
My wife and I sat in silence for a solid ten minutes after Pitt took their game sealing knee. We were bewildered. My wife broke the silence and the therapist in her came out. She said, "Every day I have conversations with my clients where, following a discussion about a successful outcome in their lives, I ask them what worked in that situation? What was successful? What clicked? Let's take that, generalize it, and use it to improve."
After watching the Hokies' offense do seemingly so little right Thursday night, I wasn't so sure there was a point in conducting that exercise.
Thursday night's game was arguably the most discouraging performance we've seen this year. Following 11 days off to heal, review, regroup and prepare for the stretch run, Tech appeared lost at times (maybe the best example was by Kyshoen Jarrett, playing centerfield on Tyler Boyd's long touchdown reception).
We're all well aware of the adversity this team has been forced to overcome 7 games into the season: Thin at defensive line and without their senior leader (Maddy); decimated by injuries at the tailback position and down to their 4th and 5th string rushers; quarterbacked by an enigma; young; young; and young.
Coming off of a bye and all that it entails, I expected more from this team. I wanted to see the performance we saw last year on the road from a less talented squad against a dangerous Georgia Tech team. In that game we saw a perfectly scripted offensive game plan. The Logan Thomas-led offense came out of the gates firing, everyone was in a position to succeed despite intermittent success in the preceding four games. And that came after a short week of preparation.
Thursday night against Pitt, in a similar setting with a similarly inconsistent offense, we failed to see the ingenious offensive gameplan of a year ago. Instead of a decisive quarterback looking to attack a Pitt secondary that wasn't as good as its stats indicated, we saw hesitation and repeated six-yard throws to the sidelines. The running game was putrid, with little inventiveness and few rushing lanes.
I wanted to see our defense lock down the Panthers' two playmakers and make them as one-dimensional as possible. I had yet to see Chad Voytik prove that he could beat a team with his arm, and the thought of Dadi Nicolas, Ken Ekanem and Corey Marshall harassing him all night with our defensive backs feasting on wounded ducks made me salivate. In some respects the defense achieved this. Although it took until the second half, and James Conner still got his. Who would have thought Chad Voytik would repeatedly burn us with his legs? Anyone? Even as the game rolled along, did Bud Foster?
Coming into the season, I had this three game stretch (UNC, Pitt and Miami) circled for a variety of reasons. Regardless of their records, UNC and Pitt historically play us tough on the road; The U is The U and is always a big game; add in a bye week and back-to-back Thursday night primetime games and you've got a tough stretch on paper before factoring in player matchups or win-loss records.
During the bye week, I was quick to voice my concern over how the Hokies would perform after eleven days rest. Would we be prepared for a battle and ready to roll from the onset, or would we repeat the performance of two years ago and get knocked on our heels? In the end I suppose we saw neither. The Hokies weren't so much going through the motions as they just looked lost at times.
Not only were Hokie fans stunned when Voytik starting carrying the ball as much as Conner, but on television it sure looked like the team was as well. An adjustment never came or didn't work, and Voytik continued to crank out yards on the ground throughout the game.
Yet despite looking almost listless at times, the game saw a number of strong individual performances from guys like Corey Marshall and Bucky Hodges. Andrew "Say My Name" Motuapuaka stepped in for an injured Chase Williams and proceeded to notch two quick tackles. Isaiah Ford and Cam Phillips again made phenomenal catches in traffic and along the sidelines. It's beginning to sound like a broken record, but even following each of the three losses, it has been hard not to smile when thinking about the young talent oozing from this roster.
Which brings me back to my wife's comment. In order to move forward and learn from the numerous mistakes made by this team Thursday night, it is imperative that the coaching staff take a solution-focused approach. Coaches and players alike can talk all day about what went wrong, but if they talk about what went right, they can attempt to make that happen more frequently.
When you remove all of the horrid drives the offense had, there were a notable few that saw them move the ball almost effortlessly down the field. Why? Despite little or no prior success in the game in similar down-and-distance scenarios, the Hokie offense was able to efficiently matriculate the ball downfield and set up scoring chances.
Let's take a look at the Hokies' fourth quarter touchdown drive. Brewer threw on all nine plays, went 6-of-9, and his only incompletions were on first down throws. After each incompletion, he followed them up with passes of 11, 11 and 19 yards to move the chains. In all, the drive went 80 yards in two-and-a-half minutes. With each completion you could see Brewer get dialed in, and he fed off of that confidence, picking up the pace of the offense to try and maintain the positive momentum.
Aside from the third quarter drive that included the long completion to Bucky Hodges, Brewer rarely showed any of the confidence that we gushed about after the Ohio State win.
Following a series of up-and-down performances, Brewer almost appears to have over-corrected his approach. The team found early success against teams like Ohio State because of his fearlessness and gunslinger mentality, but in an effort to minimize costly mistakes that killed drives against ECU and Georgia Tech, Brewer has become so hesitant that he is late delivering the ball to wide open receivers. I counted at least three plays in the first half where Brewer had an open receiver downfield, only to hesitate and allow the previously-beaten defender to recover and break-up the pass.
Given the lack of options at tailback and the youth that surrounds Michael Brewer, how does this offense move forward with him as its leader? I am of the opinion that a quality coordinator has the ability to recognize both the strengths and limitations of those available to him and reconfigure their system — if need be — to work with what they have.
Seven games into the season, Loeffler should be able to recognize what his quarterback is and is not. His strength may be as a rhythm quarterback who thrives on stringing together successful plays in sequence. Similar to how Loeffler put Logan Thomas in a position to generate some rhythm and confidence a year ago at Georgia Tech, I would love to see Lefty do the same against an athletic Miami defense.
At the same time, Brewer has lost that moxie we all loved. Instead of tempering his fearlessness, he has become fearful of making a mistake. Both extremes have cost the Hokies valuable points over the last five weeks, and in order for this team to get back to winning, Brewer and Loeffler might need to grab their fishing poles, head down to the New River and have a deep conversation about how this offense can move forward.
For better or worse, the current state of this offense dictates that this team goes as Michael Brewer goes.
With another key primetime matchup against Miami on the horizon, it will be important to see how this staff and team react to their most recent performance. When the team reconvenes this weekend, maybe they should spend some time talking about what went right. It's time to get away from the negativity, focus on the positives and close this season strong.

Comments
Good post.
We've got a LOT of positive things going for us next season. Our depth will get much better with all of the younger players getting time and with (fingers crossed) recruiting looking good. Our running backs will be stocked. We've had moments that are very promising-you mentioned the scoring drive where Brewer seemingly moved the offense at will.
My concern is that while I think VT is set up well for next year, I'm not sure what can be cobbled together for this year with all of the injuries suffered. The coaches had a bye week to re-tool and the results were not that impressive.
I still remember Scott Loeffler blatantly state last year that his offense was to establish a base and build on it each week. I haven't seen anything new in our offense since the Ohio State game. And most times he doesn't even trust our personnel to win a 1v1 battle and tries to get all cutesy which works to our disadvantage.
It's probably because we consistently lose those 1v1 battles.
Really? It appears to me the WRs and TEs fairly consistently WIN 1v1 battles. Getting them the ball is another story. Actually the group I would say has performed the most consistently this year would be the receiving corp.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure I want this offense to be tasked with much more. The offense should be at the point where everything that it runs is executed well. We can't even get lined up correctly consistently right now, and to me that indicates guys are thinking too much and not reacting and playing the game.
Good approach and mindset. It seems to me that the quick-pace offense best suits our personnel. The shifting, subbing, aligning, arranging (pre-snap) looks fancy...but is it necessary? It has resulted in numerous snap infractions. Up-tempo is where Brewer is most comfortable and allows him to get in a rhythm. Let's hope the coaches right the ship, and come out firing. Is it just me, or does it seem this team is easy to predict? 5 minutes in, and after 2 series, I can forecast the outcome. In our wins, we have moved the ball right out of the gates. The losses? Struggles, ineptitude, confusion, lack of focus...clearly evident from the first whistle.
You're right about a tempo offense being the situation where Brewer thrives, it's almost transparent at this point.
But would Frank Beamer ever allow one of his football teams to run that kind of offense? That is the part I'm having a hard time believing. I suppose anything could happen, but it would certainly be a shock.
If Frank is preventing the offense from doing one of the only things it can do well, I don't imagine Moorehead, Searels, and Loeffler will want to work for him very much longer.
+1 For the correct assessment. More performances like this one on National TV and it isn't only recruits we will have a difficult time recruiting. Let us take WR Coach Moorehead as an example. Coaches usually leave a program for a better one and eventually other schools will look at Moorehead and offer him a job. Especially since he can recruit and he can relate to the young players as a former NFL WR with a Superbowl Ring at Indianapolis. When that happens, how are we suppose to replace him? Or better yet, can we replace him with another coach with the same abilities and credentials? Especially when other coaches hears through the grapevine that HC Beamer will only play a power running offense and he will not adjust that offense even when circumstances warrant it.
I can promise you Frank isn't doing that. I know him and can tell you the losses weigh on him more than us (he really hates to lose).
While he prefers to play ball control-running and tough D, he most wants to win. He doesn't want a GT situation where we have a sizable lead, but don't/can't control the clock then make errors (incompletions stopping the clock, snapping the ball with 20 seconds on the playclock, turnovers).
First off, thank you for sharing your insight into HC Beamer. Its always good to get 1st hand impressions. Secondly, I hope you are right and I am wrong. I really do.
Btw-any who may think he isn't still competitive...I don't recommend playing golf against him!
I don't think anyone feels that HC Beamer isn't competitive. The question was whether he would adapt his preferred offense or stick with it no matter what; thinking he could still win games with that offense. Right now, imho, we do not have the personnel to execute a power run offense. We are down to Caleb and Rogers. So perhaps we adapt to an air-raid type offense since the strength of our current roster is in the WRs and TEs and a QB who seems more comfortable to that style of play.
can't get a sizeable lead when we can't even run the ball for 2 yards. This is where College Football has changed.. name me 3 schools (other than bama and stanford) that can actually run first to open the pass? Its a run and gun, score points have a great defense. We have a great Defense but the offense is in Neutral for 3/4ths the game stalling out
Why can't we get brewer 3-5 quick passes to get him going. Look at what UVA did today 1st quarter was a lot of simple passes for that UVA qb.. then later in the 2nd quarter he has tons of confidence and is gunning it all over the field.
Just a guess - what if the issue is two fold? As in Loeffler trying to simplify the game for the younger guys by going no huddle with less variations - just relying on the game speed to slow down the defense's aggression, but the same thing (up tempo) contributing to procedural mistakes/penalties by the same young guys?
This happens quite often in any organization, where two people work with the same goal in mind, but with different methods - often conflicting philosophies.
If this is true, then I am not ready yet to give up on either coach. I can wait another year. I still remember the first two Tyrod Taylor years. But the last two more than made up for those.
Once again, just a guess. I am not privy to any insider info.
I think you're onto something. If your original hypothesis is correct, which I believe it is, then we need to stick with the no huddle up tempo offense, even if it causes false starts and other procedural penalties. Eventually, the kids will figure it out (the procedural penalties). Let's face it, our running game is D.O.A. right now so we need to play to our strengths.
Great read! The amount of talent this team puts on the field every week, even considering the injuries, should lead anyone to believe were, at worst, a one loss team at this point in the season. Youre right, its hard smile and be excited about next year and the talent VT will return. I dont want to be the guy that constantly says next yearthats our yearbut suffice to sayI cant wait until next year. Salvaging this year might be more of a challenge.
Concerning Brewer, I think the confidence we saw gushing out of him at Ohio State was a result of the coaching staff letting him and the play. I hoped for a victory, but I really just wanted us to play well and not get taken to the shed. I believe our coaching staff went into that game with the mind set of lets just open it up and play loose. Thats what they did and we came out of there with a historic victory. The play calling was dynamic, Brewer was making solid, confident throws and of course, a few questionable ones, but he played with moxie. As much as I hate to admit it, Brian Griese made a good point during the halftime show something happened to Brewer after the ECU game. His confidence is shot and it's obvious to every one he appears gun-shy. IMO its coaching. I think FB pulled the reigns.
After Ohio State, I think FB wanted to go back to his anemic style of play. Nothing fancy. I have not been a fan of the play calling for a long time. Dont take that as an argument that I could call a better game, Im sure I cant, but Ive played NCAA Football on enough gaming systems over the years to have a pretty solid foundation. That said, does anyone else see a similarity between Steinspring era playing calling and Loffler? I do. Why is that?
I grew up in Blacksburg. I have been around this program for a long time. I've seen the great, the good, the bad, and the downright embarrassing. Regardless of the outcome, I'll be there next week wearing the same shirt, sitting in the same spot and shaking my keys at the TV while my wife stares at me like I'm an idiot.
Excellent write-up and you're spot-on about Brewer. Here's to hoping he can find a good balance between gunslinger and game manager. Not too surprising, considering he's making his 8th college start on Thursday. I think he'll get it figured out soon enough.
"Not too surprising, considering he's making his 8th college start on Thursday."
Thank you for pointing this out. As much as we thought Brewer had arrived against OSU, it seems like that game was a great individual performance, but he's still figuring out how to be a consistent QB (See Trevor Knight of Oklahoma in Sugar Bowl last season).
What annoyed me the most was not the game itself (although it was very frustrating), but was what Beamer said about the loss. Paraphrasing here, but it was along the lines of:
"I'm very proud of my team's effort, they worked hard, we have a few kinks here and there we need to iron out and wait it out. We need to focus and adjust."
That sounds like something an FCS coach would tell their team and press after they got beaten by an FBS team. Beamer has been extremely robotic in these pressers, saying the same thing about 'focusing and adjusting'. A top team coach would NOT be saying that at this point. I get you obviously can't be harsh, but at the same time stop saying the same things over and over again when we're more than halfway in the season. It comes off as sounding like we're getting comfortable with this slide into mediocrity. Brewer as well said that "anything could happen in the Coastal." That is not something you want to hear at all from your starting quarterback. It's as if they've accepted that they are able to lose at any given day, which is not the right attitude for this. They're just not going to win if they keep that up.
That's Coach Beamer. It's the same scripted answer every week.
I don't see him as a motivator; someone who can light a fire under the team before, during, or after a game.
Distinct difference between motivation and screaming. He can motivate just fine.
Exactly. His style works very well when we're winning. Throughout the 2000s and up until 2012 that tactic worked perfectly because we were good and won 10+ games a year. However when the team is going through a multi-year slump and needs someone with fire and energy, I feel like he's coming short here. He might be great at motivating his players in the locker room, but the impression he gives to a lot of fans is not a good one because of his 'robotic' style.
What do you want him to say? The pressers are pretty meaningless anyways. In his book, he said he tried doing the whole ranting and raving thing once and it didn't work at all. That's not who he is and he doesn't see much value in it. To be fair, he's not wrong. If this team can get out of their own way and execute, they've shown the ability to be a very good football team. The challenge, which every single coach has said since the beginning of the year, is doing it consistently.
You're right, there is a distinct difference between motivation and screaming. I never suggested his alternative should be screaming at everyone, which is apparently what you assume.
Yes, this team has shown signs of being a very good team. Do you not think consistency falls back on the coaches and ultimately the HBC?
Compare Beamer's comments to another old timer coach
Kansas State Head Coach Bill Snyder Postgame Quotes after loss to Baylor 2013, going to 2-4 record
On the focus of the team...
You have young guys, which sometimes get so caught up in the emotion that they cant function. Sometimes they cant think through things and are not assignment sound. Some of the guys just have a difficult time dealing with the emotion of it all. And to me, the game of football is about emotion. Its about a lot of other things as well, but it certainly is about emotion. I dont think enough of our guys went out on the field with emotion. I think part of it might be in response to some comments that I have had. And that is, how we have to play with emotion and learn how to handle the emotion and how to react to the things that are involved in getting you emotionally prepared for the ballgame. Is that the only reason why we didnt play well? I dont think thats necessarily the case. I think Baylor had an awful lot to do with it. I think I made some bad choices certainly that had a lot to do with it. I think there were a plethora of things that led us to not being as productive.
-- Beamer was asked if he needs to give better pre-game motivational speeches to get the team ready. He said that's for the movies.
"I think if you wait until Saturday right before the ballgame, youve probably waited too late," he said. "... I think its more your preparation on Tuesdays practice, Wednesdays practice, Thursdays practice, when we take care of issues. I think thats whats important.
"I think motivational speeches are probably overrated. Theyre good for movies. But if were having to get pumped up Saturday at whatever time too late."
Listen to Blue Devils head football coach David Cutcliffe's pregame speech in the locker room before his team takes on Cincinnati in the Belk Bowl. Dec 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHYJpt7EF4g
It's these things that have passed by at VT
Thank you! Great examples of what I was trying to explain.
The example you have provided of Coach Cutcliffe is the style of motivation I'm talking about. It's not verbose nor is it a screaming. It's to the point, strong, and confident. Often, and again this is just my 2 cents not fact, FB sounds confused and unsure about whether or not we can win.
Since I don't have enough "Turkey Legs" to vote. I'll do this: +1^
I didn't realize that there is now a minimum of 'leg count' to be able to contribute a positive affirmation of someone else's opinion on this board. I find that extremely ridiculous.
aptturkey, I went through all of your posts in this thread and found every single one of them to be respectful and thoughtful in content, as well as rational in thought. I hope you notice your leg count now. Thank you for joining the discussion and for adding to the content of this board. I hope you stay for a while. Have a great day!
swvadon. Thank you for your kind words! A turkey leg for you sir. Apparently, the count is twenty.
I am of the opinion that we can have engaging, opinionated, and heated debate/discussion/conversation that is also thoughtful and shows respect.
At the end of the day we're all Hokies that want to see the school and community thrive.
Now that I can "vote", I'm down voting everyone! Seriously though I'm kidding, please don't down vote me.
I see you trying to correlate pregame motivation speeches to wins on the field... but why would you pick a Duke bowl game that they lost?
Win or lose it was about getting the players ready for the game to play. Coming in to the game on a 4 game losing streak it was about the kickoff starting strong, the game being strong, but more it was about Duke football being strong. Maybe, maybe not but it led to a 10-4 following season and a 2nd bowl game
Interestingly enough, games had polar opposite results.
Cutcliffe gives an impassioned pregame speech, and Duke comes out on fire against Cincinnati but craps it away at the end. The following year, in that 2nd bowl game, Duke comes out on fire against Texas A&M but craps it away at the end.
I'll use Pitt and ECU as examples. We come out extremely slow but look much more alive at the end in both games.
Like I said in my reply below, the coach can do the preparation, but these guys who have been playing football for almost their entire lives should know how to motivate themselves and each other as well.
That's a rather broad generalization. No one is trying to correlate the two. Besides, if that were the case and we used your rationale about motivational speeches and winning, as compared to FB's opinion about motivational speeches (noted above by JPoole), VT would rarely win a game.
You assume that's my rationale. Don't assume that's my rationale.
This is my rationale. I really don't care who gives a motivational speech before a game, whether the head coach, one of the player-leaders, or the surly equipment manager who's been there since before the stadium had lights. But SOMEONE had better get the players in the right mindset, with enough emotion, to play on the day of the game.
I'd post the "balls of steel" clip from Ohio State if I could find it.
I don't expect him to say that much because it's not his style, so it's more of wishful thinking from my side. And you're right, if we execute our offense well like in OSU then we're very good, however that happens extremely infrequently and inconsistently and that is what makes us a very mediocre team this year. It doesn't matter how good you can be in flashes but if we don't have the consistency, then unfortunately we're not up to the mark, and this has been the general case for the past few years.
He isn't gonna throw his kids under the bus. I guarantee the talk in the locker room and at practice is gonna be a little less rosy
I think that's the important point here: what Beamer says to the cameras is one thing, and what he says to the coaches and players is another. I hope behind the scenes he's motivating the players and holding the coaches accountable.
I think the "moxie" is gone because Brewer was cautioned about all the interceptions. He did not have the confidence in the Pitt game that I saw in previous contests. After the OSU game I read about the Confidence, the moxie, the gunslinger attitude. Well, it's gone. I would rather he sling the ball all over the place and take the interceptions and go down guns blazing than sit through another game like the last one. Maybe he's hurt. He looked stiff and hesitant Thursday, until later in the second half. His back could be bothering him.
The problem is that were simply not good enough on offense to survive our QB throwing three interceptions a game. It's fine if you're a team that puts up 45 Pts per game with ease, but that's not how we operate.
He needed to be smarter with the football, and the result was that he went to the other extreme, which still isn't being smart with the football.
Loeffler said earlier this week, (and I paraphrase) that there's a reason NFL QB's are making millions of dollars a year: Very few people can do what they do.
There is an extremely fine line between pulling the trigger and holding the ball and Michael Brewer is very good at making that split second call MOST of the time.
He was erring on the side of pulling the trigger too much and it's obvious that that there has been an attempt to correct that-more throw aways and more hesitancy to throw that was apparent at Pitt.
But now, perhaps there is an overcorrection. They are trying to find that sweet spot right in the middle and some kids don't quite get it right. I support Brewer, (and Leal, Motley.......) It ain't easy.
It becomes a mental game and we're in the thick of it.
Oh.....and welcome and a leg for you.
You might have been joking about Loeffler and Brewer grabbing some fishing poles, but I think that's exactly what needs to be done. Everyone on here who likes to fish, even occasionally, understands the soul searching that can happen when its just you, your buds, your pole, a slight breeze in the air, and the anticipation of waiting for that big strike. It's straight up therapeutic
Couldn't agree more. Luckily there are plenty spots to do just that. Now I'm not sure how much of an outdoorsman/angler Lefty is, or how much scheduling would prevent this, but might be on to something there. Early-Mid October can be a good time for a nice haul depending on where you doing your casting. Hell, I think I might have to go out a few more before the bites start to cede a bit
Good points all around. Dufman I've been agreeing with you a lot for the past few weeks but.
What makes you think we can't score 45 points.? If we're 100% healthy we have some good athletes and a damn good defense. Malleck hodges shai Marshawn both fresh wr and the vets
HOWEVER.....
I definitely starting to think Beamer might be the one holding loeffler back. It's 2014 and at some point you need to be a run and gun team. Every time we have played like that it's been a great result. I get the whole balanced old vt look but...
Our offensive line can't hold blocks long enough. We're down to our 4th and 5th string RB. The better RB of the two doesn't get touches. So why not air it out?? Help the offense get into a rhythm, a drive like that had to have a good effect on the o line and everyone.
I don't ever want to doubt Beamer but times like these make me wonder what we could look like with a "go get em" coach. We have been soo spoiled with Beamer the past decade, and he done so much for the program. The last thing I would hate to see is the Bowden thing happen here and quite honestly it's getting eerily close for some fans.
PS- Go Duke
This exactly right: "Seven games into the season, Loeffler should be able to recognize what his quarterback is and is not. His strength may be as a rhythm quarterback who thrives on stringing together successful plays in sequence. " Coach Frank Beamer's mismanagement of personnel (or maybe in this case it is Loeffler) is unbelievable. Brewer is being ruined by the restrictive harnessing that apparently goes on every week. My guess it is Beamer caused by his wanting to restrict turnovers. Brewer's getting worse during season reminds me of what happened to Logan Thomas. It is systematic.
One week it's "We don't run the ball enough, there's too many turnovers".
Next week it's "why don't we let him throw the ball"?
Chasing too many rabbits.
We basically go away from what's working game by game.
That happens when you go from 5 RBs to 4 to 2, and the 2 that are healthy haven't shown much against an opponent's 1st-string defense.
Correction 1 RB didn't do squat so the next RB doesn't get a chance.
Stuff befuddles me that we didn't event try to get Caleb some carries
I keep seeing this and it continues to irritate me. This simply isn't true. The sad fact is, none of our RBs were effective. The line couldn't block for crap and the RBs couldn't find any holes that did open up. Our running plays, in order, through the game:
1st quarter
Coleman for 3 yd, negated by holding
Newsome for 5 yd
Caleb for 1 yd
Caleb for no gain
2nd quarter
Caleb for no gain
Coleman for 2 yd
Coleman for -1 yd
Rogers for 2 yd
3rd quarter
Rogers for 8 yd
Rogers for 1 yd
Caleb for 6 yd
Caleb for 4 yd
Hodges for 1 yd
Caleb for 1 yd
Rogers for 3 yd
Rogers for 9 yd
4th quarter
Caleb for no gain
Through most of the game we were behind the sticks due to penalties and behind in score, forcing us to pass to try to make up ground, so the running game was minimal, anyway. The most effective RB that night was Rogers. Caleb didn't find any holes and Coleman was his usual self (sorry, JC, that's just true). But don't say that Caleb wasn't given any chances. He just wasn't effective, and often ran right into lineman rather than finding holes (though they were few and far between).
I guess it's just frustrating when it's soo easy to see JC shouldn't even be a feature/get carries but he still does.
Where were the jet sweeps?? Shouldn't that help spread the defense out?? I know we ran a moronic double reverse but still. There has to be a way we can get more yards than 36 or 46.
If not then teams will play front 4 even 3 get pressure and keep everything in front of them. That's how you beat VT.
The problem is, we're complaining about something every week. A week or two ago, too many jet sweeps, now it's not enough. Too much running, now not enough. It goes on and on. When we're ineffective in almost everything we're doing, it really doesn't matter. When your top 3 backs are out with injuries, the whole "don't let JC play" rings hollow. We just don't have the horses to pull him from the field, because then everyone would complain about the potential for injuries - run [insert RB here] all the time/why is [insert RB here] continuing to get pounded behind an ineffective line, he's just going to get hurt. Plain and simple, Pitt's D was killing our running game and it largely doomed our offensive attack, by forcing Brewer to throw when he was playing a bit conservatively, as has been discussed a lot elsewhere.
I think we're complaining a lot more lately because there has been a piss poor performance put on the field ever week since OSU and UNC.. Why can't the coaches make the proper adjustments? If the line can't block.. lets throw a screen or a wr screen or a quick pass. If the line is blocking lets continue to run the ball. I know easier said than done but its been pretty bad lately.
This year regardless who is calling plays we go away from what working. Every single game we get a drive going then boom we go away from whats working or a penalty.. obviously coaches can't help the penalty's because its week 7 and we still continue to do the same thing so I guess that's that.
I'd like to show two pictures below and figure out what JC saw that I didn't. Maybe some other people can help but I am soo confused as to why he cuts this inside right into #44 when Gibson and a pulling Farris create a huge gaping hole to the outside? Maybe the play call was to go inside?? Zone Read, but even then look at that hole no way JC didn't see that. Obviously I am not a D1 RB but that hole is pretty good size and there's more hokie blockers that way.
See #44 unblcked and standing right there to tackle/push JC down. Look at that hole to the left though, so much room. It looks like Farris is pulling and JC should follow and go outside..
Even this angle which is seconds later truely shows how big that hole to the outside was, instead we run right into it.
I'm not bashing JC the kid puts in a lot of work just confuses me as to why we continue to miss the hole.
That first picture, when JC is about to cut, is where you can clearly see why he made that decision. if he heads outside, #47 is scraping over to cut him down (and Farris gets held up at the line, leaving 47 free in the next picture too). When he cuts up, he now has McLaughlin between himself and #44. If McLock gets a better piece of/stays with 44, this is likely a much bigger play. On the flip side, if Farris gets outside and seals 47 inside, JC has a huge lane outside. In this case, I think JC did the right thing - get upfield and get some yards when you see a hole.
Based on those pictures, its hard to say that JC saw #47 scraping. Look at his line of vision, he's got 6 guys that are 6'2"+ 280lbs+ between him and #47. In this case, I do think it would have been better for him to cut it outside, but it does not surprise me. The issue really over the past few seasons with the running game has been the inability for guys to get their pads facing upfield and get the extra couple of yards. Most of our runs have been sideline to sideline, especially with JC. So it would make sense that he has been coached to get up the field as quick as he can.
The fan base isn't one gigantic entity. One week some people say we aren't running it enough, the next week different people say we didn't throw it enough. We all like the Hokies, but we're not The Borg.
Very true. There is always going to be a vocal portion of the fan base posting that we 'need to get back to Hokie football' - which translates in their minds to running off tackle or QB runs about 80% of the time, whether or not that is realistic. Then there is a portion that always picks whatever our weak spot was in a loss and say we need to do a 180 from that.
The truth of the matter about the Pitt game is that we were down to our 4th & 5th options at RB - who are our 4th & 5th options for a significant reason, being neither Caleb nor Coleman is very good despite what their fanbases might claim. They just aren't. One 70+yard run by Caleb last year doesn't mean he is very good. He's the 5th option for a reason. Coleman being Shane's pet favorite doesn't mean he is very good, either.
So, we had our 4th & 5th options at RB going against the 4th ranked rushing defense in the nation. Then our passing game was indeed puzzling, but nobody on here has ever addressed the fact that since the rushing game was nonexistent it made it much easier to defend the passing game.
Folks on here are attacking Brewer, despite the fact he didn't throw any INT's which had been his weakness. They fail to acknowledge that he was working against a stacked deck all game long. As for Loeffler? He has game plans that make sense, even if they don't always work. Nobody wants to admit that he has to please Frank in his offensive philosophy, which means making killing the clock an obsession as opposed to moving the sticks. As long as that directive remains foremost - and it does, he wants to kill the clock in football more than score quickly as long as he views the offense being there only as an aid to the defense, this is what we have.
Beautiful
You mean like it was before brewer,2013 Maryland 27 Virginia Tech 24 Possession26:00/34:00,
and like it was before loeffler, Virginia Tech 12 Miami (FL) 30, Possession 34:21/25:39.
I has a sad now.
You can chase 1 rabbit at a time but, as soon as you start chasing 2 rabbits, you'll end up with neither.
I see comment after comment on TKP raving about the talent that our freshmen have this year, and they're absolutely right. We have been blessed by EXTREMELY talented freshman who display uncanny ability and skill. That being said...how does one not blame the staff? If you see amazing freshmen who do great things but the result is a L, it seems to me that the cause goes to the staff.
I agree that Beamer has earned the right to leave when he wants but I was shocked when Babcock offered the 2 year extension early in the season, recent results have made me scratch my head even more. I don't solely blame Beamer but it's his job to get the other staff in line and executing. So when I see scathing comments about Loeffler and references to the past with disdain for Stinespring I can't help but think...aren't these people Beamer's responsibility? Didn't he hire them and place them in the positions they are in? I know, there are exactly 3 billion people rolling their eyes right now because this is an anti - beamer comment, but he is the head coach and his job to make the staff and thus the team successful. I hate to say it, I Truly do, but I don't think the staff is managed well at all and I'm not sure that Beamer has what it takes to accomplish this any more. We sink deeper year after year into a conference that has one or two ranked teams in it, DESPITE a flood of talent. At what point does it become the right move to allow our head coach to use his recruiting skills with a ten year (200,000+ a year) deal as AD assistant? Im of the opinion sometime soon if we want to alter the course of this sinking ship...then again "there's always next year".
It seems a trend has also arisen by many on this site that if you dont specifically state you will be rooting for your team next week And you arent still proud to be a hokie then you arent and you wont. Id like to think that our fan base is better than that. I'll "see" ALL of you next week loud and proud hokie nation!
Freshman, no matter how talented, will make freshman mistakes like go in at the wrong times, jump offsides and make other mental errors.
WE don't get the 5* guys, we get the 3* star guys where the difference is frequently not athletic but other things like, a little too jumpy or not able to control the adrenalin.
Wonder why we redshirt so much? It's not because they lack talent, they frequently lack something else that can be trained. Sometimes it is size, other times it's composure, etc.
And you're absolutely right, lots of penalties are probably a result of the youth, but when do you blame the staff and follow that ladder to the top? And i mean you egbert, when would you personally (if you dont mind my asking) pull the plug if we see seasons like this one continue to be the norm. How many years will set that off? Or would it ever? I'm just curious. I don't deny that I'm on the shorter end of the patience. But I love beamer and the fact that half our staff has been around forever and maybe the thought that he would still be around makes it that much easier to think it's time for a new top man if we want to break this trend. I just don't see anything to believe that we will see much difference anytime soon.
Well, since the case is new this season that VT is really infraction prone, I'm willing to give them quite some time to teach these guys not to do it.
The trend so far has been quite short so, he's got lots of time as far as I'm concerned.
Ultimately, yes, the buck stops with the head man. But the one thing that a HC has to do is find balance between micromanaging and trusting his staff and giving them latitude to do what they're hired to do. Frank doesn't like to micromanage. He likes to set strategy and goals and let his staff work. So is he responsible for the performance of his staff? Sure, he made the hires and those were his decision. But I think there's a huge amount of problems in other programs when the HC starts to dictate exactly what everyone is supposed to be doing. That's true outside of football, as well. Hire people to do their jobs, critique them and assess their progress, but don't try to do their jobs for them.
I alluded to this early but it went without response so I'll ask again.
Let me preface it by saying, I'm only asking I'm not stating fact. Although, it's probable there is a factual basis.
Does anyone else see a similarity between the Steinspring era play calling and Loffler's current offense (which notably has few wrinkles)? If so, why do you think that's the case? IMO, it's because FB is micromanaging, regardless of what he tells the media or fan base. FB likes to huddle up, line up, and play old school smash mouth football. I'm sorry if I'm the only person that gets tired of driving to into the redzone, running three times off tackle, and settling for a field goal.
No, I don't actually
What evidence do you have the CFB is micromanaging?
None that would be sufficient. Haha.
Of course the antithesis is: What evidence do you have that he's not?
Unless you witness it directly yourself, you can't prove anything either way (and strictly speaking, you can never prove a negative). All we have is what the coaches say in interviews. So either you believe that or you don't. I have not heard anything about Frank interfering or micromanaging anything, really. The Beamer that interceded on behalf of the running game was Shane.
I understand your position. However, there is a difference between direct and circumstantial evidence. I'm not attempting to take the position that I have either one. I respect your position, but I have to disagree that simply because no one is saying there is a problem equates to - there is no problem. Again, I'm not trying to argue there is dissension in the ranks or anything of that nature. But do you honestly expect a second year hire to take to the media and express that he might be experiencing blow back from his boss?
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
I'm honestly getting a bit lost in what you're trying to say. Maybe something's happening, but maybe it's not, but there's no evidence or at least some evidence that might not be meaningful? I feel like you're trying to make a point but are sort of dancing around it. Of course Loeffler is not going to undermine Beamer. But in past weeks, we have seen Loeffler admit some fault and do some introspection. Publicly admitting your own problems is, to me, the only real positive that comes from failure. I have seen nothing that indicates Beamer is screwing with the offense to its detriment. There are probably some things he can do as HC to focus both the coaches and his players, but beyond that the position coaches have to be at their best, working in line with the coordinators, and knowing what their players can and can't do. That's all it comes down to, but that's true of any football team. Beyond that, we're just speculating, I think.
Sorry for any confusion. I'm not trying to make a solid point. At the outset and now, I'm merely expressing a simple opinion. You're attempting to establish fact from opinion (e.g. my opinion can't be correct because I have no evidence to back it up). All this while arguing that your opinion is correct because there is no evidence to the contrary.
My previous post was in response to your argument that something is true because it's not yet been proven false. To me that's a logical fallacy. Logically, if you don't know then it can be either true, false, unknown between true and false, or unknowable.
Yes, I'm speculating. I should have made that clearer from the start.
I understand what's going on, but it's just very confusing when you make vague allusions to maybe some evidence that might exist. Just realize you're engaging a scientist in a debate :) I live my life based on facts and observations. Speculation is generally discarded entirely, and opinions should still be justified by something, so I approach all the debates here the same way.
This isn't a logical fallacy. It's the very definition of a scientific theory - a plausible explanation for something that occurs that can be tested. A theory is supported by evidence and is accepted until evidence exists that disproves it. It can indeed be true, false, or unknowable, but the theory must always be capable of being tested and scrutinized.
Your original hypothesis was: Beamer is micromanaging
Your evidence was: *crickets* (not trying to be condescending, I'm actually just trying to be funny here)
My hypothesis: Beamer is not micromanaging, rather Loeffler is still in a period of evaluation of how to succeed with the team in its present incarnation, but the coaching staff as a whole must work together to make the team better.
The counter: there exist zero pieces of credible evidence to suggest Beamer is micromanaging and/or interfering with Loeffler. On the contrary, Loeffler has publicly admitted fault in several instances and has proposed changes. This suggests introspection and tells me that Loeffler's ego doesn't get in the way of his desire for success. Additionally, Shane Beamer suggested to Loeffler that we take a different approach with WMU. This is an assistant making a case to a coordinator. The team worked together, and it worked out. There are plenty of things that we don't know about the behind-the-scenes relationships on the team, so some things are certainly unknowable, but just based on what we *do* know, I don't see a reason to believer there is micromanagement or interference. Maybe that's wrong, and maybe we'll learn that later, but at this point, the theory that I think can be supported is that everyone is at least attempting to work together, even if the results are not always good.
Our scientific experiment is that Beamer is micromanaging.
VTGuitarMan Hypothesis: Beamer not micromanaging.
Aptturkey Hypothesis: Beamer micromanaging.
Your argument is that I am incorrect because no one has said he is micromanaging and because Loffler has engaged in introspection and accepted responsibility for his bungling. You are attempting to correlate the two, at least thats the way it appears to me (I'm not a scientist so I could be wrong). That is a post hoc fallacy or termed differently coincidental causation. You are assuming that because two things happen simultaneously they are related through a common cause, which is simply not correct.
As an example: ice cream sales in July are the highest of any other month during the year. And there are more murders per capita in the month of July. Thus, there must be a connection between ice cream sales and murder.
So your argument: No one is claiming that FB is micromanaging. And Loffler has accepted responsibility for some things. Thus, FB is not micromanaging Loffler and the offense as a whole.
Additionally, you're simply using circular reasoning and bifurcation to support your position. Your position being that because no on has said anything means nothing is happening. Thus, you are simply using the thing to be proven, or in this case disproven, to support itself. Just like me, you dont have any real evidence to support your contention other than "this is true because it can't be false." Yet, you attempt to regard it as fact.
You've bifurcated the argument by claiming that only two possible solutions exist (1. No one has said anything to contrary; and 2. Loffler accepts responsibly for a few things), when in reality there may be more options or extraneous variables you are not taking into account. The goal being to force anyone reading your post to choose between the two, since if one is not correct, then logically the only other presented option must be correct, since it's the only other option.
At the outset, I merely asserted opinion. I never claimed it was fact. You attempted to do that.
Sorry for my delayed response. I've been watching Alabama trounce the Aggies and dreaming of what could be. Haha.
p.s. thanks for making me think on a Saturday. This is never a goal of mine. Haha.
your hypothesis is based on the presumption that the play calling is similar. in what ways is it similar? i don't see any similarities at all. i think that is a case that has to be made before there is any reason to propose that Beamer is micromanaging anything...which to be perfectly candid, would be kind of refreshing.
He's not correlating anything. You have zero evidence that Beamer is micromanaging, so that argument in a factual way is incorrect. (Though as an opinion I am beginning to think he is)
Guitarman is simply saying that Loeffler has shown introspection which means that there is some measure of evaluation going on by himself and by Beamer. That doesn't mean Beamer is micromanaging, rather simply managing. Beamer is after all his boss, so has the right to evaluate his staff as he sees fit. Every employee understands that and I am sure Loeffler does too.
If Loeffler wanted to run a quick-passing tempo offense because all on-field evidence clearly proves that's when the offense is most effective, do you honestly think Frank Beamer would let him?
My one issue with your position is that in order to prove your assertion wrong (Frank isn't interfering) it would require Loeffler publicly throwing his boss under the bus, which we all known isn't going to happen.
Maybe he is maybe he isn't, but it wouldn't suprise me. I have a hard time imagining loeffler has free reign of this offense, especially after the whole "we told him to run the ball more" at halftime of WMU thing. It wasn't just Shane who said that.
And my issue with your position is that you don't have any evidence to support your opinion either.
Let's face it, both sides are just opinions, we don't really know one way or another.
Well our eyeballs can certainly see what is and is not working on the field.
So any way you slice it, somewhere there is a disconnect between what this team is and what the coaches are trying to make it.
I fully admit that my opinion in this matter is exactly that. My boggle is that this is already starting to feel like Stiney all over again. The story is starting to feel the same, the results on the field are the same, the excuses are certainly sounding very similar...
So at that point you start to look at commonalities. At this point the only thing all of Beamers mediocre to bad offenses over the last decade and a half have in common...is him.
What can anyone do about it? Nothing. Like every year, hope things get better next year. Hope the defense is so dominant it doesnt matter how much of a dumpster fire the offense continues to be. Really as fans just do what weve always been doing.mdrinking heavily.
It probably doesn't matter, but we're using the word "opinion" to mean "speculation" or something like that, and that's not what "opinion" means.
"Blue is the prettiest color" is an opinion
"The pen in your pocket is blue" is not an opinion.
If I think the pen in your pocket is blue, and I don't really have any evidence for that, then it's speculation. But it's not an opinion: either the pen is blue or it isn't.
"Frank Beamer is a great coach" is an opinion. "Frank Beamer micromanages his assistants" is not an opinion: either he does or he doesn't. If you say he does, with no evidence to support it, then that's speculation. If the other person says he does not, based on what little evidence is available (i.e. public statements that may or may not reflect private reality), that's a decision not to speculate, but to accept statements at face value until and unless there is reason to doubt them.
Neither is an opinion. "Grammar and usage posts are annoying" is an opinion.
"Grammar and usage posts are annoying" is an opinion.
But so perfectly timed.
The issue I have with this is... I believe that if you're showing signs of success, it's hard to be interfered with professionally. Remember, Malzahn's first year at Auburn, he was an OC, similar to Loeffler, in working under Chizik and his system was championship level successful. So it's either A) Chizik is micromanager or he isn't; or B) he felt like something wasn't working and needed to change.
"absence of evidence..."
Joe McCarthy, is that you? : )
I thought the popular complaint of the week was that we don't line up and play old school smash mouth football enough?
Sorry, I just can't keep track of all the complaints. I don't care how we do it- I just want to win.
Seriously. It's like complaint du jour every time we lose. Why isn't Frank setting Loeffler straight? Why is Frank interfering with Loeffler? On and on. We lost. We lost because nothing was working right. The coaches share blame and the players share blame. A team wins and loses together.
Well arn't we 11-11 against Power 5 teams over the last 3 seasons?
When that's the case, I feel that any and all criticisms are valid. Maybe it is the perfect reflection and realty that this team really doesn't do anything well on offense, which is unacceptable when we keep hearing that they are "building a foundation".
This blog is starting to remind me of the Phillies blog i used to read, right until every person with a legitimate negative point about the team was alienated or down voted into oblivion.
No one is invalidating criticism, we're debating and doing it rather well. It's just funny (to me) to observe that one week something happens that causes some to complain, then the next week the opposite happens and another group complains. Sure, it's valid, and it shows the inconsistency of our team.
Hey that happened to me to,
from a comment 2 months ago
Similarities? Little to none.
I think we played a bad game. With a lot of backups. Unfortunately it happens. As shitty as we played we still had a shot at the end. Let's get ready for Miami. Go Hokies.
I see on some other sites people are calling for coaches' heads. It's really not so simple as that, yet. The lack of recruiting at line positions is hopefully being rectified and if it's not, then, let the chopping begin.
None of the coaches should be anywhere near losing their jobs. Like you, I've seen all of them, including Frank, being discussed that way on every message board, some more so than others. Some might be underperforming, but it's not like they are at that level. Plus, it's not like that is the sole reason for the team's performance. There are multiple factors. It's not just one knot we have to untie, there are several. Coaches, players, injuries, recruiting, lots of issues that could improve. We'll just have to wait to see how they get rectified.
The injuries specifically in the front 7 of the defense can not be overlooked in a loss to a power run team like Pitt.
idk, I seem to be as lost as the team seems to be.......I don't pretend to be much more than a loyal citizen of the Hokie Nation. The in-depth discussions and analysis here help me understand the nuances of football and I can better understand why things worked and didn't work. All that aside, I am not a "kill the rabbit" after failures to succeed, but something is wrong and it's becoming a year-after-year thing, it would appear. We started the trek in 1999 playing for the NC. We then let that go and joined the ACC and proceeded to win ACC titles and of course continued to go to bowl games. We then said OK, we will just strive to win the Coastal and of course continue to go to bowl games. Coming full circle, we now are in jeopardy of both losing the Coastal and not going to a bowl game. What a fall from grace!!! Having said all that, I am still loyal while also being very disappointed at the ineptness of the team that has become the rule rather than the exception. So, leaving the Xs and Os aside for you all the experts, what I am seeing is that starting next year, (yes, once again) our talented frosh and the great talent that is coming for 2015 bodes well for us. We will have Brewer back and then when our playmakers will be Sophs and Juniors, we have to break in another QB. That smacks of another scenario like the times of Eddie Royal and crew when they were so underused (how I'm remembering it). I am thinking that if Brewer continues to decel instead of excelling for the rest of the year that I would like to see us break in the new QB next year instead of 2016. So, what are the thoughts about that? I think we need to get back on cycle with the skilled folks being together as much as possible ala the Tyrod era. We've been out of sync so much since his departure IMO.
It is definitely time to consider killing the rabbit, at least just an honest review of it.
If conference championships are the measuring stick of success it may be time to actually start thinking about it. Since the start of the Bowl Era at VT (1992) Vt has only gone more than 3 years without a conference championship twice. The first time was 1999-2004. Plenty of valid reasons then.
And Now. 2010 - today. And now with Duke's win today and FSU's dominance back, it's settlling the Coastal out and ACC champion looks back.
Then move on to recruiting, First add in top ranked VA talent not choosing VT anymore. Also VT isn't signing top talent nationwide.
Lets be honest and consider what winning the ACC even means these days anymore in the whole of college ball
Tennessee, our should be out of state rival, has won only 3 bowl games since winnning a National Championship. Hasn't been to a bowl game in 4 years and has been almost 20 years since a SEC championship was won.
And currently UT has the #3 recruiting class including two 5* players, seven 4* players. Included in that are the 74th, 54th, 39th and 11th best O linemen in the country, what we need, they got, in spades.
And going against our O line will be the #2 and #5 Defensive Tackles they got
So that's why
Well, let's see.
Replaced the OC- check
Replaced Oline coach- check.
Re-orged recruiting staff and manner in which assignments are made to recruits to reflect position coaches instead of straight geographic-check.
Hired 2 new recruiting positions-check
Alright so, next step is to recruit a couple classes and evaluate impact of changes, keep what works, change again what hasn't.
Alright, everything seems to be in place, thanks.
Don't give up hope on the 2015 recruiting class just yet both in state and OOS :).