if you expect us to get to 16 games! ;)
I was waiting for your analysis because I was curious to see what you thought from and X's and O's perspective. Watching the game realtime it looked like horrible play calling from both Loeffler and Foster, now it seems like you can add in poor execution from the players as well. Two positives for me right meow is Brewer was a man and took the blame which shows if nothing he has character and will work to get better, and we play a directional michigan next. GO HOKIES!
Hopefully playing directional michigan will allow us to focus some and correct some mistakes before we really can't afford them....as if we could against GT.
If we don't absolutely blow them away and impose our will I think it's going to be a long season. I don't think GT will run the tables in the coastal and still think they'll be towards the bottom so I don't think we'll be in a tie-breaker with them but if we can't beat either UNC, Pitt or BC then we may be out of the running with one div loss already. However I still see all games as winnable but once again it all depends on what team shows up on Saturdays.
Just my two cents... we were beaten by a bad football team Saturday. Thomas was a good QB. I really liked GT's wide receivers and B-back Laskey. But other than the middle linebacker their defense stunk, and their A-backs didn't piss a drop. That team will lose at least 3 ACC games. They are not going to stop anyone.
Agree 100%. It's still early but it looked like this could possibly be the worst ACC team we will face this year other than Wake.
GT is the worst team in our division. There isn't much difference between the best team (which very well may still be VT) and the worst team, but that's the worst. And before anyone says uva, they have a very good defense (best in the division?) and weapons on offense. That's a bowl team. (GT probably is as well because they played 3 awful teams OOC).
I have to agree about the defense in particular. GT's defense is really weak. Their DBs looked awful. We had numerous opportunities where their DBs were just completely lost. I just kept watching our offense and thinking - 'We really should be doing better against such a bad defense. And these guys(GT) are supposed to be a better ACC team? Huh?'
I'm not going to blast either our defense or offense, but I have to say - I keep watching us play against other teams like GT and I wonder why we have trouble beating them. I imagine I'll say the same thing about UNC & maybe even Pitt. I just shake my head sometimes and wish the ACC could be a big boy football conference.
Yup. That is why I believe this loss is even more frustrating than the loss to ECU. Everyone knew ECU was dangerous and Carden and his recievers are a talented group with experience. Although we still could have won that game but in the end we just got beat.
GT on the other hand has not looked good. We know their offense, it's no secret. Their defense is horrible this year and we still find ways to give them this game. We could have easily had the biggest win against them since we've been in the ACC. We have the talent to do so we just didn't and kept them in the game.
Hopefully we can handle business from here on out.
I struggle with Loeffler. On one hand, he has a package of plays in place that work to get guys open and create huge matchup challenges. The offensive structure is far superior from an X's and O's perspective than it was two years ago. On the other hand, part of the job is being a playcaller, and at times he seems to be more interested in getting all his stuff in rather than sticking with what is working and building off that series. It was my primary criticism of him in the Duke game last year, and that screen call made no sense (in fact, if they had run the fake bubble screen and gone down field like they did to Ford early in the game, that would have been a better call in a 2nd and short when they were expecting the run... they are crowding the line, why run a screen?)
I also hate all the player substitutions. I realize that there are matchups that he wants to exploit, but based on feedback from people who were at the game, at least three of the substitution penalties involved players who were getting almost no playing time and didn't come out of the game at the right time. I can tell you from my experience as a guy who was a bench player in college, my head wasn't always in the game, which is not shocking for a 20 year old kid. When your number gets called, your head may be filled with the excitement and adrenaline of getting into the game, or the disgust that you are not playing more, and you forget yourself. I can vividly recall being so excited about getting into my first varsity game as a sophomore in high school and lining up almost a half yards offside... as a defensive tackle. Ultimately, these are kids, and too much just may be too much.
At the same time, the substitutions also take your best players out of rhythm. McKenzie would get two or three carries, and Williams would come in. Williams has a great drive for a touchdown and then had to sit cold for the last few minutes of the half plus halftime. Trey Edmunds had a package, but was in and out, and the first interception he looked like a guy who was excited and perhaps overeager to hit someone. Five different running backs (six if your count Newsome, who is essentially being used as a running back) had touches on Saturday. I know that more and more teams are going to committee approaches at running back (ECU used at least four against us) but I just don't think that is the best way to get it going. You can argue all you want about who that guy should be, and my mind isn't made up. But, I don't think anyone can argue that JC Coleman should see the field again with this group. If McKenzie and Williams are your top two, then Trey or Rogers is your guy on third down. Stick with it.
As for Bud, I would love to get an explanation for we have not seen more zone this season, but we saw more zone coverage on Saturday than we have seen in any of the games this year (with Kendall usually on an island.) Kendall did not have a good game on Saturday. He was beaten cleanly (and it wasn't close) on the comeback route that kickstarted the game tying drive. He was beaten badly on the first half 4th down that should have been a touchdown. Against ECU he was beaten badly on the last play before ECU's game winning touchdown. He looks like a guy who has been worn down, along with several of the other secondary guys. That is a bad sign this early in the season.
The running back carasoul really bothers me too, I would have hoped the failures of the last few years would help them realize they need to pick a horse and ride it. Ican understand having a primary back and a short yardage back but there seems to be no rythm or reason to the rotation or play calling they use with each back?
I will offer this mild ponderance about our offense - I look at the box scores on Saturday night to get a feel for what I missed while at the game. I look at them this year, and I see that about eight different guys caught passes, and six different guys rushed the ball. I guess that's nice if you're one of the 6-8, but it seems like we would benefit from developing a rhythm and the players would accept their roles as starters/backups more if they knew the primary guys got a bigger portion of the touches.
That's just me.
8 different receivers catching passes is a good thing. Force the defense to cover every player on passing plays.
8 different rushers is an issue for me...
There aren't 8 different receivers out there on every play for the defense to choose. Just as a RB develops rhythm in a game, a QB & receiver develop a rhythm in the game. They understand which defenders to exploit. They realize which routes to try later in the game based on tendencies. There is a myriad of foundation for the realistic reasoning behind this.
Based on the 'more is better' philosophy, perhaps we're passing too often to Isiah Ford. Because, you know, we could be tricking the defense by passing more to the guys who don't have many catches, right? See how easily that theoretical was proven inadequate?
I disagree, because Ford is getting open. I didn't see one throw to Ford other than the first interception that was a "forced throw."
That's missing the point. Instead of thinking about it that way, how about thinking about it this way - What if... possibly, Ford was in as the primary receiver on the play instead of (fill in the blank)? What are the odds that he might do as well or even better? You know, because he & Brewer have established a rapport and Brewer knows how Ford might shake his defender? And how Ford could tell Brewer - 'Hey, I think I can get the DB to bite on this if I do that'?
Or... we could have 8 guys each getting 4 looks the entire game, and none of them having a chance to determine patterns by the defense. See the difference? It's called opportunity cost, and we're leaving it on the table. It's not about subtracting from positive results. It's about understanding the lost opportunities for even MORE positive results if we only played to our strengths better.
I really think Brewer and Loeffler have done a fantastic job of spreading the ball around. Phillips was getting catches, Byrn was getting catches... those were the guys getting chances to make plays. Knowles was targeted one time, he was the outlier.
If you want to argue that somebody needs more looks, I would argue that is Bucky Hodges, but frankly, he isn't getting as much separation on routes designed for him as you would hope. He has great speed, but his football speed (sharp routes, change of direction, explosion) is still a little slow.
Here is an added point. Ford has 21 catches. Byrn has 21 catches, Phillips has 15. My biggest concern is the lack of big plays and YAC, but the system coupled with the lack of a big time down field threat gave us an indicator that those would be problems. 13.5 yards per catch (Phillips as the leader of the guys with more than 10 catches) is pretty paltry.
Isaiah Ford21 12.4
Willie Byrn21 8.9
Cam Phillips15 13.5
Bucky Hodges11 10.5
Ryan Malleck10 11.0
They have to get more over the top. I just don't know where it is going to come from. Those big plays are critical because execution breakdowns happen on long drives.
Those numbers are not that bad, but I do agree we lack a real deep threat.. I know I have seen Hodges/Ford get open deep but Brew can't see him or has already made his read for the play. I trust Lefty to keep calling these plays and its only a matter of time before we break a big play. Speaking of that what is our longest play from scrimmage? Can't be longer than 30-40 yards right?
Other topic-----Not saying we burn a redshirt but for '15. I am excited about Kendrick Holland 6'3 197lbs he looks like the perfect deep route guy and he can go up and get it based off of his hudl tape.
I'm not sure the lack of a downfield threat can be blamed on the receivers. I'm more concerned that we have a QB that doesn't have the ability to throw it downfield. His arm is not strong at all. And I really don't like the out passes with a QB that floats the ball. If anything, I think we need more quick passes from him like slants and such. You know, the passes that Beamer has always refused to call.
They are valid concerns. But I am sure willing to give up those deep balls in exchange for better accuracy on short passes if Loeffler is going to continue to use this kind of passing offense. I am just a snob, I'd prefer both.
I don't have anything to add beyond what French has already said. Spreading the ball around to WRs is a good thing.
THANK YOU for validating something I've been saying for a while now.
completely agree on the RB situation. didn't understand as to why Williams would be in for a few runs and then Shai would come in or vice versa. I get the whole Shai gets a series and then Marshawn gets a series. It should be Shai gets a drive then Marshawn gets a drive unless an injury occurs or a guy is just noticibly tired or something. Can't stand too many running backs. Also agree about Coleman.
Lots of folks are going to ask me more about the offensive line. Well, I covered 19 plays this week, and if I had done a deeper dive on offensive line, this would have read like War and Peace. I thought the OL had their best game of the season, but I also don't think the GT front is very good. The biggest problem continues to be overextending against simple X-stunts, and I believe that is in part an athleticism issue (added size in Searels program means less mobility.) And, that added size has not necessarily resulted in more push. I still think Wyatt Teller has a role here and is being underutilized, but the problem is that he is backing up the guy who has probably been their most consistent lineman in Wang. For those of you thinking that you can move Wang to center to replace Farris, Farris had his best game of the season on Saturday. I am not sure how Searels operates, but if I were him, Teller would be getting work at both guard slots. Conte has slowed down a bit since William & Mary. His pad level has been higher than I am comfortable with, and his feet seem to have started to die at contact, which if you have read my column long enough I regard as a big red flag. Then, you watch Teller's one running play and you see how much movement he got, it makes you wonder if he can give you that on every play. If he can, he needs to be on the field somewhere.
It couldn't hurt to have him as an extra tight end, or a short yardage guard... something.
I'd take an A-quality OLine with C-quality skill players over the opposite any day of the week. Especially on Saturday.
IO completely agree here, When Teller came in he had some great push and it seemed to open up some holes. However Wang had another good game and it looks like our Left side of the O-line is the strength. I would love to see Teller get more action and why not put him on the RG spot, is there that much of a difference that he can't just slide in and get it? Obviously the blitz pickup might be a tad different but still?
You say our strong side of the O-line is the left side, and I might agree. Which makes me wonder why we seem to run right most of the time.
I also noticed when we snapped with so much time left on the play clock. I sat up in my chair and whispered, perplexed, "Why are we snapping with so much time left...".
I thought the same thing, but I took it as riding the momentum like the quick snap on Marshawn's TD.
I know that screen blew up, but I still don't hold that as a bad play call (or even the quick snap). If Ford gets that block and Phillips picks up 15 yards, nobody cares that we snapped it early or that we didn't run it for 4 yards to get the first down. Just one block away......
I'm not a football guru like French; I don't claim to know a lot. Until someone explains to me otherwise, I will contend that, for the past two games, Bonner playing deep centerfield in Cover-1 with a stacked box makes absolutely no goddamn sense. He's consistently not picking a side to cover nor is he offering any serious deep cover help (he should've been inside Smelter's jock with a possible pick after Kendall bought the pump-fake on the last TD). Maybe I'm wrong.
the last TD was Riley getting beaten. They were in cover 3, which means Riley had to be deeper than the deepest man. If they give up a comeback route, so be it. Tackle him. Bonner was supposed to play deep middle. There was no chance he could have gotten there in time. That was on Riley (and Bud if you want to argue that you don't want a shorter corner covering a 6'3 220 lb NFL receiver that just piledrove Kendall Fuller earlier in the drive.)
Was Riley playing a comeback route or do you think he was trying to come up for run support? Either way, he was beaten badly on that play.
He was jumping the comeback route. Thomas pump faked and Riley bit.
Gotcha. Missed the pump fake. Riley must have had visions of Ohio State in his head right then.
One additional item. I was very complimentary of Knowles as a receiver and blocker on Saturday. But he had a touchdown on Saturday on the reverse if he just cuts off the blocker. Instead, he went out of bounds like someone was going to knock him out of bounds, and there was nobody there.
I bet the receiver meeting room was interesting yesterday.
I don't think he and Coleman were the right choices for the series after recovering the fumble. I have to wonder, especially when it comes to Shane's process for determining what back plays what series.
I honestly don't think there is a set system, because if there is I have yet to see it. I get the RB BC but at some point you have to keep feeding 1 of them. Them spill that Rb for a brusier/change of pace Marshawn type back!!! Look at the Steelers last night, Bell ran wild then they brought in Blount to absolutely dropped the hammer. I know both of them are freshman and I think if Edmunds was 100% healthy he would be that main RB.
In regards to the JCC play any of our backs can run that play however all 4 of them have the ability for different results. Maybe it was Shane hoping it would be an easy Td for JCC to get his confidence back up. Maybe Shai+Marshawn needed a breather? Who knows but it definitely was a weird choice at RB for a sudden change of possession.
If it were me...not saying I'm smarter that SL or any of the coaches because that's ludicrous I would have gone for the endzone right away on 1st down. PA with (any of the 5 rb's) Rogers goes in the flat, and a corner route by bucky with I Ford crossing him at the post.
And if Coleman's speed is the driving factor, I would argue that Edmunds and McKenzie are just as fast. Plus, both of them rock the safety there.
After reading your breakdown I couldn't help but think that play probably would've been a touchdown is either Marshawn or Shai were if for no other reason then the D would've been looking for power lead and the element of surprise of them going outside would've sprung them. As you pointed out, with Coleman in the D knows it's not going to be a power lead.
Why are we so adverse to running the power with Coleman anyway? I mean, I know he doesn't really "finish the run" like the other backs, but if he's in there for his speed, can't he wiggle through the hole on the power faster than the other guys? I do agree that he was a poor personnel choice there, but do you think if they called the power lead, it could've been a TD since they were expecting outside run as soon as #4 enters the game? I'm just wondering why they don't diversify the play call even if JC isn't really a power back.
partly because if 1 O-linemen gets pushed back into JC its likely going to be a loss. Not bashing JC at all but IDC how much you front squat/press when a 300+ pound o-line gets pushed back into you you're going to fall/get off balanced and the whole play is a mess.
I would also think that the power play requires the RB to allow the O-line to set up the blocks and then follow not just smash right behind the FB..
And, he isn't just small and lacking power, but he isn't particularly fast or elusive. Trey Edmunds is just as fast, and very tailback on the roster from what we have seen can either bounce off tackles or avoid them, except for Coleman. The counter pitch was as well blocked as that play can get. He has to beat the safety. He didn't. And, this isn't the first example. We have three years of him having opportunities to make those plays. Take away the Duke game and the Florida State game his freshman year, and he really has no evidence that merits him being a starting running back in the ACC as of today. I like the kid. He is a hard worker and a good team player. Ultimately, the Hokies have better options.
French, on that last interception, it looks like a different technique by the CB on the two examples. On the first pass to Knowles, the CB is dropping back so much that he's off the screen when Brewer releases. It's clear that the out is open. On the interception, the CB is right there on (Phillips?)'s curl route, the makes a good play to drop back and take the corner. That's what Brewer said, he was baited by a good play by the CB (which I believe ECU did as well on an interception). You said this happened many times in the game, maybe there were other examples where the CB played the WR tighter but that was still the open man and not the TE running the corner.
On Brewer's first interception, the pressure comes when Wade Hansen is just beat by the DT. It looks like Trey made a reasonable choice, to help out Bucky with the DE instead of helping out Hansen who has his man for a second then loses him. Either way, Brewer needs to make a better choice but if Hansen controls his guy for another tick, Brewer has time to hit either Ford in the middle of the field or Byrn on the cross. I'm not sure Brewer isn't throwing this ball away and either didn't see the Safety at all or didn't have the arm strength to get it out of bounds. If he's trying to hit Ford, it's a terrible pass.
Hodges route wasn't as deep as Clines and the throw came quicker, but the read is the same. If the corner is behind the out route, the throw goes to the out route. It doesn't matter how deep that corner is off the ball, if he is behind the out/curl, you throw it. Especially to the boundary, which is a shorter throw.
As for the INT, Trey has to stay in and let the play develop. His responsibility is the gap between Hansen and Hodges. Trey abandoned the gap early. That tackle would have been flat on his tail if Trey stays where he is supposed to go. Protection left, then Trey has the inside gap, Hodges has the outside. If that DE stunts inside, it is Treys man. If the DT stunts outside, it is Treys man because Hansen has to block the gap to his right. It wasn't ideal by Hansen, but that is on Trey.
Keep in mind, Trey is my guy. But, the bust was a bust. Regardless, Brewer had enough time to see that Georgia Tech had the coverage on the play. That ball should have been thrown about 15 yards to the right of where it went... right into the mascot.
regarding the last INT... exactly right. If the DB is even a yard off the reciever, you throw the hitch. If the pass is placed properly to the ouside, the WR can make the catch or at the very least screen the DB off the ball with his body. Only if the DB is hugging the WR do you throw to the TE.
Don't know if Hodges took his route to the sideline too early (too shallow) but to the boundary there's not as much room for lateral movement and that led to less vertical distance between the WR and TE.
re watching that play from the backside (hehe) and you could almost say there were 2-3 GT defenders that could have had that INT.
Def tough to re-watch and see rogers come open late/after brewer threw it but he had acres of space. Well we can move on and learn !!!
Was at the game and screamed "SAM'S OPEN!"right as the ball was released. Then suddenly I noticed my face was in my hands.
This is a really young team and it also could be one of the most talented teams we've had in a while. Due to youth, mistakes are to be expected, but it seems like the coaches are not consistently giving the players their best chance to succeed. Loeffler seems like a really smart offensive mind, but he makes some extremely questionable calls every week (not to mention subbing after almost every play. I would be interested in learning how often we sub in the no-huddle versus a true up-tempo team). And our DBs seem overmatched or out of position in giving up a lot of big plays this year.
I will also never understand why Knowles and Coleman return kicks. I must be missing something, because it seems crazy that Newsome and Stroman aren't back there every time. Knowles sprints for the sideline every return.
Again, I am back and forth with "giving the players the best chance to succeed." He is getting guys open. I don't think any of us can debate that. Some of McKenzie's best runs have been on counter-action, which doesn't work unless the threat of the jet sweep is credible. Those are things to be considered.
If the offense is good enough to move the ball without all the matchup stuff, packages, and trickery, then it isn't needed. Bad Loeffler. But, we have not seen the offense do it in such a situation. If the defense can stop the big freshman tailback for WMU (he is a load folks), then the O will get a chance to prove that it can physically dominate versus tricking their way to yardage.
I guess I am most perplexed with the play calling after the fumble recovery at the 10. And that could just be a lack of execution, but as soon as I saw Coleman and Knowles in the game I lost all hope for a TD. It just proves I'm missing something though if the coaches, who know a heck of a lot more than me, think that personnel group gave us the best chance to score.
Anyways, I appreciate your breakdown and insight and I look forward to seeing what changes the team makes next week.
French, do you feel like we over-utilize passes behind the line of scrimmage hoping for decent yards after the catch? I'm an Eagles fan so I watch Chip Kelly run these sort of plays all the time and I get that they can be effective, but I feel like we run them so much without getting the necessary blocks to make them work. And if that is the case, then I just don't understand calling the play; if we just can't block the play properly, shouldn't we just stop waiting for it to work one time?
Sorry, I haven't gotten through the entire article yet but I'll forget if I don't post now. On that first Brewer INT, you said it was the MLB who rushed the pass and implied that Edmunds had responsibility there. I'm not anywhere near as football smart as you, but that looks like the Left DT to me, and he basically just throws #77 aside (I had to look that up, Wade Hansen? Is that right?) and has a free shot at Brewer. I don't know what the play was or whose assignment it should have been - Edmunds to stay back and help or whatever, but it looked to my uneducated eye like Brewer was under pressure because his guard got whipped 1vs1 at the line.
In that case, it's the tailback's job to get in position in front of the QB and pickup either a blitz or what leaks through. Trey didn't linger long enough in front of the QB to be the last blocker and opted to help the TE too quickly.
If he had lingered longer, trey, who is a good blocker, would have picked up that man coming in the gap and relieved the QB from pressure.
It was the DT. A botch on my end. But Trey still vacated his area. That was a zone protection, with every OL blocking the gap to their left, Edmunds filling in behind Hansen, and Hodges with the end. If Edmunds is where he is supposed to be, that DT is flat on his back.
At some point in the game Shai had two nice carries in the Jackets end of the field. It was 3rd and 1. Marshawn was brought in for the short yardage situation. He ran to the left side of the line and got stuffed for a loss of a yard. I can't recall if we punted or kicked a FG. I believe GT had three down lineman but could be wrong (I haven't been able to re-watch the game yet). Two things- Shai is a bug guy; why not let him take the play as he seems to have some rhythm and why couldn't the line just drive the D back off the ball? This should be a simple as hitting the sled and driving it to Roanoke!
We punted. There was a cutback lane inside of Wang (who got pushed back a bit.) Farris had a terrific block on the play. It should have gotten the first.
Marshawn and Shai will learn. Both will continue to get better. They are freshmen! We have at least three more years with both guys, plus Ford and Phillips.
We need the OL depth (tackle next year scares me to death, especially now that Pettit, who they like at tackle, is going to miss spring ball due to his shoulder surgery.) We also need a dependable blocking tight end to step up when Malleck is hurt. Bucky and Cline were not terrible, but they are both better when they don't need to get beaten up blocking.
what has happened to Redman as a blocker? i know he was used a lot in the spring since Cline and malleck were hurt, and even seemed to be a decent threat in short yardage as a receiver. Have we just not utilized him much because of the playmaking capabilities of the other tight ends? i feel he could be utilized enough that him being in the game wouldnt necessarily key the defense in that it is going to be a guaranteed running play.
He did a poor job against William & Mary. I can't recall immediately if he played versus Ohio State, but he didn't play any offensive snaps that I can recall against ECU and GT.
Redman earholed Joey Bosa on the Rogers end-around non-pass. Redman was late getting on the field for that one. That was the only time I saw him out there, he may have played on FG blocks.
Another great analysis. French, thanks again for making me a smarter football fan!
French... raising the football intelligence of Hokie fans since ______
Does everyone else spend the rest of Saturday in a bad mood when the Hokies lose?
Used to; then I had kids. Win or lose they don't care especially since as soon as the game is over it's play time since Ms. Fly has been watching them so I can watch the game. It's a great way to get over a loss quickly.
It's true. Within a minute of the clock going to 0:00 for ECU I was laughing at my daughter and her little friend (our good friends' son) for doing something silly. Then we watched the kids play on the swing set in their Hokie gear while we sipped Oktoberfests on the porch and discussed the game. World keeps spinning.
Got my first on the way so I'll be looking forward to that...
For a time, yes. I would get pretty hot-headed after a game. That changed, though, with one incident. After the Boise game, I was super pissed and went off and slammed a door shut, really hard. It scared the hell out of my dog, who retreated to her crate and gave me the saddest eyes I've ever seen. She's a corgi, and if you know corgis, you know how expressive they can be. So not only had I upset my wife by acting like an ass, I had scared the living daylights out of my sweet little dog, who thought she was in trouble. I did some thinking, and I realized I was wildly overreacting. So yes, I get a bit down when we lose, but that's it. On Saturday, the game ended during the most beautiful part of the day, so I shook my head sadly and took the dogs for a walk to enjoy the weather. I felt good when we got back home. Not great, but not awful. There are bigger things to be upset about, and we definitely don't feel as bad as the players who worked their butts off to try to win. That's an important thing to remember, I think.
I couldn't agree more. I can't let the play of 18-22 year old boys/men determine my mood. I tailgated with a college room mate n friend from high school. Sat with my dad and some great fans during a good game, minus the last three minutes. Then had wings, beer and a Lotta laughs at Hokie House. Amazing day.
We are young. Young and inexperienced in a new offense. Coach lefty isn't watering it down, and doing what he feels best to win us games. Im sure he hates losing as much as we do.
We are young. Our two best WR's played their 4th game Saturday. Our two starting RB's played their 4th game yesterday. Malleck wasn't out there. That's a security blanket gone. Kline's first game back. Our QBs 2nd game in like forever.
Our offense didn't lose this game, besides all the turnovers, penalties, and at times general buffoonery. As Mr. McFarling said, "4th and 15".
We all expected 8-6 and hoped for 10+ wins.
As least we aren't Michigan, Florida a few years ago, Bama's mess before Saban. All those programs hit a bottom of sorts before working back. We're staying above 100 while building from the ground up.
HOAT just gives you a long face.
I would say I was bummed some, but then Sunday rolled around and I got to hike Buffalo Mountain in Floyd and it was amazing. Photo credit goes to the girlfriend.
I hope I have been successful to a certain degree.
More than you know...Good to hear about others keeping things in perspective too.
Thanks again.
Awesome write up French, as always.
I don't understand the fans with the "fire everyone, the sky is falling" mentality. Yes, there were some coaching mistakes in the game, but the VAST MAJORITY of negatives, as French points out, were players making mistakes. Those things are correctable.
I've seen comparisons to 2012. Please stop. That team had a dearth of playmakers on offense, as well as an overwhelmed offensive coaching staff. This year's team has talent. When we put it all together, we win at the Horseshoe. When we turn the ball over 3 times we can lose to ECU and GT. That 2012 team played its best game at home against FSU and still couldn't win. If this year's team plays its best we can beat anyone on our schedule, including FSU in the ACCCG.
The nonsense I dealt with on Twitter was absurd. Supposed "insiders" claiming that a kid busting a double coverage has something to do with the recruiting drop off in the 2008-2010 timeframe and that Frank was to blame for the substitution infractions as if they were endemic of a practice week flaw. Also, they blamed Frank for not benching Brewer after the 2nd INT. How quickly we forget that Brewer lead them to a touchdown drive the next series? They couldn't bench him after the 3rd INT because they never got the ball back.
Twitter just shows how many stupid people there are in the world.
Twitter...Facebook...the Internet in general...
This loss stung (no pun intended) more so than many I can remember in the past. The last loss I can remember stinging this bad was Boise St. (No not JMU, was still too numb to feel that one...) For me, the losses that sting the most are the ones where so much of the team shows glimmers of glory but promptly shuts the lid on that light and heads back into darkness. Boise St. we spotted 17 points but rallied back and played hard then just gave it up on the last drive. Against GT, we took it to them in the first half but still lost a game. Both were such heart breaking losses. It doesn't hurt too badly when you get outplayed by a better team (Alabama..yes it is frustrating and I get upset when we lose to anyone but those games are ones I can come to grips with). To me this seemed like a complete team failure: subpar play calls in key situations, poor execution by players...just a very long and disappointing game to watch.
This team has so much talent, more than the previous years and can do so well if they can just put it all together. I really hope they can--and as French eluded to in his great article, we finally have the talent to run some power runs...I want to see more of that. The one thing I miss the most is that feeling when RW or Darren Evans came on the field and you just knew they were gonna suck 6-8 minutes off the clock, pound the rock and score the touchdown. That confidence is still not there yet but with juice and shai, it can happen again..
I am a GT guy, but will not troll your board. This is a great article and review of the game. While it is definitely heavy on the VT made this or that mistake, the GT players did have a role in the outcome. Some of the comments declare GT is the worst team in the ACC, but you should look again at the scoreboard. It is rarely wise to paint your opponent as unworthy, especially when they have just recently defeated your team.
Good luck on the rest of your season. I am thankful we don't have to replay this game. It could have very easily had a different result.
Oh, we know it's not GT, it's probably Wake that's the worse in ACC. Doscount the steam release you heard from the game.
But GT was better than we were on Saturday for 60 minutes or more accurately, for some of the 60 minutes, unfortunately it was the only 60 minutes that counted.
Our guys are much better than we were on Saturday. We just didn't bring it to the field for 60 minutes.
You got lucky that we really did beat ourselves mostly but, at this point that's mostly semantics.
Anyway, thanks for a hard fought. We always knew this wasn't the year, too much newness everywhere, we gotta knock the shine off and reread the manual.
We always said 2-15-2016.
Go VT.
... and thanks for not being a troll.
No one's contesting that GT won yesterday, but your team has loads of problems. We're not very good, you're worse. You won. Congrats. I have a feeling that the entirety of the ACC schedule, once played, will bear out the truth.
We beat THE Ohio State University two weeks ago. Would you say that we're a better team than they are? I sure as heck wouldn't. College Football is funny that way.
It's really easy to say that VA Tech had missed opportunities to win the game, but isn't it just as true to say that GA Tech should have/could have very easily won the game by 25 points instead of 3 if things would have gone a bit "cleaner" for them," such as having their long TD run that was called back for an illegal block looked at as a legal block (reviewing the replay, the blocker began the block above the waist as they engaged and they continued running down-field, and the defender tried to escape him which pushed the hands down); and Tech's QB missed a wide open receiver (Waller) who would have walked in for another TD had Thomas had just a second more to set his feet. Couple those two things with the fact that the Hokies only points (8 points) in the second half were courtesy of a fumble scoop and score (with a two-point conversion) by the VA Tech QB which could have just as easily been recovered by a GA Tech defender, then we could be looking at a 22 point swing in favor of GA Tech with just those three plays.
While both teams missed field goals, GA Tech's was a clean miss whereas VA Tech's was blocked by a Yellow Jacket defender. Also, while it might be true the Hokies moved the ball through the air, GA Tech intercepted 3 passes, including running one back for a TD, and GA Tech's QB actually personally rushed for more yards then the entire VA Tech team combined.
My point is that while GA Tech had to come back to win the game last Saturday, in fact, VA Tech was fortunate to have been in the position to have led the game 95% of the time. Give the Coaching staff the credit for having the team in a position to win the game because without them, the Hokies would have gotten blown out at home by the better team.
in regards to the block: He had to start the block with the defender's chest/shoulders towards him for it to be legal.
There are a lot of what if's in football as stated above.. however at the end of the day a L is still a L. No reason for those brewer int's.. The JC pitch play was shocking ect ect.
On a side note, do you guys mind being called "GA Tech"? Also, the scenario you play out above us if everything goes GT's way. On the flip side, if everything goes our way, we blow you out. No pass interference, no interceptions, etc. At the end of the day there are too many "what ifs" in any football contest to play that game. What matters is that you guys made more plays than we did
17 of the 27 points that GiT scored were the result of three Tech mistakes. You can also say that the final score should have 24-10 just as easy. GiT wasn't the better team, just luckier.
Some days you get the bounce, some days the bounce gets you.
There is some truth in what you type, but I think the difference is that GT's breaks came on lucky (or unlucky) bounces where VT continually self-destructed with critical execution mistakes and bone-headedness. I also think that the bounces went both ways about evenly...VT picked up the fumble and ran it in, but Bonner & Kendell dropped easy interceptions...GT had a long TD called back, but VT had a long punt return called back that could have led to a game changing score. GT deflected a couple sure TD receptions as well
Meh... Stuckey's or whatever that receiver's name is beat Kendall Fuller pretty soundly for the ball... at least once on a key down and drive. French used the term "pile-drive" to describe the event. So I'd say GT made some plays.
At Georgia Tech, you can do that... once or twice a decade.
The first completion of the game tying drive, Smeltzer ran a comeback route and pushed off on Fuller. Fuller reacted like a car hit him. Smeltzer is a load, and somebody is going to pay to teach him how to run routes.
If you're gonna troll, at least say something funny.
French what is you general first 4 games of his VT career of Brewer? I think calling for his head is a bit premature, but I think the leash ought to be a little tighter. So I guess your immediate take away after 1/3 of the season, knowing full well that he can absolutely turn this thing around.