At this time last season Virginia Tech was also coming off a win over North Carolina. However, the Hokies sat at 5-1. Their only loss was to, at the time, No. 1 Alabama, in a game much closer than the scoreboard made things appear. Of course the wheels came off after that, but nevertheless on paper it would seem that things were going much better at the midpoint last year.
Yet there is some feeling of optimism right now, that didn't exist last year. It's as though last season fans were pessimistic despite the record, and this year fans are optimistic despite the record. It feels like there is consistency at QB (insert joke here about consistent interceptions), the offense finally has some identity that includes a running game, and much of Tech's success thus far has been at the hands of underclassmen.
But what do the numbers say?
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
First some of the goods from the first half of the season:
- Virginia Tech is averaging 4.33 sacks/game, second in the country, and has accumulated a leading 185 sack yards.
- The Hokies have possessed the ball for 34:55 per game, third in the country. Although, it's an overrated stat, but it's something the offense tries to do so it's good to see they are succeeding.
- DBU is second in the country in passes broken up.
- Opponents are converting only 24.1% of third downs, the second lowest allowed.
- Bud's defense is only allowing 44.9% of passes to be completed, the lowest rate in FBS.
Next some of the bads:
- The Hokies are second in interceptions thrown with 11 (Thanks UNLV!).
- Virginia Tech is 95th in the country in YPP, gaining just 5.21 yards per play.
- On kickoff returns, the team is gaining just 17.75 yards on average - 117th in the country.
- VT is one of 10 teams that has yet to have a 50+ yard play.
And the ugly:
- Virginia Tech has committed 9.5 penalties per game, 9th worst in FBS.
- DB-Ewww has given up 16, 20+ yard rushing plays (third worst in the nation) and 22, 20 yard passing plays (23rd worst). The combined 38 plays is fifth worst in the country.
The Record
Even those who thought we might start 4-2 likely didn't envision it happening quite this way and yet here we are. The uncertainty many of us had going into the season has only been amplified to this point and the 7-10 win range most of us predicted remains completely intact.
Brian Fremeau breaks down each game's "non-garbage-time" score difference into four components: offense, defense, special teams, and extra possession(s) (since a team who gets more possessions than another would score, on average, 1.9 additional points). Here is how our FBS games break down this season (Learn more about game splits.)
Through Western Michigan, the offense and defense contributed (win or lose) fairly equally; both contributed to the wins and both suffer blame for the losses. However, against UNC we saw the offense give us a negative contribution towards the 17-point differential, while the defense contributed over 16 points!
Further cause for optimism is that thus far special teams have made a positive contribution in every game.
Special Teams aka BeamerBall
(More details on methods can be found at http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/feist)
Speaking of the contribution of special teams, it must be mentioned that after finishing the last three seasons with overall special teams efficiencies that ranked 75th, 62nd, and 68th the Hokies have quietly moved back among the leaders at 24th this season. FEI breaks down how each unit has specifically fared relative to all other teams and the average:
While the field goal kicking and return games have been at or a little below average thus far, the Hokies have been quite dominant at stopping their opponents from doing damage in the same. Consider:
- Although VT ranks 79th in average punt distance at 40.68 yards, opponents are averaging just 3 yards per return and have opted to attempt a return on just 12 of 32 punts.
- Opponents are gaining over 20 yards per kickoff return (62nd) but have gone over 30 yards just once and never over 40.
- Virginia Tech has held opponents to a 53.8% field goal percentage.
Is BeamerBall back?
The Offense
The Hokies have finished with the following S&P+ offense rankings recently: 2013 (91st), 2012 (68th), 2011 (45th) and 2010 (7th).
Given that, one has to wonder how much of a leap Tech needs to make from 2013 to give fans optimism, and how much of a leap is reasonable?
At the midpoint the offense ranks 83rd. It would be easy to make the case that such an improvement is neither enough for optimism, nor being constrained by what's possible from one season to the next. If Scot Loeffler is going to keep many fans on his side after this season, the team will need to make more improvement in the second half. Where does S&P+ rate the Hokies on specific metrics?
The team thus far has an average-at-best success rate (gaining enough yards based on down and distance), and that's the highlight. IsoPPP, a measure of explosiveness, rates Virginia Tech about as explosive as a wet paper sack. Otherwise, the Hokies are sitting a little below average rushing, passing, on standard downs and passing downs. This offers us little to get excited about.
FEI generally agrees with S&P+ and has Tech at 95th. Further, it breaks down the offense using some personality metrics.
FEI has Tech even further below average on most metrics including First Down Rate (drives where at least one first down is obtained), Available Yards (% of possible yards gained), Explosive Drives (% of drives averaging 10+ yards per play), and Value Drives (those starting in your own territory and making it to at least the opponent's 30). FEI does offer one area where the Hokies have excelled: Methodical Drives, those lasting 10 plays or more. The Hokies rank 43rd.
The Defense
In Bud we trust. For good reason.
The Foster defense is once again—yawn—looking elite, currently rated 6th in S&P+. Where specifically is Virginia Tech excelling?
Lower ratings are better here as they are relevant to what opposing offenses are able to do against a defense. Nearly across the board, VT has above average ratings including the 9th-best opposing success rate. One weakness, not surprisingly, has been a tendency to give up explosive plays (IsoPPP) where the unit ranks a disappointing 107th. Can our stud DB's make the adjustments needed to shut down the deep ball moving forward?
FEI is not quite as generous, ranking the defense 29th. Let's hope FEI doesn't find itself in a dark alley with Bud Foster. On specific personality metrics FEI rates the Hokies similarly to S&P+:
Of course opposing offenses are having explosive drives at an above average rate, but otherwise they are getting shut down in multiple ways. Somewhat the opposite of the traditional bend-don't-break defensive strategies we have seen over the years, Virginia Tech is breaking but not bending, rating No. 2 in the country at preventing methodical drives.
What to Expect
What do I think happens in the second half? Here are my predictions:
- Brewer's interception rate only comes down slightly, but we continue to throw the ball at a much higher rate than in the past. Brett Favre leads the NFL in career TD's but also career INT's. The passing game continues to be a pleasant surprise and frustrating mess.
- There will be significant improvement in the defense's ability to stop big plays, and not at the expense of methodical drives. Despite injuries the defense is a force in the second half.
- Thanks to improved run blocking, the run game continues to improve despite injuries to the best running backs. Sam Rogers sees an increase in caries as we anticipate pounding out rushing yardage and not explosive rushing plays.
- FEI predicts 8.3 wins, but I will go with 9 regular season wins as I believe less turnovers helps more than RB/DL injuries hurt.
- In a close game that sees us nearly lose the Commonwealth Cup, we edge UVA and escape with our 11th straight win. Unfortunately we finish 2nd in the division behind Georgia Tech, who clinches the week prior against Clemson.
What are your predictions for the second half? Post them to the comments! You could win turkey legs!
As always a thanks to Football Outsiders, cfbstats.com, and Minitab Statistical Software.
Comments
DB-U has given up 16, 20+ yard plays, fifth worst in the nation.
Torrian Gray & Bud Foster cannot be happy about that. There is no doubt they are trying to fix that.
those are 16 pass plays? vs. running plays. and how many were short routes that someone else may have been responsible for. For example, Switzer ran a tunnel screen through the heart of the LBs.....
All pass plays...as you said that could include screens that were thrown forward, but from memory I think most of us feel that the majority were against the secondary.
Take out the ECU game and this stat drops significantly. Also factor in we are one of a few schools that have not had a bye week. We've also played three teems that have big play ability in OSU,ECU and UNC. This stat will even out towards the end of the year even if Facyson red-shirts.
I was noticing something about punting and perhaps this stat breakdown lends my thought a bit of credence. It seems that AJ's punting yardage is down, yet our coverage is much better than in previous years. Is it possible that Beamer has told him to try to hang it up a bit longer rather than going for distance, so the coverage team can get downfield better to avoid a big return? It seems to me to be a pretty good trade-off, if that's the case. Anyone else noticing that?
I think Frank even said this before the UNC game. I agree that VT is consciously working this. Last week it resulted (in addition to Riley's hit just prior) in a key fumble by UNC #3 (I don't know correct last name spelling). The UNC game had a distinct Beamer Ball aroma to it.
I worked out with Brian Saunders as he was preparing for the NFL Combine a few years ago and he gave me an insight to the punting world of the pros: The pro guys like hang time more-so than distance on punts, especially 40-45 yards per punt and have a killer hang time. They also like the ball to drop to the punt returner as a nose dive (makes it more difficult to catch).
Beamer is also trying to limit outkicking the coverage.
40-45 yard average + hangtime + nose dive = pro chance
I actually have some data on this and want to do a special article on it, but lack the time currently. Unfortunately I can't find true hang time data but knowing the % of punts returned and avg yards gained tells us something about how much coverage is able to get to the returner, which is mostly related to hang time on the punt. Notice no coaches have indicated any concerns about the punting game...
Cool, I'd love to see that article when you've got time to put it together. I started noticing when a bunch of people were complaining online about how AJ's punts seem shorter this year. Then I realized that coverage was so much better, and you're right, nobody's saying anything is wrong with punting.
Opponents only returning 12/32 punts and gaining on average 3 yards is pretty remarkable. what I need to get together is some context...how many normally get returned and how much yardage did we give up on average when punts were longer?
The other piece is where we punt from...punting from your own 5 obviously it's up to how much distance the punter is capable of unless you're telling him to hang it. Punting from the opponents 45 means you're intentionally going for shorter distance so you shouldn't be penalized for that.
I wonder if there has also been a change in emphasis between keeping guys back (to prevent a blocked punt) vs sending guys downfield (to cover better). I have no idea how you would measure that statistically.
No complaints here. Last year I kept complaining AJ was out punting his coverage. He's dramatically improved the trajectory of his punts. I'm a huge fan, even if it produces less destructive hits on opposing returners from AJ.
That is one f the strategic nuances of the game that I would love to hear more about. NO JINX-I like our ST teams so far this year.
You think GT will beat Clemson? Personally I don't see that happening with how Watson has been playing and the fact that Clemson has an above average defense. I said it in the "Why we need GT to lose 2 games" thread, but I think GT loses to Clemson, UVA, and either UNC or Duke (leaning more towards UNC due to more explosive offense and because I think UNC can win a shootout against them). Meanwhile UVA will lose to FSU and either Miami or UNC.
Poor wording on my part...I mean I believe they clinch the week before but it doesn't have to be a WIN against Clemson. It's looking like a cluster in the Coastal to say the least, and I think the only team that can win it other than GT loses that weekend, clinching it for GT. I think Clemson beats the Yellow Jackets. VT would have 2 conference losses (can't decide where #2 is coming from but I'd go with Pitt if I had to since they lost to Akron and that would be very Pitt-like to then beat us).
Obviously I hope I'm wrong and we run the table while GT loses two ACC games.
Ain't that the truth. I thought about whether GT could clinch the weekend prior even with a loss so I looked at the schedule. Techinically, GT doesn't play the weekend before our game against UVA as they have a bye week before UGA. Meanwhile, UVA does play Miami. It is possible that a UVA loss could clinch it for GT depending on the situation. Regardless, I still feel that this GT team, while more effective on offense with Thomas running things, will lose 4 of their last 7 games. Pitt is going to be an interesting game for us. I don't know what to make of it right now. I'm becoming less and less threatened by Miami the more I see them play. BC caught my eye after their win over USC, though I think they just exposed USC and ASU finished the job. I think Pitt and UVA are the only games I'm weary of from here out. Duke isn't the Duke from last year. Let's talk after next week about how our team will be going forward though.
Combined F+ ratings for some teams:
18 - VT
26 - GT
37 - Pitt
40 - UVA
41 - Miami
49 - BC
62 - Duke
I think it will come down to the Commonwealth Cup game for the division title.
If only that could have happened last year for a decade of dominance or bust!
GT vs UNC will be a fun game to watch, and may be the dagger in the heart of the argument that TOP wins games. I think TOP is important in certain situations, but I can easily imagine GT keeping the ball for 45:00 and UNC winning the game 28-24.
TOP does not win games.
Only scoring more than your opponent wins games, no other stat matters at all.
Stats like TOP can be a decent measure to see WHY someone wins games. But only if it would be an advantage.
If your defensive line is thin and your backfield plays a constant or significant amount of man-man coverage, or the other team plays a hurry up offense which does not allow the defense to substitute, then keeping TOP of possession high would be a good strategy to keep your own defense more rested than if the other team was on offense for 40 minutes.
If your defense is stacked 4 deep and the opposing offensive line is 1.5 deep, then TOP may not be what you want to do to win the game. Make their offense stay on the field for long grinding series so that at the end of these long series their line is blowing and unable to force the run game in the short red zone, for instance.
I desperately want to see more explosive plays. Even before seeing your awesome stats I've been feeling that way, glad I'm not crazy.
I'm also going to live in my own perfect world and just assume that Bud will correct the issue giving up those long pass plays.
So our defense is Clint Eastwood:
Our offense is Eli Wallach:
And our Special teams is,....ummmm....., let's see, maybe :
I say the offense is still Tuco. Just ugly.
But let's talk about what makes Angel Eyes the bad. He is nasty. He is not nice. He is a bad bad man. If that doesn't sound like the defense I don't know what does. Unfortunately, being unable to stop a gunslinger like Clint Eastwood or ECU is the downfall of The Bad.
The special teams gets to be good.
Some 2nd half thoughts:
Brewer -- His interception rate will drop, but he's still a gunslinger. He's on pace for 22 interceptions, he will finish with 17. He's on pace for 20 TD's, he will finish with 22. He's on pace for 2800 yards, he will finish with 3000.
Running Game -- We will actually improve. UNC will be a watershed moment for Searles and the OL as he begins shuffling personnel until he finds some consistency. Marshawn is back to full speed by Miami but JCC and Caleb show themselves as capable complementary players.
Defense: Agreed, big plays fall precipitously....mostly because only Miami's offense has the firepower of OSU/GT/ECU/UNC.
Games: VT 27, Pitt 13; VT 34, Miami 28; VT 31, BC 10; VT 22, Duke 13; VT 24, uva 13
Standings: GT loses to UNC (they are due v. GT) and Clemson, uva only loses to FSU and VT. Everyone else loses 4 games.
I like your optimism! Go Hokies!
Nope. Your scores by the enemy team is correct but, we win when we score either 34 or 35 points.
Change the scores we make accordingly, please.
34 vs Pitt, 34 vs BC, 36 vs Duke, 34 vs UVA.
I think this comment is coming from the one poster who is probably more cynical than me. But I think you're right, 2014 was about building for 2015. I completely expect the 2nd half of 2014 to be much better than the first half.
If UVA only loses to FSU and us then GT must also lose to them which puts them at 3 losses. I'm all for it though. It irritates me to no end that GT may win the coastal and we totally gave that game to them.
Assuming we're not included in the "everyone else loses 4 games" then that scenario would put us at 7-1 in conference with GT and LOLuva tied at 6-2 in which case we would win the coastal and face Mr. Crab Legs himself in the ACCCG. But let's not get ahead of ourselves, unless we beat Pitt none of this speculating and theorizing matters.
Pitt lost to Akron so I feel it is a near certainty now that they will beat us.
Georgia Tech is not clinching against Clemson. They are falling back in the pack with consecutive losses to Pitt, and UNC.
How many of the big plays given up are passes (DBU) vs. runs (DL/LB - with safety support)
I will update that section now to clarify and add both rushing and passing...
Predictions , We win 8 games , continue bowl streak ( too many injuries to key players) . LOL wins 6 games & thankfully saves Fondue's job. Aside interceptions, & penalties one of worst stats is kickoff returns & needs to improve.( take a knee & the 25 yds.)
MARK MY WORDS
Joel Caleb will have a monster game at Pitt and will play a big part in securing that W. He and Marshawn will be the 1&2 backs when Marshawn is back from his sprained ankle.
I think that would be an exciting combo. Makes me think of the Jones/Suggs combo. Jones, like Caleb, is taller and has a higher top speed, but still has the ability to get physical with defenders. Williams, like Suggs, is shorter yet more powerful but still able to break one open.
A few things I want to see:
And a few I think we are probably going to see:
I don't really care about explosive O plays unless they come at the end of 7-8 play drive. I like grinding it down the field to give our banged up, shallow depth D some rest.
As far as the 16 20+ yard plays we've given up...live by the sword, die by the sword. If you consistently play man coverage and blitz all the time it's gonna happen.
Predictions: GT will lose two Coastal games and I think we'll win out the rest of the way. We lose a close one to FSU in the ACCCG, not by better coaching/scheme but getting out athlete'd in the 4th qtr. I know that sounds homerery but with the way we beat ourselves in our two losses so far we're better than our record. I think the team has found it's groove based off of the UNC game and our remaining schedule sets up nicely.
That sounds great, but it's much harder to keep grinding out drives if the defense doesn't think you're capable of explosive plays...that was basically Bud's D against OSU. He felt our corners were too good to gain explosive plays against so he put them on islands and stacked the box.
You really shouldn't give the special teams credit for opponents missing lots of field goals. That's a function of luck more than some sort of ST prowess.
yeah, I always hate it when the cameras catch coaches celebrating a missed FG. Dude, you didn't do anything.
I wouldn't say it's all luck, certainly if you are getting pressure on previous extra points/FGs it is likely disruptive to the execution of later kicks... also (while not STs specific) if the D is holding the opponents outside the red zone, the kicks are less likely to be made
If you're holding opponents to long FGs, that's on the defense and not the special teams. None of the missed FGs against VT have been beyond 40. Opposing FG percentage, to my understanding, is not something that correlates year-to-year. Basically, if there's an ability to make opponents miss kicks, no one has figured it out. Last year opponents were 12-15 on field goals, so VT was due some missed FG luck.
Some clarification on generally how that's calculated...for any given yard line you'd expect the average team to gain a certain number of points per attempt. For example, wherever the 50% cutoff is would be worth 1.5 points. the stat derives your rating based on how many points teams have gotten against how many were expected.
I agree that's it's hard to say how "good" a team is at that unless they get blocks so I consider it more of a "rear view mirror" stat than something that would be very predictive of the future.
I wonder how large a sample size you would need for this information to be significant. I have a hunch it's more than one season.
...at which point you're talking about slightly-to-drastically different teams and it becomes meaningless again!
Definitely better to use this one in the mirror and not looking ahead.
Fair enough. A minor quibble on my part. It would definitely be nice if their luck held and teams continued to doink field goals. Football Outsiders has written a lot about FG luck over the years and how it impacts teams.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/sports/football/12score.html?_r=0
Moving forward, I don't think we should lose to anyone, however, that could be said for ECU and especially GT. Talent-wise Miami is the only scary team, but then you have to account for the Pitt factor so it's hard to say. I still think we should win out, but dropping another game wouldn't shock me.
As far as specific predictions, I think:
1) The defense will do better about long plays but still give some up. We aren't losing games because we have a few long gains through the air and its a function of the zero coverage and other aggressive coverages that are allowing us to get so many three and outs and sacks.
2) We continue to commit to the run regardless of any significant increases in success which should help shorten games and keep our D off the field.
3) GT does lose at least 2 acc games, giving us a chance to control our destiny.
I don't know who ECU plays, and I'm too lazy to look, but I disagree about GT. To my untrained eye, they are not good enough to win out. They were not good enough to beat us.
This this this. When the D gives up 5 or 6 big plays, we might lose a game because of it. If they are giving up 2 or 3 big plays each game, and practically nothing else, we should be winning.
On your first quote of me, I just worded that poorly, I was saying I thought we should have won both of those games. I expect Georgia Tech to lose to Clemson, Georgia and (fingers crossed) at least one more ACC team.
Maybe ... Duke?
I agree. I think if we do lose it's not because we just got out-coached or plain beaten I believe it will be because we will have beaten ourselves again, a-la GT.
Or the accumulation of injuries leaves us too short-handed to play our game plan, on one or both sides of the ball. Right now that's my biggest fear. We are about two injuries away from going back to Wal-mart to find the "next man up," like they did to find Branthover last year.
Question - comment on the kick off return yard. If a return man catches the ball 3 yards deep in the end zone and returns it to the 15 yard line, is that a 18 yard return or a 10 yard loss? I know which way I view it, and think if it was scored that way we would be pretty near last in the country in kick return yards, but maybe I'm wrong.
Statistically speaking, that's a 15 yard return. In terms of field position though, that's a 10 yard loss.
Correct...that's 15 yards and as noted, really a loss.
I agree.. anytime a kick is returned out of the endzone the spot where it's downed should be judged against the touchback distance to calcuate return yardage gained. Kickoffs -25, Punts -20
I think we'd be averaging about negative 7 or 8 yards per kickoff return by that method.
Combining touchbacks with returns, VT is averaging 61.5 yards per kickoff, 65th in the country. Our average return is just over 20 yards, 62nd in the country. But we've only had one go for more than 30 yards so we're definitely "bend don't break" thus far.
Also there is not much difference between teams on these stats. By quick count 36 teams allow average return yardage within one yard of Virginia Tech.
The bigger difference between teams is %touchbacks. About 35% of our kickoffs are for touchbacks, 74th in the country.
Also, our 2 kicks out of bounds are tied for 11th-worst in the country with about 20 other teams. Tied for 1st? LOLUVA with 4.
We are the only team in the country that will return a kickoff 5 yards deep in the end zone. That's gotta stop. I'd like to know what our longest kick return has been, that would be a great stat. Until we see the next David Wilson back there, I don't know why our guys insist on bringing that thing out. Not only does bad field position usually occur, but it seems like a great way to create an unnecessary injury. Especially if JC is returning that thing. Say whatever you want about the guy, but we're gonna need him in about 2-3 weeks if we keep running the ball as frequently as we do now. Just my 2 cents
Deon Newsome has the same explosiveness of DW4 and will break a few during his career. We need to put Newsome and Stroman back there though rather than Coleman.
Would you rather have ten touchbacks, or eight kicks returned to the 15 and two returned to the 40?
I know there is always a possibility of the return man making a great return. But I would rather seem them take a knee every time the ball is in the endzone. I would rather have the ball at the 25 every time than have it short of the 20 most of the time and close to midfield once or twice a game.
I'd rather have the touchbacks. So far this year the longest return has been 29 yards so it's not like the returns have been boom-or-bust, just bust.
Exactly, and again taking the risk of injury with one of your few healthy tailbacks used as a return man. I'll take the 25 for now, until one of them takes it to the house. But I feel like we might be waiting a while for that
If you watch how Stroman returns punts and see how Newsome moves in space, I don't see how you think it might be a while before one of them takes it to the house. I'm expecting to see it once this season at least on both punt and kick return.
This is why Stroman needs to stick to punts and not kickoffs. Frank addressed this in a press conference one time. Kickoffs require better straight-line speed, punt returns require shiftiness. That's why we won't see Stroman on kickoff returns. On top of that, Stroman is about one more injury away from being needed at CB with Facyson down. No need to put him in additional risky situations.
Can't wait to watch these guys house it, though. You're right - it's just a matter of time before it happens.
Fair enough. I agree Stroman is in a place where one more injury and he's needed or we abandon the "Redshirt Facyson" strategy. Newsome has that straight-line speed though. Knowles used to have it but he's lost vision and gained hesitation. So without digging too deep in the roster, it would seem JC is the best fit of the remaining options for that role. Any thoughts on someone else that might be better?
The only one I thought of was Knowles. But I guess it comes down to trust. The coaches trust JC's hands not to fumble and they know he has good speed once he hits his gear. I question his decision-making (taking one out from 8 yards deep last week, really?) but the coaches obviously think that he's the best one for the role. Agree on Newsome. That guy is very close to being a nightmare for our opponents.
Interesting you bring up Stroman's proximity to injured players on the depth chart: that would be my reason to pull JCC of the kickoff team, at least this week. We can't have him get popped for an injury right now. We have a sudden embarrassment of depth at WR, so I say give Knowles another chance. At least he's done it before
Oh I agree. I think this week it should be Knowles and Newsome without question. Keep JC behind our offensive line and not returning kicks while our once solid stable of RBs is now limping left and right.
You mean you want to be ranked higher than 117th in the country at average kick return distance? But we're so close to passing Idaho and New Mexico State!
We're actually not returning them at an unusually high rate...we're tied for 55th in the country in opponent touchback% with - kid you not - ECU, Georgia Tech, and Miami. All of us have received 26 kickoffs with 9 touchbacks and we haven't even played the same number of games. Weird.
I think this highlights what I was trying and failing to point about about the "run three times and punt" philosophy of clock control in the 3rd Q. TOP can be a misleading statistic in aggregate. We "controlled the ball" for 20 minutes in the second half, but really only 1 2nd half drive was a ball control drive, because it was ~6mins long and a score. Most of the rest of our possessions that half were under 2 mins. That's not really controlling the ball, because you keep giving it back to your opponent. Controlling the ball for 20 minutes with 6 6-7min drives is not the same thing as "controlling the clock" with 10 2min drives. In the former, you're limiting the number of possessions the opponent has, and thus limiting their opportunities to score. In the latter, you're making the clock go down, but repeatedly giving your opponent chances to score.
I'm all for running more and committing to the run. I'm opposed to running for the sake of burning a minute and a half off the clock before you give the ball back to the other team. If we want to play ball control that's cool, I have no issues with that. But we need to control the ball by limiting the number of possessions our opponents have, not just the number of minutes and seconds for which they have the ball.
I agree with you 95%, but... Against WMU the Hokies had the ball and the lead with 2:46 left on the clock in the first half, and they knew they would get the ball to start the second half. They gave WMU TWO chances to score before the half. I agree with you about worshiping TOP for its own sake. But in that situation, priority 2 is scoring again before the half. Priority 1 is not giving the other team a chance to score.
I think we're actually in 100% agreement here. If your goal is to control the ball, then judging whether you were successful or not in that goal should be how how few possessions you allowed your opponent. Controlling the clock for 20 minutes in the second half doesn't mean much if you gave the ball back to the opponent 10 times.
The only reason our TOP was so high in the second half is because UNC would do the gentlemanly thing and give the ball right BACK to us very quickly. Had they done something crazy like sustain a drive or two, those 1:30min 3-and-outs would have bit us hard.
They did not do the gentlemanly thing and give it back. They tried their darnedest to get it downfield and score.
Our defense forced them to give it back or outright took it from them.
Our offense did the gentlemanly thing for our defense and did not turn it over via INT and burned as much clock as possible so that our defense didn't play more time than necessary.
It would have been playing right into the hands of the UNC guys in blue to toss 3 incompletions burning a total of 15 seconds game time and then have our defense come back onto the field.
There are 2 ways to keep the opposing offense from running many plays.
One way is to keep getting first downs, the other way is to run the ball and eat clock. Since our guys were having problems making first downs because the coaches had not yet come up with the formula to make the line effective, they chose option #2. Eat clock by running the ball and not commit turnovers.
Our guys do a vary good job of not fumbling the ball. VT RBs have fumbled very little in the pat 2 years. We give up the ball when passing.
Therefore, do not pass when it's not working well, protect the ball and eat as much clock as you can when you are up by a coupla TDs.
Given the choice I would have preferred they tried to get first downs rather than run three times and punt knowing they wouldn't get the first down but would eat up a minute and a half of clock.
Give UNC the ball 9 times you give an explosive offense 9 chances to score. You also give a Defense prone to giving up big plays 9 chances to give up a big play for a score.
Just wait, there will be a game this year that we lose trying this strategy. Then we'll have that same fight we always have where everyone freaks out on the defense for losing the game for us while neglecting to mention the fact that the offense couldn't sustain any drives and insisted on giving the ball back to the opponent over and over again.
The focus of a ball control team should be to limit the number of possessions their opponent has. This by nature limits their chances to score. TOP doesn't mean what you want it to mean, and the numbers speak for themselves. The offense held the ball for 40 minutes, and contributed *negative 5* points to the differential in that game.
Draining the clock for the sake of draining the clock if you're not actually creating drives and limiting opponents' possessions are a recipe for disaster in the long term.
Killing clock is an underdog strategy meant to limit possessions by both teams. To simplify things, let's suppose you are Southwest Central Alaska State and you are playing Oregon. Over the long run, Oregon would be expected to score more points each time it has the ball than you would. So you don't want a bunch of possessions to converge to the long run expectation.
Instead you try for as few as possible and hope luck helps out. Suppose you have the greatest clock-draining offense ever created. Oregon kicks off in the first half, and it takes you the entire 30 minutes of the half to score a TD as time expires. In the seocnd half, Oregon finally gets the ball. They drive the field in 1:48 but after a botched snap loses them yardage they end up settling for a field goal. They kick back to you, and you spend the remaining 28 minutes with the ball on a single offensive possession. You take a knee deep in their red zone and win the game 7-3.
Obviously extreme, but that's just meant to show why you limit possessions as an underdog. Now if you're the team expected to score more per possession, you want to remove as much short-term luck from the equation as possible and more possessions benefit you.
For what it's worth, James Madison only gave VT 8 possessions in 2010. In our other regular season games we had 13, 11, 11, 15, 16, 12, 13, 10, 12, 14, and 13 drives.
Huh. Funny I don't remember playing JMU in 2010. There was a bye week after the Boise State game if I recall correctly.
It was just a scrimmage and not an official game. Also despite 8 possessions we won 63-0.
When in the 3rd quarter of the UNC game did we go three and out on 3 called running plays? No matter how many times you say it happened, it doesn't change the fact that each of our four 3rd quarter drives included at least one called passing play and about half of our total offensive snaps were passing plays.
I find it strange that everyone only predicts improvement and best possible scenarios...especially when the norm has been opposite of that during the last 32 games. No one sees the injuries being too much to overcome, dropping 2 or 3 games that we should win, more injuries, persistent problems running the ball, UVA due to finally win one, etc. ???
I think everybody is just a lot more optimistic than you bud. It's okay, there's enough kool-aid for you too. Come have a glass.
At this point, I don't think the injuries are too much to overcome. The Maddy injury is still the most concerning, we really need him against Pitt and Miami and BC, but Nigel is ready for more snaps. The RB injuries aren't great, but we have depth there. Assuming Marshawn is back in a game or two, we'll be fine. We need to get Malleck healthy. We're covering for Facyson.
My guess is that we continue to be an inconsistent team but I see a defense that will be getting better and better and an offense that improve as Brewer protects the ball.
I think we're a good team who has already lost the two games we shouldn't have lost.
I'll be honest, I think we've seen Maddy in Maroon and Orange for the last time. The initial timeline given for him was optimistic in thinking he could come back at the end of that and play. The coaches have the option for a medical redshirt, but I suspect he won't take it, will sit out and recover, and then train for the Draft so he can get paid and support his family. Facyson will also take a medical redshirt this year.
Now that is a little more realistic...and I fear that you are correct about Maddy.
Really? it's a meniscus. He'll be back by BC.
He's also 290ish and in a position where players are diving at his knees. The recovery time to walking and running will be vastly different from the time to playing at the level he was at
This may be more intended for commenters and not me, but my predictions are actually based on us being about the same (maybe slight improvement but not much)...if you look at the F+ numbers above, we are considered the best team. Yet it's not so extreme that I don't think we'll lose another game.
The only certainty is a lot of bourbon will be consumed.
There will be continued improvement because the team is young. This is Brewer's first year as a starter and I believe he has been trying to do too much. He will settle down and make fewer mistakes.
RBs will see more succes as the line gets better.
A couple of concerns. Trey has been dynamic on special teams and we need to find a replacement that has both size and speed. Brewer is a gunslinger. He will throw for 2800 yards, 21 touchdowns and 20 picks. Hopefully no pick sixes.
On the positive side. D line just keeps getting more explosive, even with major injuries. In BUD we trust. At this point, we likely lose one more, hopefully The Orange Bowl. Caleb will keep us averaging 5.1 yards per play, he continues to improve and looks to have turned a corner with his vision. Go Hokies!
I find it hard to believe that 11 wins wont win the coastal this year. The division was "predicted" to go 4-4, now 11 wins doesn't win it? I think if we get 11 wins we will win the coastal.
If we win 11, we'll have won the whole conference.
We are 4-2 and have 6 games remaining. If we get 11 regular season wins let's name the university after Frank.
In another sport, Nolan Ryan leads MLB in career Ks but also career BBs.
And Pete Rose, the all-time "hit king," is also the all-time out-king.
And Jack Bauer leads for both most terrorists killed and most friends killed.
With the difficult part of the schedule now over I see this team winning out. We will need some help from from GT but I can aee them dropping at least two games in conference. That team isn't good enough to win out this season.