That happened.
Then this happened.
The game was never really in doubt afterwards.
I'm going to ignore a lot of what happened after until I watch the film, but briefly...
I don't know what the defensive fronts were, or what the game plan was, but Virginia Tech wasn't committed to running the ball in the first half. During the week Beamer Co. stated, and reiterated, the focus of this game on offense was balance, which, given how much Tech had previously aired it out, meant running the ball.
In the second half, against an inferior Western Michigan front-seven, the Hokies pounded the rock. Virginia Tech finished the game with 308 yards on 47 carries which got me about as excited as anything that's happened so far this season. Reminder: it was vanilla play calling; inside zone, outside zone, rinse, repeat. It was beautiful to know what the play was before the snap and still see the Hokies rip off a five-yard run. I do believe this team can run the ball if it's dedicated to doing so. In the short term, the payoff of investing in the run game feels like the return on a 30-year bond. Nobody's hammering the rock to win Powerball, but saving those ten-dollar bills from grandma add up. Thirty-two passes, 47 runs and a 60/40 split for 486 yards seem like a great formula for success moving forward.
I've been steadfast in my belief that Shai should get the majority of snaps at tailback, but I may have to stop banging my drum.
#Hokies TB Shai McKenzie suffered a sprained knee. Coach Frank Beamer: "I think we may have lost him. That's tough."— Mike Barber (@RTD_MikeBarber) September 27, 2014
If he's done, that's terrible news for a kid that worked his butt off to get on the field this season. I'd be remiss not to acknowledge Juice's play today. He hasn't been a slouch this season, not in the slightest. Fourteen carries for a buck-nineteen is a more than respectable day in Lane. When he gets lathered up and running downhill he's a load that's painful to take down. If he's going to be the man moving forward, it'll be fun to watch him grow and develop as a ball carrier.
I called Bill(dozer) after the game to vent a little bit. He said about the most reasonable thing one could've, "This team is young, it was another learning experience."
He is right of course, take for instance the following statistic: All four of Tech's touchdowns Saturday were scored by freshman. Fifteen of the first 19 touchdowns on the season have been scored by freshmen (16 of 19 by underclassmen). Moreover, the defense was counting on some fresher faces in Facyson's and Maddy's absence.
At the end of the day, Tech, handily, beat a second-fiddle squad. The Lunch Pail defense held freshman stud running back Jarvion Franklin to 76 yards, many less than his 180 yard average, and the Broncos to 19 net rushing yards. The offense found itself in the second half and the d-line harassed quarterback Zach Terrell for the better part of the afternoon.
Those things were supposed to happen though. This team is young and has taken Hokie Nation on a bumpy ride. If it wants to chauffeur the maroon and orange faithful to Charlotte in December, it's going to have to grow up, and quick.
Comments
Their play calling signage was fantastic today.
Anyone heard anything about Dadi yet? Also, in regards to the run game I'm glad Trey got some carries, especially after hearing the news about Shai. We're going to definitely need #14 more and more now. Only thing I didn't like from the run game today was the carries from JCC, he's so ineffective this year it's sad.
Thanks for that! We're already without Maddy, so I cant imagine how the D-line would look without Dadi also.
Also, idk what's been going on in practice, but Trey looks like he should be our number 2 guy going forward if Shai. Not sure what "burst" he's been missing cause he looked good in his touches today.
He was saying the same thing in interviews earlier this week. If coach Shane was using reverse psychology or something I can forgive it...he looked great out there.
I agree. Trey looked more like his old self, so maybe he's healthy and confident now, so he should go to #2 if Shai is out (very likely). I'd also go so far as to say put in Joel Caleb instead of JCC on whatever packages they've been using with JCC. Love the guy, but he's just not getting it done. Use the Moorehead approach - the best guys deserve to play. JCC can do kick returns, but he has not been successful at RB. Love the effort, but you've got to go with what works, especially as we're going into a seriously tough stretch of conference games.
Total agreement. I feel like we have been very patient with JC's development, and he has hit a wall. I love what a guy like him means to a program, but at some point the best talent must play.
Assuming Shai is for real hurt, I agree. Marshawn has the best balance and the best vision on the team, and he's a load to bring down. Shai loves to pound people, and I love to see that. Trey looks better in limited action this year than he did last year, I think. JC is JC. I was happy to see Joel Caleb get a few carries, too. That last drive was the first decent look I think I've had at him.
A much needed win for the program today. I have no idea what today meant for the running game, but it was nice to watch all the same. The mistakes (turnovers and penalties) are still very much a concern, but they'll be resolved with more experience.
308 yds rushing. 6.6 yds per rush. That's what i'm talking about. Yes, it was W Mich, but still...
The positive I take away from it is that now everyone (O-line and backs) can see what it is to be successful on the ground. It's one thing to say, "this play didn't work because..." but it's much more valuable to see the film and know "when you did exactly this, it worked because..." Those successful reps will pay off, I have to think.
totally agree. It was a big positive in the running game today that hopefully will give confidence and momentum.
I like to say, practice makes permanent. Perfect practice makes perfect.
Successful reps are worth so much more than "learning experience" failures.
220+ in the second half.
Tote that rock, and the rest falls into place. That's what we should be doing.
Biggest reason: Loeffler seems to love play action, but if you haven't shown that you can effectively run, nobody really cares about the play fake.
No truer words..
A running game would do so much going forward... limit the INTs, limit the beating Brewer has been taking, rest our thin D... it HAS to be a priority
We have to start getting more out of our kicking games. Not sure what's going on with A.J. I feel like Brewer's height is hurting him in the pocket. Once he learns to move around to find those throwing lanes, he should be fine. I was glad Beamer didn't have the same mindset as the ACC network guys to replace him, but I wish Leal could have gotten a few more mop up snaps. Overall, I'd say a win is a win. We probably can't take a whole lot from it. ACC play is gonna require some tight chin straps.
AJ absolutely crushed his first one, but spent the rest of the day trying to pooch short punts inside the 20 and probably could have gotten about 10 yards on all of those. Brewer is gonna be just fine as he gets game reps and gets more comfortable with the system. He's got a ton on his plate with Lefty's system and he's still learning.
He's a 4th yr player and if SL "system" is so complicated for a college graduate to understand maybe SL needs to be in the NFL or CFL. I blame him for a bunch of the substitution penalties last week that sucked the life out of drives. If running backs can't play for more than 3 plays in a row and WR need to be rotated every other play maybe we should be doing some get some athletes that can stay on the field. I don't think that is the problem. I think SL wants to play chess rather than checkers.
Even in the NFL, when a team makes an OC change with an existing QB, there is a transition/learning phase. It's not like everything clicks from day one... and that's with NFL QBs who have likely played a few different systems throughout their playing career
Specifically, how long is this transition going to take? It's been 18 games.
I'm by no means an expert but I thought Loeffler wasn't exactly installing his system last season but one that would better suit Logan Thomas. I think it's obvious that this system is way more complex than last years.
When you consider that Willie Byrn and Sam Rogers are the only players on the team getting significant reps who were both playing and at the same position last year, it's easy to see how there could be some growing pains. We have an entirely new offense, including a QB who's been in said complex system for all of 2 months or so.
On top of that, consider that last season we had to scrap the offensive plan when Malleck got hurt. So the guys that were in the program last year never even got to execute said offense in a game. Overall, this is just part of the massive rebuilding project that is the VT offense. It's gonna take time, just like we knew going in. The only thing that's changed is we're much more talented at RB and WR than we were last year.
I think that's a fair assessment for the first few games of the season. However, WMU was game five and it'll be October next week. At some point Loeffler has to realize what he's got and adjust scheme and expectations appropriately. He did this last year with Thomas, and hopefully Tech's second half strategy is indicative of what we'll see the rest of the season.
My comment was more directed at Brewer coming in in Fall camp and trying to learn a new system, and not the entire team in general.. Brewer plus all the Freshmen have been in this system for 5 games now
I'm no guru, just a fan. But my rule of thumb has always been I personally give a new coordinator three years to establish their scheme. At that point you have junior players who have been brought up in the system and all the underclassmen are the new coordinator's guys. So to me, if we're still having hiccups in the second half of next season it will be cause for alarm.
This season and last, Lefty's playing with house money as far as I'm concerned.
I agree Lefty doesn't have any pressure on him at the moment, except from us fans, which I'm sure he ignores.
I wonder, though, with the two freshmen QBs we brought in, why Leal isn't starting this year (bear with me here, this isn't a Bench Brewer argument). Leal is in his second year in Lefty's scheme, while Brewer has only had, what, two months? With Brewer starting this year, he'll likely be the starter again next year, meaning Durkin and Ford will be R-Soph by time one of them gets to start (also known as 'two years of studying Lefty's scheme'). So we lose out on Leal being a year in, and Brewer is never going to be Lefty's protege a la Durkin, Ford, or whoever we recruit in the coming year or two.
Football-wise, I'm sure it makes sense. But in the longer term logistical look, I still question it.
I wonder just how much of "Loeffler's scheme" there was last year for Leal to study. It seemed to me last year was "do what we can, based around LT3." Loeffler even admits he didn't give Leal enough attention. So really, I think Leal and Motley both had a few months (spring) of the new scheme. Brewer comes in and is only a few months behind but is familiar with the general concepts from his time at TT, so he wins the battle. I think continuity is better, and having Brewer the starter for 2 years sucks for Leal but is better for the team. Then you have a couple of talented recruits in their third year, with 2 solid years of tutelage coming in ready to take the reins. Otherwise, we've got one year of Leal, maybe a year of Brewer if the others aren't ready, or handing it off to a r-Fr. Maybe that would work, maybe not. I get the sense that the more opportunity there is for our QBs-in-waiting to study, the better they will be at executing a cerebral scheme.
You play whoever gives you the best chance to win games. Brewer gives us the best chance to win games.
Brewer's a stopgap. I really think it's as simple as that.
Leal wins the Nick Sorensen award for being a team player, but he's not a starting QB. Brewer came in and immediately challenged for playing time despite his gunslinger mentality and lack of experience in the system. To me, regardless of how good (or bad) Brewer is, that's proof positive that Leal just lacks the skill set to be a starter. He's had multiple opportunities to step up and claim the position, and has failed to do it.
Brewer is the bridge between the Logan Thomas Experiment and the official dawn of the Loeffler Era. He's a legit QB with a legit skill set, who has unfortunately never met an impossible throw he didn't want to force. Loeffler has his work cut out for him as a QB coach to get Brewer to adhere to the system, but at the very least we have a legitimate QB to try to establish the actual scheme Scot wants to run.
This is pretty much the way I've thought of it, as well as the point above about him being the best chance for victories this year. Leal may lack the skill set to be the starter, but what about throwing Durkin into the fire as a freshman? I remember hearing that Ford was having trouble adjusting to the speed of the game early in his time on campus.
At this rate, Durkin and/or Ford will be in their first year as a starter in 2016, the year we've all been saying is the year we should be targeting for the next possible run for the ACC/more. If we trot out a QB that has only garbage-time experience, then 2016 might be a tough out. Now if we were throwing Durkin/Ford out as a true Junior with two years experience under their belts with the Rogers/Hodges/Ford/Philips/Cline/Teller/Conte/Juice/Shai group, then we'd have an experienced group all over the offense ready for maybe a BIG run.
I suppose I'm playing a little devil's advocate here. I wasn't expecting a transfer QB to come in this year. Now that he's here, I'm trying to play the hindsight 'If we knew then what we know now, would we have made the same decision' game.
From what I understand, Loeffler really liked how Ford was progressing in pre-season.
Ford is the cerebral QB that can grasp Lefty's system, and if he can get a handle on reading defenses and finding the mismatches at game-speed, he's going to be a really good one.
But I agree with the coaches that he's going to learn a plenty enough with a red-shirt year that any injury is not worth risking. He was pretty skinny as I recall. Be a horrible shame to have him broken in half just because a 2nd string Olineman makes a mistake, which I'm putting the chance of at 100%.
And let's not count out Motley coming in healthy and competing next spring. If not for the injury, he may just have taken over instead of Brewer.
I'll say this. All other concerns aside, having to decide which of the promising QB recruits on the bench will assume the reins post-Brewer is a damn refreshing problem to have as a VT fan.
Not only Ford/Durkin/Byrd, but VT should also pursue some transfers this offseason. Someone who can sit a year behind Brewer next year and be available the year after that.
I'm a Ford guy, but I was really, really, really impressed with Byrd's film. He looks like the most natural passer of our guys and he's not that dissimilar from Durkin as a runner. A good combination of Ford and Durkin.
We do have Motley in there too, who didn't look horrible when he was able to practice
you right, you right.
Three years! Wow.
In college football, that's an eon.
More downs inside of 10 would help. Hopefully Slye will evolve into the next great kicker too with time. Each week I'm more impressed with the youth in key positions.
I wish I could believe we had a running game.
But I don't know that the evidence is really there that we have one yet. I'll wait for the film review, but I didn't see a lot of holes the first half. I think I did see a lot of penetration against our O-line and a lot of missed blocks.
Yes we put up boss yardage on the ground in the 2nd half.
Yes the play calling reflected a dedication to the run game in the 2nd half.
But WMU is not deep. We didn't seem to consistently stuff it down their throats until they got obviously gassed. WMU's stud lLB suffered an injury and wasn't really that much of a factor afterwards.
Our offense's first drive of the 2nd half was 5 plays and 39 yards. A big run by Juice, and then we got stuffed.
Our D is extremely suspect. There is a winning gameplan against it that, frankly damn near worked today.
WMU failed on some execution, and suffered some bad luck, or else it could well have been the Hokies in a hole to start the 2nd half.
Honestly, this game reminded me of Frank's early years -- where VT was outmanned, and out-talented, but played with enough heart to keep us in many games we had no business winning until our starting D was gassed.
Losing Shai is going to suck hard. He has better vision than Juice, and a bit quicker burst through the hole when he finds it.
The good thing is that to my eye anyway, Edmunds looks 100%, or close enough that he is clearly the 1st or 2nd back in the game.
JCC needs to be dropped behind Caleb. There simply is no debate to be had here. God and Shane Beamer love him, but he just doesn't have "it", and his entrance into the game is simply a give-away of the play being run.
Brewer needs to get his head on straight. I know there are a lot of defenders saying that his TD in the endzone was on Ford, but I just don't buy it. Yes, Ford didn't do everything he should have on that play. Yes it may have been a TD if he did.
But that was a terrible place -- first and ten inside the 40 as I recall -- to throw an all or nothing pass. Especially when Byrn looked to be running wide open underneath.
I love the gunslinger mentality. I need it tempered by a realization of the coverage and the percentages.
Finally, the penalties. Just. Stop.
I think you need to dial down the negativity a bit here and enjoy the win for an evening. All will be made clear in film review.
I think you need to consider that an honest appraisal of the entire game doesn't require anyone to slap my wrist for "negativity".
I'm not any less of a fan for recognizing that as pretty as the box score looked on the ground for the game, the first and second halves of this game were completely different, and therefore we probably shouldn't go off proclaiming our running woes are over.
I'm enjoying the win just fine, thank you.
I'm glad you're enjoying that, sincerely. But still, it looks like you took as pessimistic a stance as possible on every single thing we did, even the things we did well. It wasn't always pretty, but this team just isn't gonna win pretty, at least not for a while.
I appreciate that. I'm sorry I came across as pessimistic. I think there's just a fine and fairly insubstantial line between that and objective assessment.
Trust me, I enjoyed it tremendously. I'm not going to say I've discovered a trick to great play, or that our troubles are over, but I did sit with my 7 month old on my lap for the entire 2nd half, and she divided time between looking out window, playing with toys, watching the game, and cooing happily and then slept for the last hour. I am willing to try that again next game.
For science.
It's a fair point. And definitely keep that little one around from the start next time.
cherish these times brother........and keep in mind, its not the outcome of the game that's important, it's the time with your children watching it together, no matter how old they are, that counts.....i speak from experience, trust me.......this a bond that will only grow, and become a part of the fabric of not only your life, but her's too......
I don't think he's being pessimistic. I think he's just calling it like he sees it. The writing on the wall is if we don't fix these things our record through the rest of our ACC play is going to be pretty ugly.
My eyes told me the same thing ford and phillips are still young and it showed with dropped balls and missed opportunities...I think the d line and linebackers are weaker then I thought at the beginning of the season we are going to see a lot of bear zero man because the secondary is the strongest part of our D...I disagree with the blame on Brewer for the end zone pick Ford should have fought or broken up the catch just inexperience on his part...I don't think we will see the running attack back this season..we did it to protect the lead against a less talented team...At this point I think it will be an up and down season probably no ACCCG but who knows the coastal probably won't be decided until November...I think if the young players stay healthy and get more in game experience next season could be special...GO HOKIES!!!
Yup, it's gonna be up and down for sure. We might stumble into a bit of success this season, but next year could be something awesome.
I found this comforting in 2012. I found it a little less comforting in 2013. You can't say every year is a rebuilding year.
In 2012, our line was still coached and recruited by Curt Newsome and we had a very simple passing tree. When you play 22 true freshmen in 2 years, I think it's safe to say you're in rebuilding mode.
My other worry is we have already given up more 20+ yard plays in five games than I think we did last year in 13 games.
Keep in mind that Bud's defense is a very demanding system for players. One missed assignment = mucho bad news. We've got a ton of new guys on the field this year, really for the first time in three years, and they've got some growing up to do, coupled with some injuries to key guys. There's a ton of upside on this team and as they get more experienced, they'll be a whole bunch of fun to watch.
Translation: this years defense isn't as good as last years.
What do you expect when you replace 7 multi-year starters and major contributors or so? Now, it isn't, but it has the potential to be very, very good down the road.
*plus Facyson.. and Maddy playing hurt/out 2-4 weeks
And they really got after us (sorry) on that drive when Dadi went out too.
This year's defense looks quite similar to last year's defense when Kyle Fuller was injured...
With Maddy out, the entire front 7 is different.
I'll take the W, but I'm still a bit sour about that first half. We've gotta be better next week.
I really hope Shai's injury isn't as bad as Frank seems to think it is. FWIW, I'm pretty sure that quote was before the training staff evaluation. I'm still holding on to the hope that it might be a mild knee sprain.
On the plus side, it's really good to see Trey back.
I got the same impression about the Beamer quote, so I'm still hopeful
From Hokiehaven it looks like Shai might have torn his ACL again. Not good since he is our best back
From the official VT football Twitter acct
Does that mean he hasn't torn his ACL? I don't think it does. Sprained knee may be the diagnosis right afterwards due to selling and before an MRI. Goforth and Beamer seem plenty concerned.
It means that if there is swelling, you can't tell if it is torn until the swelling loosens up or an MRI reveals it Sometimes they don't do an MRI immediately because of the swelling. being revaluated could be an MRI or checking it out. If you feel the back of the knee kind of rolled up into a ball...bad news. of course that is just one ligament. Could be a sprained knee ...which isn't a surprise that could happen to a relatively new ACL repair person.
'Sprain' is catchall for ligament damage over a wide range of degrees. All sprains are ligament tears - the question is, is it a relatively small/partial tear that can heal in a few weeks or a full tear that will require surgery. The initial diagnosis for any on-field ligament tear is usually 'knee sprain to be evaluated further' and then MRI'd a couple days later - the only time you hear a torn ligament diagnosed in real time is when the injury is so traumatic as to make it obvious (Willis McGahee, the South Carolina kid a couple years ago).
Bottom line is that it may or may not be bad for Shai, but 'sprain' and 'tear' are one and the same thing, it's just a question of how bad.
Bring back more power I formation. I think we execute it the best and should build off of that. We have to have a competent run game.
FWIW- Shai's mom seems to have confirmed that its another torn ACL. friend of a friend knows her and she said VT's trainer thinks its acl but hoping for just a sprain. Was on crutches and knee wrapped in ice ect ect.
I'm gonna chalk that up to mom being overly concerned and protective because, well, mom. But, just in case, I have bourbon on standby for tomorrow.
We are too late for a medical redshirt for Shai aren't we?
Yes, the cutoff is three games.
All the best to Shai and his family.
The freshmen/sophomores continue to be the top players. If this team can just get some consistency and get Brewer to stop throwing the ball to opposing DBs...
Guys UNC's D is terrible as well 70+ and now 40+ by Clemson. They look really shaky over the middle for sure. Hopefully Brew can be accurate and find Bucky, Ford and Phillips streaking wide open!!
Definitely afraid of Switzer though.
I have UNC -Clemson on one monitor and Miami-Duke on the other.
Just find a way for Switzer to show up to class, and unc is done.
Hopefully after Marshawn Williams and Ferrell Edmunds III have softened that line up a bit to the tune of 2 TDs each.
Glad VT got the win. A little bit upset VT didn't win with the conviction expected.
I'm very concerned with Loeffler's offense, play design, and play calling. IMO, he's tinkering too much. Furthermore, he's not giving his offensive line and Brewer a chance to succeed. Even in the 2nd half, I don't feel Loeffler called a great game. He never built off of the running success (but I guess he didn't have to).
What I want to see. On 1st and 2nd down, Loeffler should mix up quick passes (slants and outs) and runs. It seems he's trying too many drop back passes on 1st and 2nd, leaving the team in 3rd and long. It was way too easy for W.Mich to defend. After a running game is established, mix in the play action and bootleg. After the quick passing game is established, mix in the drop backs with intermediate and long routes.
I think a big part of the problem is that, with so many young guys and mixup up front, we're not quite sure what we've got. Are we good at mashing up front? Are we good at dropping back and picking up chunk yardage without playaction? Are we good at the quick passing game? We have a good idea on a few of those, but we're not quite sure yet. Or maybe Lefty is perfectly aware of what he's got, and he just doesn't quite trust his guys to execute and beat the man in front of him. All that said, I think the second half was pretty excellent. Lefty & co. came out and said, "we're gonna get 300 yards rushing. End of story." I think we'll likely see a bit more of that sort of mindset to start games from here on out. Very rarely will this team win pretty. Lefty, Beamer, and the rest of the staff at this point are just trying to figure out the best way to win ugly from week to week.
If this is true, then Loeffler needs to get better at training his players in practice. If his players can't execute, then that's on him for either a) not preparing his players well enough; or b) not designing and calling plays that are to his player's strengths.
I'm really interested to see where this offense is at the end of this year. If it still appears disjointed, out-of-sync, and unprogressive (plays don't build on one another), that's on Loeffler for tinkering too much and never establishing an offense. I'm definitely cynical, but I really hope Loeffler has a plan that I just can't discern yet.
That's the issue with playing so many young guys. You know they're the best option, but they might not be the most consistent. They'll continue to grow and the offense will continue to look more cohesive as time goes on. Unfortunately, it could be pretty bumpy at times. We already saw last year that, even with a depleted roster, Lefty can make a very good gameplan to take advantage of his players' strengths and incorporate plays that build on each other (see Miami for a perfect example). The man knows what he's doing and the players are buying in, it's just a matter of getting the guys to do it 100% of the time on the field.
Everyone is playing young guys. And we are in an era of wide open offenses and we are, again, stuck in the mud.
Enough excuses. Walk into the offensive meeting room, assess what assets you have and what you do well and go execute. Stop letting the defense dictate to you, determine what you want to do and go do it. You're in year 2, you aren't too young, it's not too complicated. These are bad defenses. Execute better.
I second this...I just watched a true freshman QB from Clemson throw for 6 TD's in his first start. I then wondered how much of our offensive issues was not playing to our strengths and Loeffler just doing whatever he wants to do or youth and experience issues. Really starting to sour on whatever Loeffler wants to do, it's like Stiney 2.0...especially with those bubble screens!!!! Other than a good year at Temple, Loeffler doesn't have much of a resume'...just saying.
Against a D that is ranked between 120-123 depending on whether you are going by yards per game or points allowed... there's probably a reason why the Clemson coaching staff picked this week to start him
Frank Beamer didn't have the greatest resume when he was hired either
You also have to understand this isn't any QB that they had. The kid was a 5* rated QB #1 rated dual threat QB. And lets be honest chad morris is a great offensive coordinator and has been there for years.
Comparing Clemson to VT is like comparing Apples to Cake.. One has all the ingredients in it ready for success while one is just a simple apple waiting to become an Apple Pie.
Pie beats cake every time
Has Clemson played 22 true freshmen combined this season and last? I don't think so. They also were never coached by Curt Newsome.
Five games in, excuses start to wear out
Exactly. Were 18 games into his system and a general eye test says that we haven't improved much at all. How is it that we put about the same points as Tulane + Wofford against GT with Georgia Southern throwing up 38 in a half against them? Less points than Purdue and about the same as Idaho vs. Western Kentucky? I mean winning only 35-17 against Western Kentucky is embarrassing. We're freakin Virginia Tech, we should be spanking teams like Western Michigan. I'm getting really sick of Brewers dumb mistakes, Oline, and stupid penalties. I want to direct my anger at someone but the whole team is such a damn mess that I don't even know who to blame. It's a damn shame. Damn shame.
At the same time, the entire train has not fell off of the tracks. I feel like I know what the Loefler offense is supposed to look like, he's just doing a mediocre job of getting there. We still have what I believe to be a good QB and crazy depth of talent at RB, TE, and WR. The line needs work but it's not like we have a pee-wee league protecting Brewer.
Yes I agree with you. It wouldn't be fair for me not to acknowledge the talent we do have on offense. Bucky, Cam, Ford are going to be a force to reckon with. Brewers awful interceptions are just very deflating. It strips any momentum we have. I also feel as if loeffler puts him in those positions with his play calls. He expects Brewer to do to much when he's really just a good game manager. I really don't understand why we don't run the ball from center either. I don't like the fact that our running backs need 5 yards from the get go to get to the line of scrimmage. These are just my opinions, i'm not a football guru and I'm sure 95% of the TKP community knows more than me. It's all just deflating. And now hearing of Darrel Taylor's unexpected commitment to Tennessee really rubs salt in the wounds. Tough to be a positive fan right now.
It appears you are an unapologetic Loeffler fan, which is fine, but I don't know how you can conclude "The man knows what he's doing." I wouldn't make this conclusion until he proves that on the field. Sure, point to Temple. But I'm pointing to the 1 and 5/12s seasons as a VT offensive coordinator. Make as many excuses as you want, but I will not accept a bottom 1/2 offense as successful.
Furthermore, I think we can differentiate a lack of execution due to inexperience and play-calling aptitude. Maybe Loeffler can call a good game, but the amount of 3rd and 7+ is extremely concerning. While we can see sometimes that 3rd and long is due a drop ball by a freshman, but I think a lot of times we see too many plays on first and second that don't make sense, like the deep routes and bootlegs that have not yet been set up.
I don't know if I'm seeing progress. Like I said, I want to see it. I expect to see it by December.
Couldn't agree more. I thought I was the only one who has felt like this offense is always in third and somewhat long
Considering I've actually talked to the man, watched him coach at practice and sat in his meeting room, yes, I'm an unapologetic Loeffler fan. I don't see how people can see the mess he was handed and expect everything to magically get better after a year and 4 games. Does he call every game perfectly? Nope, but none do. He's got an incredibly young team this year with a line that is 2 years removed from being coached/recruited by Curt Newsome. That's not being set up for success. It honestly pissess me off when fans start screaming for his head because "I will not accept a bottom 1/2 offense as successful." Well, it's still a significant improvement from what we've had in any year involving Curt Newsome, except when he had Tyrod of course, 'cause let's face it, Tyrod didn't need a line.
Give it time. You probably won't see the kind of progress you want by December, but you're gonna start seeing it in 2015 and 2016 as the level of talent in the program continues to rise and those young kids get more time in the system. The man inherited a dumpster fire. Last year was all about extinguishing said dumpster fire and putting a band aid on the offense. This year is where we're starting to actually build something.
Worth noting that this is not remotely directed solely at you. A good chunk of the fan base seems to under the impression that Newsome's influence can be cleared out in a year and a half.
Blaming Curt Newsome is easy, yet provides us no insight without relevant facts to back it up. Newsome was not responsible for devising the offensive game plan, not responsible for calling plays, and he was not the sole recruiter. I agree Newsome was not good O-line coach, but while his coach from 2006-2012, VT's offense wasn't that bad. The total offensive and (rushing offense) of VT was as follows: (Note: cfbstats.com only goes back until 2008)
2008 103 (35)
2009 49 (14)
2010 41 (23)
2011 35 (28)
2012 83 (81)
2013 102 (110)
2014 66 (61)
So looking at the FACTS, during Newsome's tunure, VT has had a top HALF Total Offense 3/5 years listed and a top QUARTER Rushing Offense 4/5 years (eh, 35 is not top quarter, but close). Loeffler currently has a barely top HALF total rushing offense right now and let's not talk about 2013.
Sidenote: What specifically did Curt Newsome do that is uncorrectable in 1.5 years? The O-line is looking better, playing better. The depth and seniority is good. I do believe however, Loeffler sets them up to fail by calling too many drop back passes on 1st and 2nd down.
Next, why shouldn't we expect improvement by December? Why would we expect a man who's job is to make a good offensive scheme and game plan to not improve his scheme and game plan, considering it's well below average? That's baffling to me. You're already searching for excuses for this year.
I think it's really easy to over-simplify from any standpoint. From 2008-2011, we had some combination of Tyrod, Evans, RMFW, DW4, Boykin, and Coale on the field at some point. Dynamic playmakers cover up for deficiencies elsewhere. How often did we see some totally blown play end up being huge because of one of those guys? The drop-off from 2012-2013 was a direct result of incoherent recruiting and a failure to target guys for specific positions. We also lacked a real feature RB that could blow open plays, and we lost record-setting receivers to graduation. Couple that with the fact that Grimes had to come in for 2013 with a hodge-podge line that hadn't been coached well, then Searels takes over in 2014 and has a different style and did some shuffling, and now we're seeing growing pains from all of this.
So I guess the TL;DR version is: we can't pin anything on one coach or position group, past or present, at this point. This is a problem with many variables, and it's impossible to draw real conclusions at this point about what we have or who we will be. We're still figuring out what we have and what works. I'd like it to come along faster, but look at how many true freshman are playing right now. We're in for a bumpy ride.
I agree with all of this. But, should we expect nothing from the Offensive Coordinator? Should we not expect a coherent game plan using the assets available?
I'm not suggesting VT should be a top-10 offense. I'm suggesting I should see some form of coherence and structure.
VT has played two very mediocre defenses (GT and W. Mich are tied for 73), yet VT struggled to put together an offensive game plan to take advantage of those games. In the W. Michigan game, the offense struggled until a mandate from Beamer to run the ball down their throats. So, when VT's offense looked it's best, it wasn't even Loeffler's game plan (at least it seems).
I should grant props where it's due. The OSU game looked like an offense on the rise. I just don't understand why it seems to have regressed against weaker teams.
Sure, Loeffler deserves some criticism here. He clearly likes to tinker and try to find something that will work. If he had stuck with pounding the rock a bit earlier, this would have been a much different game. I'm 100% with you on the 1st and 2nd down calls - run the damn ball! I'm tired of always seeing 2nd-and-long. But I think there is a mitigating factor here. Our OL got very little going for the run game against GT (127 yards? pathetic), so Loeffler clearly approached the WMU game with little trust for that unit getting it done. Through the first half, he was mostly right (or at least looked like it when we had 82 yards, more than half of which came from one run), but clearly Beamer saw an opportunity to try to just force our will. It paid off, and for that I am glad the head coach stepped in. Perhaps that will be an area from which our OC and our offense in general will grow. Like I said in another thread, successful reps, regardless of opponent, will pay off.
Not to kick the can down the road too much, because I agree that I want to see some growth from game to game and was hoping for better by now, but I think our performance against UNC will be a good indicator. They have a suspect defense in general (92nd rushing D and 127th passing D), so if we come out with a balanced attack it will show that the game plan is formulating and progressing. We should get a bunch of yards. If we struggle against UNC's D, then I will be extremely concerned.
Amem brother. Beamer should have been stepping in and correcting issues sooner.
Edited out. Always finish the thread before posting.
I doubt we will ever know but it did look like CFB said alright lefty cut the sh** lets run the damn ball and win the game. The longer we let them stay in the game the easier it is for another ECU/GT meltdown. IDK if the team could/can handle a 3rd loss like that with our ACC schedule coming up.
good points. unc will be the litmus test. i hope loeffler passes.
Like Hell we can.... where's my torch and pitchfork?
VT is 11th in the nation on 3rd down conversions
We get a lot of practice!
I have to be completely honest and say that I don't think Loeffler knows at all what he is doing.
Take a look at what Chad Morris did in his first year at Clemson. In 2010, the season before his arrival, they averaged 139 rushing yards, 195 passing yards, 334 total yards, and 24 points per game. His first season as OC in 2011 resulted in 158 rushing yards (+19), 282 passing yards (+87), 440 total yards (+106) and 33 points per game (+9). In his second year, rushing increased an additional 33 ypg, passing by 40 ypg, total ypg by 73, and points per game by 8.
Loeffler, on the other hand, inherited a team that averaged 145 rushing, 230 passing, and 376 total yards, with 25 points per game in 2012, very similar to what Clemson was doing prior to their coaching change. In Loeffler's first season (against much easier competition than Virginia Tech faced the year before, I might add), the offense averaged 119 rushing (-26), 236 passing (+6), 356 total yards (-20) and 22.5 ppg (-1.5). Assuming ESPN's stats are correct, this season we are currently averaging 141 rush (+22), 265 passing (+29), and 406 total yards (+50), with 29.8 ppg (+6.3). However, these numbers are inflated as a result of our offensive regression the year prior and actually represent marginal improvement over the previous coaching staff.
What it boils down to is that this offense has no identity. Loeffler keeps using multiple packages and formations for specific situations, all of which key the defense off as to what we are doing. What makes other teams (such as Clemson) successful on offense is that they can run multiple plays out of the same formations and using the same personnel, allowing for an uptempo attack that keeps the defense guessing (which is what we seem to be pushing towards).
While I was happy with the improvements in the running game this week, like a few other people here I think that the stat-line today is not indicative of how poorly the offense actually played. We wore a bad team down and imposed our will at the end of the game. This will not happen against good teams. Take away the special teams plays early and this is a game that is tied at the half. There is no excuse for us not to be dropping 50+ points on a team like this. Unless this offense figures out what they are, we are going to be fighting just to make a bowl game.
I know some people will see this kind of talk as negative or pessimistic, but I see it as being objective. This is a bad football team. This is not your typical Hokie team. We lack discipline and execution, we can't run the ball, we turn it over far too much to close games out. But we've all seen the glimpses of what this team can do, and I think that is what frustrates us. It ultimately falls on the coaching staff to get this team headed in the right direction. If they do, we could still win the ACC, but right now there is a lot of work left to do.
(Sorry that this is so long and the formatting is terrible).
I'll take an increase of 7 points per game year over year ALLLLL day. You obviously have a short memory. Yeah, we had an identity with Stiney and ocain...it was outdated and predictable as shit. Those fuckin guys would regularly run the ball on third and long. Our talent level was terrible last year and this year we're extremely young, inexperienced and often times both. We're going to be fine with lefty.
"Here are some numbers, Loeffler is a bad coach. Look what [other guy] did at [other school in completely different situation]." Yeah, sorry, football doesn't work that way.
I don't think Loeffler is a bad coach and I do think he knows what he wants to do.
I just don't think he has the personnel to achieve it. Either they need more practice in the system (WRs & QBs), or need more practice and talent more suited to the schemes he wants to run (OL).
That said, I'm not sure why the numbers referenced by Wittimus should be discounted. It's as good a measure as anything.
By just about any metric, Loeffler's first season and 5 games hasn't been a great showcase for his schemes. What would you suggest people use? W-L? Turnover margin? Yards per play? What's the metric you think most objectively reflects the state of a program?
Yes, when Loeffler's scheme works, it works beautifully, and gives us an idea of just how high our ceiling is running it. I think we could explode the VT record books if we could consistently execute the game plan. We'll never forget how good a truly exceptional talent like TT or Mike Vick made us despite schematic and O-line flaws. But one can easily imagine a Loeffler scheme executed well with a competent O-line having much better and more consistent success without needing an exceptional talent under center.
I think what Wittimus and others are alluding to, including Joe and other staff, is that the measure of an OC isn't just what their ceiling is, but how they work with the talent they have to achieve success on the field.
Now: Tell me this is a rebuiliding year, and that CFB & his staff have internalized that and are playing to get all these young players running like a well-oiled machine by the end of the year and in time for next year, and I think most people questioning the schemes would ease up on their objections a bit.
But all we have are what the coaching staff tells us, and asking us to interpret hopeful tea-leaves about what their true intentions are can be a stretch when we struggle to perform even the most basic of tasks (disciplined play at home without penalties), or handle teams with ease that we should be dispatching with little drama.
So in my opinion, grumbles can be excused. I know in my case, it was easy to excuse ECU, but it was absolutely impossible to do so with GT. After the debacle against the bees, a first half like we had against WMU really drove home that something is terribly out of sync with this team.
What concerns me now is that I don't know if the 2nd half was Loeffler's offense, or Frank Beamer's offense. I suspect it was Frank's. And I hope that it is used going forward not as the offensive scheme, but as a foundation upon which Loeffler's schemes can be better employed with the talent we have. But if it implies we are going to be scrapping Loeffler's schemes for the most part, I think we run the risk of diluting future success at the expense of immediate wins.
I don't think Frank would submarine Loeffler. I think the change of focus in the 2nd half was him gently reminding Loeffler that in the absence of exceptional QB and WR talent & skill & execution, running the ball makes all other schematic options easier to employ.
You forgot to factor in talent differential. Especially at Clemson. Sammy Watkins comes to mind.
I think this is the biggest issue in interpreting year-to-year stats. It's hard to isolate any one factor as being the difference. Player continuity is huge, especially in college. Guys come and go, some don't pan out after a great year, injuries play a role, etc. It's a fair comparison to look at trends over several years, but the "year 1 vs. year 2" thing is so hard to interpret, especially in college.
You make some valid points, but your analysis is based upon the assumption that OC Leoffler had the same personnel during his 1st year as Ocain-Stinespring did their last year. They didn't.
Now lets be clear here, I also have concerns about how effective OC Leoffler's plays are at VT. Seems to me that it is heavily reliant upon a QB who can read the defense and make the right adjustments to the play that has been called. I.e. the plays seem overly complicated, but I'm willing to give the man 2-3 more years. He was given a smoldering dumpster fire of an offense, so let us see what he can accomplish with his recruits.
Final observation. For what its worth, lets remember Tyrod Taylor was a four - five star recruit. Since his recruitment, we have yet to recruit anyone with his talent level at the QB position.
I think that is the idea for having 2 TEs that can line up on the line plus split out wide... you seem to ignore this fact altogether. I think that was also the reason they wanted JCC to start, as he can line up as a WR, but he just can't do enough as a RB to get in there.
Keep in mind that the stats you cite from 2012 was with some NFL caliber senior WRs... they were gone in 2013, so you'd have to expect some drop-off... to pin that on an OC seems like a stretch
I agree that I definitely didn't feel confident after this win. One easy comparison is WMU has never scored on us till now. I didn't just see it on the O, but D looked shaky too.
Word is Beamer enforced the change to running after the first half. Doesn't give me warm and fuzzies either.
And can we please stop the JCC experiment? It doesn't work.
My main takeaway is that we are going to have a nasty stud team in a few years, which means The Magical 2016 season is still on. We may on have the tip in now, but by then, we will be fully dipped for sure.
I really hope VT is fully dipped in 2016. Even with a new QB, VT should have the best offense since LT3's sophomore year (35th in total offense). Will they? I'm not so sure Loeffler can direct this team to that level.
2016 could be an amazing year. It also has the potential to be the same mediocrity of 2012-2014.
I really want to believe in Loeffler, I really do.
This game almost feels like a loss to me with the news about Shai. That kid is so good and now he is out for the season. I believe Juice is just as good, but damn, we had a great 1-2 punch going on.
Fortunately RB is our second-deepest position, and we will still have a 1-2 punch. Terrible for Shai and the team, still.
With Shai most likely done for the season (and hopefully only the season), the situation we now found ourselves in is Juice as our featured tailback, with Caleb, Edmunds and JCC battling for number two on the depth chart. I'm hoping today's performance indicates Trey is back and ready to compete for playing time, but if not then we might see Caleb skyrocket up the depth chart. JCC is a known commodity and has probably hit his ceiling.
A Williams/Edmunds backfield might pack a decent 1-2 punch, with Caleb as a breather and JCC with his 1-3 carries a game situationally.
Honestly, I don't want JCC to get any carries. I feel like that they would just be better spent with someone else. Caleb now has his chance to show if he can compete, hope he takes it.
From what I've seen from Stroman on punt return I don't think JCC needs to be one of the two on kickoff return. As someone mentioned, Stroman is going to take one to the house sooner or later. I've been really impressed with him on PR. Put him in on KR too and let him do his thing.
Disagree. See Andy's "five thoughts" column. Stroman is a possible game-changer at punt returner, but with Facyson injured, CB depth is thin. If you keep putting Stroman out in positions where he can get pummeled, you're asking for trouble.
and since our returners don't understand getting the ball at the 25 yard-line is better than the 10 it would be a bad idea. /SARCASTICA.
Why are we the only team in FBS to return a kick 4 yards deep into the endzone???
Didn't even think about that, but it's a damn good point. I was just thinking about getting the best personnel on the field.
In other news, I was at the Clemson-UNC game and was extremely unimpressed with their pass defense. We should be able to exploit them downfield, and if we don't, it's solely our fault. I also saw that Miami beat Duke pretty good, I didn't get to watch it though so I'd love for someone to weigh in on what they saw from that game.
Miami has sports of looking very dynamic and downright dominate on both sides of the ball, but then lose momentum and fall apart. Very talented team, seemingly poorly coached. So, Miami is who we thought they were. Duke is the polar opposite and was overwhelmed at times with miamis athleticism. Duke is more athletic than before 2013 season. But they were very lucky last year, I expect them to norm this year.
I'm not sure we gave the offense to take advantage of UNC. They will score against us, can we keep up?
All I know is that our offense better take a step forward. With ECU dumping a smooth 70 on the Tar Heels, our offense better be ready to roll in our ACC road opener. Just now hearing Shai is out for the year, really sorry to hear that. He runs so hard though, he's gonna take some hits down the road. Marshawn looked great today, and if he can limit the fumbles we should be in good shape. Hope the coaches retire the JCC/Newsome play this week. It's a total waste. End arounds are for the birds unless you have Percy Harvin
I think we have the weapons to take advantage of their poor pass defense, but idk if we will attack them schematically to take advantage of them and that worries me. I somewhat jokingly mentioned that it seems like Scot plays a chess match against himself every week, but honestly we do have a tendency to make bad defenses look good or great so I am a bit worried.
I really needed this you guys. It's nice seeing critique tempered with just the right amounts of positivity and pessimism. The other sites are in full blown chicken little mode right now.
Geez, I feel that sometimes TKP members can be a little overboard at times, I can't imagine what "the other sites" are saying about the team.
I can sum it up. Beamer is terrible and so is his son. We won't win another game. Lefty is the worst coach in the country. Sometimes I wonder if they read what they type. They spew hate about their own team and then wonder why kids choose to play somewhere else.
I would vomit all over those forums
... and no one could tell the difference between that and the posts they're used to.
Just try and post something positive over on 247. Downvote city.
In my opinion, next week will tell us a lot about what to expect the rest of the season. UNC's defense is about as useful as a poopy flavored lollipop and if we can't hang 35 on them, it's going to be a bumpy ride.
It's already a bumpy ride
As long as we win I don't care how many points we score. Starting 0-2 in ACC play would likely be the dagger to the heart.
"plopsicle"
I still don't expect much from this year. We knew we weren't going to be good.
According to the ESPN box score, Cam didn't have a single catch yesterday. Anyone know how many times he was targeted? Was he the one that let that late TD throw slip through his fingers (although Brewer overthrew it just a bit) or was that Ford?
Yes, he dropped the pass you are referring to.
I think I only saw him targeted 3 or 4 times, but I don't know.
It didn't seem like he was on the field much. I saw far more Dmitri than normal however.
I think lefty an Searls need to get on the same page. The runs out of the I formation were working girl 2 main reasons. The hole was defined and everybody knew wher it should be. Secondly, the te's were better utilized as blockers and they executed. Keep going it until the other team can stop it.
I agree, they were working girls and apparently that was a good thing.
Looking forward to French's tape evaluation of the working girl scheme out of the I.
Yes, and how they were able to keep WMU from plugging the hole
And that's why they had the runs.
Hey, this football analysis thing is easier than I thought.
SO after watching the game and taking some notes its clear to see we run the ball very well in I formation. Yes it might be obvious but it works and we need to continue this. Loeffler should see and get our team a set of plays that we can run well. I would take 4 yards on 1st down any day!!
IDK if its just me but Teller looks real real good on the O-line. He has a quick burst and rarely seems to be flat footed. I would love to see Wang slide over to Center and Teller to LG. That would be a nasty 2 right there and I could see us running that way more often. Yes Farris is good but Wang and Teller is 1000 better> than Wang and Farris.
I would love to see Beamer and Lefty come out with power football vs UNC and then go PA over the middle. Clemson exposed the, big time and I'm expecting/hoping to see the same thing.
Some numbers for consideration:
Through 5 games, VT put up the following rushing numbers (thanks to Chris Coleman withthis TSL article for providing the info)
2013: 181 carries, 699 yards, 3.86 ypc
2014: 196 carries, 873 yards, 4.5 ypc
Also through 5 games, the Hokies have put up the following total yardage numbers:
2013: 328.6 yards per game
2014: 422.2 yards per game
I'd call that some pretty significant improvement, especially considering we don't have Thomas to go all 3rd-and-Logan on a defense anymore. The offense is heading in the right direction for sure.
I'd like to know how that compares to what opponents were/are giving up.
EDIT: Did my own research.
2013 First 5 Opponents: 155.16 rush yards allowed/game, 3.98 YPC, 369.14 yards/game
2014 First 5 Opponents: 150.34 rush yards allowed/game, 4.30 YPC, 363.22 yards/game
2013's numbers are skewed by Western Carolina's utter ineptitude: they gave up 277 yards/game on the ground and 6 yards/carry. (I looked at that three times to make sure it was right.) If you pull out the 1-AA games from both years:
2013 First 5 Opponents: 124.68 rush yards allowed/game, 3.48 YPC, 345.98 yards/game
2014 First 5 Opponents: 146.83 rush yards allowed/game, 4.22 YPC, 353.22 yards/game
The offense is still better (I think?) but they're helped out by facing a slightly friendlier slate of defenses so far.
It's a good point (and the reason I laugh at shows like "Numbers Never Lie" cause, let's face it, they can say whatever you want them to say if you try hard enough), but my point is that at least we're seeing an uptick in yardage, even against inferior competition. Not to mention we're putting up more yards even when throwing away possessions left and right. If we were lagging behind our 2013 numbers at this point, I'd be very concerned. Happily, that isn't the case.
Offensive philosophy remain unclear with current 5 game data set in 2014. Appears our best results come from
An Up-tempo, with minimum personnel substitution during each series. I believe our offensive coaches have been over-coaching during the games between multiple substitution after every play and 'confusing' offensive schemes, it was very apparent in the first half we were lost. Key going forward is eliminate mistakes (penalties, turnovers, & over-coaching) as noted this is a young, talented team with the potential to make a run for the Coastal. Starting this Sat @ UNC.
Anybody know how many tackles Rogers has this year?
edit: answered my own question. ESPN reports:
5 tackle assists on the year.
A fullback with 5 tackles.
Which one Bucky Rogers, Sam Rogers or Roger Rogers?
bahahah/ SARCASTICA
I really hope all of them are from special teams play.
I know one was against the returner in last week's INT.