You can't sugarcoat what happened in Blacksburg on Thursday night. Offensively and defensively, the Miami Hurricanes physically dominated the Hokies. When the game concluded, the catcalls were loud. Fans screamed for everything from a quarterback change, to a new offensive coordinator and some believe it may have been a nail in the coffin for the tenure of Frank Beamer. I turned off the broadcast absolutely disgusted that I left Avalon Pier in Kill Devil Hills, NC in the midst of a hot trophy red drum bite to watch a first half in which the offense could not manage more than a first down while the defense was manhandled up front. Perhaps most frustrating was that my negativity during the game was exceeded by the paying audience's, who permeated a sense of frustration that has grown from unrealized national championship aspirations in 2010, to a complete lack of faith that the program is going in the right direction at this present moment in time.
An in-depth review of everything that went wrong in the first half could make a War and Peace look like a Berenstain Bears book, so this instalment will focus exclusively on the offense.
When I watched Pitt and Miami live, I thought that perhaps the offensive struggles were in part a result of personnel changes. Even though the Hokies did not particularly run the ball very well last season, the design of the running game complimented the design of the passing game. The quick slant to D.J. Coles that was often run in the red zone last season came off of inverted veer action. Many of the quick counter routes to Willie Byrn in the flat came off of outside zone read play-action. Linebackers were being influenced in one direction, and the ball would go a different direction.
Since Ohio State, the offensive passing game and running game has not seemed to build off each other nearly as well. I thought personnel was part of the problem. Perhaps since Michael Brewer isn't a power running threat on inverted veer, and despite his quickness he has not kept the ball enough on bootlegs and zone reads for defenses to tie up defenders on contain responsibility. Perhaps Williams downhill running style was ill-suited for the style of play action that helped get Cline, Byrn, and Knowles open last season.
Well, I was wrong. While the Hokies use Williams more on inside zone style plays than the stretch plays from last season, and while Brewer may not be a major threat on read option plays, both Pitt and Miami both respected Brewer's threat of keeping the football. Therefore, without the threat of back side pursuit, the Hokies had a numerical advantage at the point of attack.
To be frank, the answer is simple. The offensive line is not playing as well as they did last season. Fundamentally, the group is not as sound, and athletically, they are not as quick and strong at the point of attack. Despite what you have read elsewhere, outside of picking up stunts, the offensive line last season was very solid at the point of attack, and the Hokie running backs couldn't always take advantage because of poor reads on zone plays or some of the edge blocking by the inexperienced tight end group was shaky. This season, the running backs are better. The tight ends, with the return of Ryan Malleck, are far better at blocking. The offensive line isn't as sharp, either assignment-wise or physically.
Here is a great example. The Hokies run an outside zone stretch play with a fullback lead from a split back shotgun set. On the back side, Brewer is a threat to run on a fake handoff, and the Hokies have a screen package set up for Ryan Malleck. The play design works. Three Pitt defenders commit to containing Brewer and stopping the screen. This leaves six blockers (including Rogers) and the ball carrier (Coleman) to defeat six Pitt defenders at the point of attack. (You will note as you watch the play, the remaining two Pitt defenders never come into the screen shot.) Six blockers and a back should defeat six defenders every time. This is a well-designed play.
But, the offensive line doesn't get the job done. Even though the Hokies end up with a first down, there are multiple busts on the play. It starts at the point of attack with Augie Conte.
Up front, Pitt has a defensive tackle aligned as a wide one-technique on Conte's inside shoulder. It appears that center Caleb Farris adjusts the blocking scheme to allow himself to pull instead of trying to scoop that defensive tackle.
By alignment, Conte has a relatively easy block on the defensive tackle. The ball is snapped, and Conte's head hits the defensive tackle on the outside shoulder. Everything is in place, now Conte has to drive his legs and seal the tackle inside. Instead, Conte looks like he is pass blocking. His feet are moving, but there is no downhill momentum at all. The defensive tackle crosses his face with ease, and despite leverage and angle advantage, the tackle barely breaks stride. For Conte, who is likely the strongest player on the Virginia Tech roster, to not even turn the tackle's pads with that initial contact spot just is not good enough. He doesn't even stay engaged.
Elsewhere, other breakdowns occur. Laurence Gibson fails to scoop the back side defensive tackle (something that is happening far too often this season.) Wang doesn't get enough of a chip to help Gibson either. Rogers path indicates this is an outside zone, but Jonathan McLaughlin has his head on the inside. McLaughlin still has a pretty decent block, but if he gets outside leverage on the end, Coleman can go outside and take away the backside pursuit as a factor. Farris looks terrific pulling, but gets no movement on the linebacker (No. 8). A well-executed play should gain significant yardage here, but instead it turns into a minimal gain.
Once Wyatt Teller was inserted into the lineup, the Hokie running game looked better against Pitt, and all of the best runs came off space his speed and push created. The rest of the offensive line was more aggressive and played at a higher tempo. Unfortunately, the failure to score a touchdown on the opening drive of the third quarter seemed to put Scot Loeffler back into pass-only mode (which will be a more in-depth discussion down the road). During the week of practice, it was clear that an emphasis on being physical and more downhill in the running game was a focus. From a physical perspective, the offensive line was much more aggressive and attacking than they were in the first half against Pitt, but the production wasn't there. Why? Here are two plays from the first drive that show the stark contrast in how the offensive line performs play to play.
First, here is a well-executed play. On second down, the Hokies run an outside zone read.
The left side of the Hokie offensive line (Gibson and Teller) starts with a double team on the Miami defensive end. They push the end five yards down field, right into the laps of the scraping Miami inside linebackers. Both linebackers have to retreat in order to get around the block. If you watch the speed and downhill push here versus the above highlighted play against Pitt, the contrast is startling. Malleck seals the edge. The rest of the offensive line effectively scoops the back side pursuit (although you would like to see McLaughlin put the back side defensive end on the ground with that cut block). Brewer's threat to keep on the back side ties up No. 17. This is well done and Williams gets a nice gain.
On the resulting third-and-one, the Hokies bring Caleb Farris in at center and move Wang over into The Wang Package tight end power set. You would expect that Loeffler would run the G Lead here, with Teller pulling and kicking out, and the combination of Malleck, Wang, and Gibson blocking down inside. Instead, Loeffler calls a true power play, with the entire left side blocking down, Rogers kicking out, and Conte leading through. Miami's DC even helps Loeffler by calling a cross stunt by his linebackers. The left inside linebacker (Kirby, No. 56) stunts into the left tackle-left guard gap, and the right inside linebacker (Perryman, No. 52) has to scrape all the way across to help on the left side. Loeffler has the perfect play call here, but the execution is terrible.
Power plays, as I have discussed at length, are rule blocking plays. It does not matter what the defense does, you must block your rule. The rule here for Malleck, Wang, Gibson, Teller, and Farris is gap-down-linebacker. That means each player has to account for the gap to their inside (in this case, right shoulder) first, before then following a path inside until they find a down lineman or a linebacker. For technique, each play side blocker should make contact with their left shoulder on the right hip of the Miami defender to their inside. Malleck should have the outside linebacker on the edge. Wang should have the down lineman (No. 91) aligned on the outside eye of Gibson. Gibson should be stepping through his inside gap. If a linebacker blitzes through the gap, he takes the linebacker. Teller should be stepping through his inside gap. If a linebacker blitzes or a defensive tackle shoots the gap, Teller should drive him inside. Farris occupies the gap vacated by Conte pulling.
Instead, this play is a disaster, starting with executing blocking rules. Gibson and Wang block this like a zone play instead of following the basic blocking rules! Gibson, instead of stepping through his inside gap, chips the down lineman like he and Wang are combination blocking a zone play to the right! The Miami linebacker (Kirby) runs right through Gibson's assigned gap to make the tackle in the back field. If Gibson steps through his hole, he runs right into Kirby (who had time to go inside and then change direction back to the outside.) Meanwhile, even with the help by Gibson, Wang doesn't get any movement inside on the down lineman (Olsen Pierre, No. 91), and Pierre roles off Wang to help Kirby make the tackle. Meanwhile, Rogers doesn't get much movement on his kick out block. Malleck engages well, but is too high and doesn't cave his man inside. What should be a huge gain based on formation, the play call, and how Miami defended it turned into a huge loss.
On other plays, Miami's defense just wins one-on-one battles. Here is another outside zone play.
Trent Harris (No. 33) aggressively gets up field to prevent Malleck from reaching him, then works back across Malleck's face to force the cut back inside. Everywhere else, the play is well blocked. Teller and Wang execute a beautiful combination block to scoop the nose tackle and the back side linebacker. McLaughlin seals the play side inside linebacker. Conte struggles a bit with the defensive tackle, but gets enough contact that he wouldn't be a factor if Malleck can reach or stretch Harris effectively. The play design leaves the deep play side safety unaccounted for. Without the threat of the deep passing game, the safety attacks aggressively, and you hope that Williams can win the battle. Here, he doesn't. Again, if you want to be critical of Loeffler, the only fair critique is that there isn't a threat of a deep pass off play-action, which is more of a by-product of Brewer's lack of arm strength and deep ball accuracy than a fault of Loeffler.
The fact of the matter is, Miami, on both sides of the football, was bigger, stronger, and faster than the Hokies. Perhaps more troubling is that they executed far better. I have heard a ton of criticism of Scot Loeffler over the last few weeks, and my gut reaction immediately after the game was not particularly favorable. But, the failings offensively in the first half against Miami had little to do with play design or calling.
As I wrote above, Loeffler had a perfect call in place on third and one on the opening drive, and the offensive line botched the blocking on the play side.
The second drive got behind the sticks when Michael Brewer made a poor throw on a screen to Hodges, putting the offense behind on down and distance. Then on third down, whoever sets the pass protection (center or quarterback), sets it to the left, even though Miami is showing an extra man on the right side.
The Hokies end up with four blockers accounting for two pass rushers on the left side, while Rogers and McLaughlin remain to account for three pass rushers to the right side. Unsurprisingly, Brewer gets sacked. There isn't a hot route to throw to, but if the protection is set correctly, a hot route would not be needed.
On the third Hokies drive, Josh Stanford took a lazy, completely unnecessary holding penalty to put the Hokies in an unmanageable third and long.
All Stanford has to do is put his head on the outside of the defender and drive. This may not be egregious, David Pollack, but it was lazy. Again, the play call is fine, and effective. The only criticism of Loeffler would be to reinsert Stanford after his leave of absence instead of using Cam Phillips (who I saw very little of early in the game). And that decision may have been above his paygrade. Nobody is open for Brewer on the resulting third-and-long, which gets batted down.
On the next drive, coming off their own goal line, Tech runs play-action on first down with a clear out route concept play side (Malleck and Hodges running deep to clear out for Rogers in the flat) and a back side drag route by Stanford from the left slot.
Stanford is wide open on the back side drag route, but Brewer, for reasons only he knows, looks at Stanford after his first read (Rogers) is covered but decides to pull the football down. Then Brewer reconsiders and throws the ball away. A quick check down to Stanford would result in either a first down or a very manageable second-and-short. Then on third down, Brewer makes the correct read on a smash route (throwing to Ford on the corner route when the corner jumps Hodges on the short out), but completely misses the throw high.
Again, this is a poor throw by Brewer. Ford is open for a first down. I don't particularly like that Loeffler isn't running the ball, but two of the three plays completely fooled Miami's defense. The players didn't execute.
The theme goes on and on. Johnson makes a house call after a poor Hughes punt. First down the next drive, Hokies run outside zone.
Rogers gets stuffed on the kickout and Conte misses the linebacker on his combination block. On second down, Brewer goes immediately to the check down (Malleck) for a short gain. Again, the Hokies find themselves in a third-and-long situation, and Wang and Conte botch a simple delayed cross stunt by the two defensive tackles.
If Tech's zoning pass protection, Conte and Wang shouldn't be chasing. If they are manning pass protection, Wang isn't good enough to block a four year starter in Anthony Chickillo one-on-one. Fact is, Miami was physically superior to the Hokie offense, and the execution wasn't there to make up for that difference. With what I saw on film, I don't think that Chad Morris, Chris Ault, or the ghosts of Pop Warner and Bill Walsh calling plays would not have made much of a difference.
It certainly did not help matters when Tech's defense spent most of the first half being completely manhandled by the Hurricanes' offensive line effectively zone blocking. I hope to have the time to review the Hokie defense in detail later this week, but Miami's offensive line, which featured a true freshman at one guard and a converted guard at right tackle, drove the Hokie defensive line and linebackers past their appropriate gap fits time and time again. Without depth, and at a distinct size disadvantage to the Hurricanes, all the advantages that numbers and speed gave the Hokies against a spread option system like Ohio State's were completely negated when those undersized defenders had to take on and shed blocks. That pursuit which the Hokies are known for, just was not there. I saw more poor tackling from senior safeties Bonner and Jarrett, and far, far, far too many plays where defenders were not flying to the football and gang tackling. Unlike against Pitt, where the defense played well minus a handful of big plays, the Hokie defensive unit got whooped physically. The offense's lack of production and the resulting damage to moral and legs could have played a factor, but I have seen bad offense from the Hokies before and more often than not, the defense was able to overcome it (or at least make the game competitive). The Hurricanes, are one of the worst teams in the country in converting third downs (28.41%), but converted 7 of 15 against Tech (46.67%). The offense was bad in the first half, but so was the defense.
The second half was a different kind of strange. I actually found myself far more critical of Loeffler even though the Hokies ran the ball much more effectively, because the way he called the game seemed to be more about proving a point—that the offense could run the football. The first drive featured five consecutive inside zone plays (all of which ran right, leveraging Wyatt Teller as the key back side scoop block to create a cut back bubble) before the offense started using some variety again (ending with a power call on the Williams fumble at the goal line). The third drive (after the Caleb fumble) started out with the I formation and power to the right side two consecutive plays and ended with four consecutive inside zones and Wright's fumble. The offensive line looked much quicker and more aggressive, but it seemed to be more running for the sake of running. Where were the downfield passes that the better running game should've opened up?
I finished my look at the film utterly perplexed. The offense is essentially the same personnel-wise on the offensive line. Brewer doesn't have the physical tools that Logan Thomas has, but most people reading this column would agree that Marshawn Williams is at least comparable to a healthy Trey Edmunds last season. Malleck and Hodges are major upgrades at tight end. Ford and Phillips have beaten out guys in Stanford and Knowles that both had over 40 catches last season. The offense should be better. Right?
Unfortunately, guys who were key contributors to that success last season have not performed as well this year. Coach Searels effort to bulk up the offensive line seems to have backfired, as the returning starters looks slower and are getting less push than last season. Caleb Farris, who still appears not to be getting push and extension (with his bad shoulder) has not been as effective at center as he was at guard last year. David Wang's return to center hasn't mitigated the errors in setting protections and picking up stunts that have plagued the Hokies the last two seasons. The offensive tackle flip-flop has both Gibson and McLaughlin floundering. Benching Teller after the Wright fumble, when he again was the best lineman all night, sends a bad message. The lack of consistent run push and protection has put the Hokies behind the sticks, and the young receivers seem to be struggling to get separation after starting the season so well. Key contributors from last year (Stanford, Knowles, and Coleman) have given the offense next to nothing. Hodges is being misused, likely because Brewer's shaky play has resulted in Loeffler being very conservative in the passing game. The offense is a mess.
Loeffler's job status will be questioned heavily in Blacksburg this week. His tinkering is frustrating. His inability to establish a mentality up front to pound the football and get push, and then design a passing structure that supports that ethos ultimately will have him in conflict with what Beamer wants. The need to use misdirection and influence last season to manufacture offense last season has become the enemy of the mandate to transition into a true power team this season. Philosophically, what Loeffler has demonstrated to be his most effective philosophy, spreading a team out and then using misdirection to get good matchups and then take advantage of those matchups, runs contrary to Frank Beamer's desire to have a physical offense that can control the clock and play field position (much like Miami's offense did on Thursday.) Ultimately, that conflict in philosophy may be the reason Loeffler leaves town, provided Beamer stays.
While Loeffler's complex system could be attributed for the lack of a running game and the bevy of pre-snap penalties that have haunted the Hokies all season, the system was not responsible for the performance on Thursday. Ultimately, Thursday night showed how desperately the Hokies need more mature talent on offense. Wyatt Teller again had a strong game, but you need five guys on the offensive line generating the same kind of push. The young wide receivers looked physically outmatched for the second week in a row. Tailback depth again looks like an issue as result of Wright and Caleb now joining Coleman on the persona non grata list due to their fumbles. And, quarterback is now as big of a question mark as it was at the beginning of the season.
I would not be shocked to see a quarterback change this week. Brewer has not been good the last two weeks. While Leal lead a touchdown drive against Miami's backups, Miami was playing prevent defense and most of Leal's throws were to wide open underneath receivers. Leal short-armed a post route to Ford that made me maintain my status as a "Non-be-Leal-ber." Has Motley been good enough in practice to get reps this week? I am not sure that it matters at this point. Because of the closed practices, I have no idea how close Chris Durkin and Andrew Ford are to being ready, but both have more upside than the available options. I can't imagine that it is worthwhile to blow a redshirt at this point even if they are the answer long term. Unless the offense can execute better and physically impose their will on the Boston College defense, a quarterback change won't turn this lost season around.
Comments
.......which is why you need an offensive line to win at football.
Great write up as always, French.
I feel your pain.
Great review of a terrible offensive performance French, too bad about the Red Drum bite. This team is so frustrating to watch, it is painful ineptitude. There is no excitement even in a loss. There don't seem to be any positives to focus on, or any potential to look forward to.
I wonder what Whit will do about the direction of this program. I have been impressed with his actions and direction so far, but righting the football ship is certainly his biggest challenge to date.
I believe most of us have seen what this team lacks but you point it out so well with with your elegant style.
Great write up. Answered a lot of questions I had after thursday night. Any thoughts on the bye-week advantage miami had as well? Do you really think those help in prep for games minus letting guys get a break and heal up some? Pitt had the same bye week we had so there was really no advantage there. When I realized that Miami was comming off a bye-week while we were coming off a poor performance against Pitt I didn't have good feelings. What do you think? How much extra prep do they get in? I know the coaches usually talk about hitting the recruitng trail some during bye-weeks. So I guess my question is how much extra prep is there vs rest and recovery time?
Thanks French. I really appreciate your efforts every week to educate our fan base. After reading this, I can't help but feel like the Hokies bowl streak and more than likely, their hold on the commonwealth cup will end this year. I understand that the offense especially the line wasn't executing and that Loeffler's play calls and game plan might not have been as bad as some (including myself) thought it was, but isn't it his and Searls' job to get them to execute? What do they spend their time on in practice? It seems to me that they're so all over the place, every week is a "new focus". It's very frustrating to read break down of the tape and see that failure of individuals or entire units to execute basic level stuff is what's causing these embarrassing performances. And frankly I'm tired of hearing that VT is going to be a run first football team. Because we haven't been. At all. Which is even more frustrating because when Beamer, or Loeffler, or whoever is calling the shots decides they want to prove a point and call nothing but run plays, VT has proven they can run the ball. They just never seem to want to until it's too late to effect the outcome.
My next issue, do we have less talented players on offense than ECU, Marshal, and UCON? If so, that's very sad but I don't think that we do. So how can teams like that have success moving the ball against decent defenses but we can't? I've never coached or played football at a high level so I won't start critiquing how these guys practice or prepare. Instead I'll try to relate it to something I do know. I've spent 15 years in the army in combat arms units and one thing that's never changed in my career is that great units do the small things very well. The units that do the small things well all have one thing in common, they're always very disciplined. That's something that I feel like is lacking on this team. I'm not sure why or who's to blame but it's how I feel based off what I'm seeing. All the penalties, guys completely blowing assignments, that's all a lack of focus. Hell, Wang even admitted as much. I understand that these kids aren't in the military but a certain level of discipline has to exist in any well run organization. And until that gets fixed, I'm afraid all the QBs and 5 star recruits in the world won't make much of a difference.
I think your comments on discipline are spot on. We won many football games with similar or worse recruiting classes, and it came from a disciplined, blue collar work ethic. I'm tired of hearing the talent argument from these coaches the last two years. It's disrespectful to the kids in the program and it feels like an excuse.
I was preached the same thing in my high school days, and like you said I feel like it applies in life. If you do the little things right, the big things will fall into place. Know your job, do your job. Have a leg.
My first guess (mostly joking... mostly) is they practiced nothing but the snap count. Happily, we pretty much eliminated the stupid pre-snap penalties that have plagued us this year. Unfortunately, everything post-snap tended to go downhill pretty quickly.
You're 100% right on the discipline thing. If we do nothing else right the rest of the way, I'd like us to at least show the toughness and discipline to at least eliminate the dumb penalties for good (lookin' at you, OLine, Dadi and Stanford)
Im over it now, but while watching the game, I haven't been that depressed watching the Hokies since the Matt Ryan meltdown.
I honestly feel way worse than i did that game. I was there soaking wet from standing in the pouring rain for hours to see him march down the field. It sucked but we were winning that game. This is way worse...we are playing like hot garbage.
hot garbage, it'll get afterya
I think I went through the five stages of grief during/after this game.
1. Denial - during the first quarter (is this really happening? no way...)
2. Anger - second quarter/halftime
3. Bargaining - third quarter (moving the ball a bit, so close...if only it weren't for injuries/execution/couple bad calls)
4. Depression - all of Friday
5. Acceptance - today, after this review and now I have closure. We got our butts kicked. Now I understand why.
French, the way you break down the O-line makes so much sense. Thank you. It's the unit on the field I have always had the hardest time understanding. My analysis for years has been: *rabblerabblerabble*OFFENSIVE LINE GET IT TOGETHER*rabblerabblerabble* but now I'm starting to see what's actually going on. Is there something different about what the team is trying to do this year over last? Was Grimes just a better coach than Searels, or is there some philosophical shift here that they're just not adjusting to? Is it just the fact that Searels wanted them to bulk up, and they're not physically capable of playing as fast as needed? It would seem like a philosophical rift between Loeffler and Searels that would explain some things, but it's a just speculation, since Loeffler+Grimes seemed more effective, perhaps based on familiarity. Just trying to wrap my head around all of this as I watch at least one of our guys (more often a couple) look utterly lost during each of the bad plays that you highlighted. Not to pick on Conte, but in a couple of the clips in this review, he was just sort of looking around as people were blowing by him, then he jumps in when the RB is down to sort of be near the play and halfway push the DT, LB, or whoever when the play is basically dead.
With all the discussion of Metallica lately, when reading through this review and seeing the broken plays, I kept hearing "Sad But True" in my head.
I'm sad.
Man this piece hits on so many good points that its really probably one of the best pieces put out there in recent memory.
First, the offensive line has taken a huge step backwards this year. That's very worrisome. Is this a product of Searles just not being a good coach, and is unable to bring the best out of players the way Grimes used to? Considering the personnel is the same, that looks to be the case. Sure, it doesn't help that the talent we have at OL is sub-par to put it mildly, but that doesn't excuse the complete blown assignments we're seeing almost on an every play basis right now. The OL has been our weakness for the past 10 years, it will continue to be our weakness going forward until these guys start actually doing what the coaches want them to do. My only hope is that Newsome ruined them early, to the point where there was no saving, and we will see a big improvement down the line with the guys we brought in last year and are continuing to bring in this year. Otherwise... yikes.
Our team is suffering as a whole because Brewer cannot pass deep. Teams have finally adjusted to completely take away everything underneath, allowing guys on the edge to get open 1 on 1 with a corner deep, knowing Brewer will not be able to make that pass. And now with the extra defenders closer to the LOS, and Brewer's internal clock at warp speed cause of the OL issues, he's forcing the ball out quicker than he would like, which is causing inaccuracies on even the simple throws. He has devolved into a bad QB, and its probably time for a switch, but in this dumpster fire of a season, is a QB change worth it if you have to burn a RS (assuming Motley is still hurt). My guess is no.
We are running the offense Beamer wants us to run. He has always wanted a power game that controls the clock, and we are calling plays as such. Loeffler's philosophy (up tempo, spread it out, and use misdirection to create mismatches) has been undermined and it would not be a surprise to see him walk away from the team in the near future. When the offense does run the scheme that Loeffler wants to run, and they go up tempo and no-huddle, the defense gets on its heels and we have success. When we don't, the defense pins its ears back, the OL has execution issues, and we sputter. I point to that WMU game to when this shift in philosophy from misdirection to power came from, because it really seems like it started when Shane inserted his will on the offensive playcalling. Just something about Beamer's son getting his way in that meeting, and then everything seemingly adjusting to that mindset going forward, which is an overall regression to the offense we ran under Stiney doesn't sit well with me. The overall coaching of this team right now is not putting us in the best positions to win. Period. If your OL is having execution issues and cannot hold a block to save their lives, at a certain point, you must scheme to get the ball away from that area of the field as quickly as possible. And no, screen passes thrown 3 yards behind the LOS creating the need for a WR to break one or two tackles before we are past the LOS is not the answer. The problem is, I don't think a change in OC will impact anything. Beamer has an offense he wants to run, and we are not going to stray from that course, even in the face of numerous execution errors completely undermining everything we're trying to do.
After years of great defensive play, the defense as a whole right now is just not good. They're getting mauled in the trenches and there is little they can do to stop the run. Yes, we have a few injuries, but its concerning to see them completely manhandled like they have been the last couple weeks. More than anything on defense, we need that DL solidified, and we need it done quickly. We desperately need Sweat, Settle, and Dalton to come in with the class we already have. If we don't, these past 2 games might be a sign of the future for us.
Good stuff and I mostly agree.
One thing i wanted to add regarding the defense is the success of the unit is predicated on cohesiveness and trust. even the smallest lapse in trust or execution ripples through the unit. think about last year when we lost fuller. it impacted the whole unit, even though the replacement was pretty decent. maddy is this year's kyle fuller. throw williams and facyson on top of that and it's no surprise that we are getting gashed all over the field. we have a fair amount of talent on defense but we don't have enough to overcome 3 significant injuries and the loss of cohesiveness and trust that it brings. it may be an excuse but from where i'm sitting, it's just reality.
you're absolutely right that we need those top end talents. talented depth cannot be understated.
When we started this season the starting eleven on defense could have held their own against any offense in the country. Unfortunately the defense was also as shallow as a puddle in a parking lot. Losing one lineman or one linebacker or one DB would have been challenging but not fatal. Losing all three has just made a mess that even Bud Foster is searching for a way to clean up.
One thing is painfully obvious., you cannot run the power running game with this o line & the running backs that are available. It is not working & is like continually running into a stone wall. Someone should explain this to Beamer. It looks like someone has said " we are going to run the power run come hell or high water" no matter the defensive scheme.
Thus the frustration of some members of the fanbase.
Yet when Lefty tries to adjust the scheme, everyone complains about the playcalling and the lack of a running game?
Talking to the fan base at large here, not you, tech46. Just something I find amusing.
I don't think that the people advocating to adjusting to a more tempo based offense are the same people who are bemoaning the lack of a running game. It feels like these are two very separate and distinct camps. I don't think your characterization of the "fan base at large" is accurate.
This truly is the tragedy of Scot Loeffler. Good play calls and open receivers, with nothing to show for it. Add three consecutive Sisyphean trips to the goal line, and I can hear the Greek chorus warming up for act 3
Scot Loeffler's career is full of tragedy. Everywhere he goes, there is failure and its not his fault.
We are not a good football team right now, so there's plenty of blame to go around.
I do wonder how much coaching vs coordinating he does. The play calls seem to be passable upon further review, and the route concepts seem to work well. Last year he ran an offense around one of the teams few playmakers. Yet we're constantly plagued by a lack of execution and playable depth, and have failed to win a number of winnable games.
Is that his coaching fault, or the positional coaches'? Or Frank Beamer's directives? Are the players not being given the best chance to succeed, or are they just not good enough, stemming from bad recruiting 3-4 years ago? Too many questions to be traced to one man, if you ask me. Unfortunately (for him), he is directly responsible for the offense of Virginia Tech, and Auburn before, and you are right that neither have succeeded.
Really, I just wanted to work in a Sisyphus reference and nothing I say after a loss should be taken seriously
With all the weapons, the offense should have been able to put more than 6 points on the score board. Miami was not all that dominant defensively. The players made plenty of mistakes but the play-calling has also been horrendous. After what happened at Heinz Field, Scot Loeffler should have made adjustments. He has to get the offense to play better for the team to have any chance of going to a bowl game.
If the HC wants what he wants, what exactly is the OC suppose to do? Especially with the RB Coach who is his son demanding the same thing?
I hate to say this, but the gameplan was 100% different against Miami in the 1st half than it was against Pitt in the 1st half. Almost zero similarity with the exception of using the two back outside zone.
What there seems to be is a serious lack of the coaching staff reading French's reviews.
I feel like I've seen this gif before....
Leg.
And screw the gif, I've seen the video!
The most worrisome aspect of this season to me is that I've never seen a Frank Beamer Hokie team regress this much during the course of season.
Even the bad 2012 and 2013 teams got a little better down the stretch. Are the injuries that much to blame, or is it something else?
Disagree... the 2003 season went into the gutter after a really good start. We opened the season with a 49-28 win over UCF, followed it up with a 43-0 pasting of JMU, handled Texas A&M with relative ease during Isabelle 35-19, smoked UConn 47-13, whipped Rutgers on the road 48-22, destroyed Syracuse 51-7, and peaked at #3 in the rankings before getting destroyed by WVU 28-7. We handled #2 Miami 31-7 (all on defense... our offense did next to nothing over the course of that game) and then the wheels fell off. We proceeded to lose to Pitt 28-31, squeaked out a win over Temple 24-23 in OT because of a missed XP, then lost out the season... 27-34 at home to BC, 35-21 at UVa, and then our defense couldn't stop a cold against Aaron Rodgers in a 52-49 loss to Cal in the Insight Bowl.
#5 to unranked in the span of 3 weeks to close out the year in a season in which we were #3 at the midway point. National title aspirations to an also-ran in the blink of an eye. Started the season 6-0... finished the season 2-5, with one of the wins in OT over really lowly Temple.
This game brought back the same feelings for me as the 2003 WVU loss, but that season was overall worst since it happened so recently after 1999 and we all still thought of ourselves as title contenders at the time. At least now our expectations as a fanbase have accepted rebuilding, at least to an extent.
Agree. "The Maroon Swoon" used to be one of our trademarks in the early part of the 2000s, IIRC.
O-line.
I missed the past two games due to work. Honestly, I'm a bit relieved I did. Go Work!
But French is describing what I think we've been seeing all year.
The O-line is a hot mess. Losing Grimes set us back another year. No two ways about it. I'm sure I'm not the only one who had significant doubts when Searels swapped our tackle positions. McLaughlin was a hoss on the left side last year. Don't know what Searels saw differently, but it has obviously backfired.
Unlike many others posting here and elsewhere, I'm a bit more patient though.
I love what Loeffler brings to the team. Yes, there are some play calls that leave you scratching your head, but we have a QB with no confidence right now, in either himself or his O-line, and both for good reasons. We have a decimated RB corps.
That's going to put a huge crimp in the play calling when you can't depend on getting a yard even with the perfect play called against what the D is doing, or you can't depend on the QB getting the ball to a wide-open receiver.
I don't see a conflict between Loeffler & Beamer. I don't see Shane imposing his will on the play selection. I see a simple conflict between Loeffler's system, and the tools on the field to implement it.
So we are at a bit of a crossroads for this season. Do we play for more wins this season, or do we play for the future?
If you strictly want more wins this season, I think the best thing to do at this point is get Motley in the game. He gives you a legitimate option to run the ball from the QB position.
If you want to play for the future, I'm still not sure that Motley or Leal isn't the answer. Yes, we don't see practice -- but I'm having a really hard time understanding how Brewer is a better option under center right now. I suspect there is a combination of playing with a bad back, and with a rattled confidence, but he is missing some pretty basic passes at this point, and I'm not sure how keeping him in there is helping him in any way. Get him healthy, and get his mind right, and let him come back and compete in the spring.
I think Frank's comment that "we'd be better next year" gives away the game on what I've suspected all year: That this year was pretty well written off by the coaches from the get-go, even if they wouldn't consciously admit it. And I'm ok with that. Really. Do your damnedest to beat UVA and WF, and make another bowl, but play the personnel that give us the brightest future.
And find some way to get the O-line squared away. I have no idea what that would take. I think that, as a unit, they are just completely without confidence in their assignments or their execution, and I have no idea how that can be improved mid-season.
I think they tried to improve by starting Teller, and it just didn't work well enough. Hopefully next season we have a few more cards in the o-line deck, for whoever the coach is
I can immediately and confidently say we play for the future. The time has come to look around and ask of each player, "Is this guy going to be part of the next great Hokies team?" If the answer is yes you try to play him. If the answer is no, you don't.
I can look at Michael Brewer and say with confidence that he is not going to be part of the next great Hokies team. He's a placeholder until someone better is ready. But who is that "someone better"? Mark Leal isn't going to be part of the next great Hokies team. Is it Motley? Or is he just going to be a backup for either Ford or Durkin?
If Motley is likely to be the starter next year, then he should start the remaining games.
If Durkin is the starter next year, I think you start Motley for the rest of this year. At least the offense can begin to get accustomed to a dual-threat QB, and more importantly, it gives everyone a "start over" moment.
If Ford is the QB of the future, and you don't want to burn his red shirt, I think you give Leal the starting job, and install next year's offense. They may not be able to run it worth crap, but they're not running this year's offense worth crap, and at least it will give them a head start on next year.
I think one way or another we need to start planning for next year, as you said. We are obviously not at practice or in team meetings but I want to see what Motley is about. I don't want to burn either Ford or Durkin's redshirts, so my preference is Motley or Leal.
While Leal looked ok last week, it was against a prevent second string defense. But he has zip on the ball and to me he seemed confident. Those are two things Brewer is completely without right now.
I agree 100%. Time to get guys game time and practice for next year.
Seems to be a recurring theme of bad weight gains for minimal or negative strength gains.
Haven't been impressed with the weight program's impact on our DEs ... mentioning Searles putting on bad weight. I get that he may have said 20 lbs no matter what....
These kids need to be enrolled in nutrition and biology for performance athletes, they should be controlling the timing and nutrient intakes... ketogenic carb cycling is my preference for off season, but you don't need the ketogenic part... but you have to put nutrition, supplements, and lifting in a carefully orchestrated plan to maximize your results.
Some of our DEs should have gone higher in the draft but gained bad weight then lost bad weight for the last two years. Now we have a guy whose only hope is to play LB, if he can hit that weight.
I have no knowledge of whether it is an old fashioned strength and conditioning approach or if it is players who are undisciplined and not hard working enough. But this stuff is not rocket science. Its basic block and tackling known by lots of folks out there. If you're a D-1 athlete aspiring to NFL, you should be able to stay with one of these plans... takes a little discipline, but you can still eat stuff you want to eat... getting too much partying in might be hard but you can certainly get it done in moderation.
Awesome write up. Way to deliver that hard message. I can't even watch slomo replays of this team it is too painful. I just wanted to blame someone. The wrong someones it turns out. Makes me feel better about the game... its one thing to get beat cuz you got outcoached... another to get out executed... another to get just flat out beat.
I really feel like alot of our kids lost faith in getting to the league and haven't been committed. Almost feel like we need to find some swagger that we used to have when we beat Miami in the trenches. Seems kids these days its less about beating a certain opponent than it is about getting paid. But having a decent Miami team dominate us in Blacksburg should do nothing but make us better. It seems Miami might actually be back... and thats a good thing for us (long term).
That is a good point about Miami. They seem to be improving each game and have all kinds of weapons. Their game plan against us was executed perfectly and the score could have been worse if Dorsett turns his head on that fly route when they were pinned deep. We were simply outcoached on both sides of the ball. I'm curious to see how Miami plays down the stretch, especially against FSU.
More out-athleted. Miami was bigger, stronger, and faster. Coaching didn't make up the difference.
Great write up as always. I would only disagree on one thing:
Has he been good since the GT game (minus the 3 picks the offense was watchable)? Sadly though, that last drive only reaffirmed that Leal is not as talented as Brewer, but he did get the ball out of his hand which Brewer is doing less and less. And how slow did Leal look on that scramble up the middle?
Its really disappointing to see a quarterback regress like Brewer has. I'm used to seeing our QBs not improve, but they don't usually get worse. I'm hoping to see Motley this week. At least maybe he could run around some behind our porous O-line.
I just want the team to be watchable again. Ever since 2011 it has become harder and harder (and less fun) to watch us play. I'll never forget being in the Horseshoe this year, but I hope we can return to being that team that looked better than OSU I can forget this season.
It appears to me that either Brewer is thinking too much in the pocket, worried about the rush (rightfully so) and worried about throwing INTs. Whether this is from the coaches getting on him about throwing INTs or self inflicted, it seems like it's caused Brewer to lose his edge, and the result is 2 no INT games, but also 2 horrible offensive performances
So what would you do now vs. BC? Kinda echoes what I saw on film. I turned it off disgusted after the first half. Brewer making bad reads, lacking confidence, and missing wide open receivers (particularly the post to Ford from the end zone). The OL just getting pushed around. The D-line getting manhandled. We have great talent at TE, good young receivers, and a talent at RB in Marshawn--but how do we get them the ball? Frank wants to pound it with no OL and banged up backs. Scot has a gunslinger lacking confidence with bad protection. I was giddy at the possibilituies in 2015, but without major OL improvement and a return of Brewer from tOSU, we wont even get to Charlotte next year. I'm sad. I don't know what I would do this week to fix it. I fear Tyler Murphy will run wild on Saturday.
Well, just to put things into perspective, I compiled this list from hokiesports.com:
Season (Overall record) QB
1999-2000 (11-1) Vick, Michael
2000-2001 (11-1) Vick, Michael
2001-2002 (8-4) Noel
2002-2003 (10-4) Randall
2003-2004 (8-5) Randall *Lost Commonwealth Cup
2004-2005 (10-3) Randall
2005-2006 (11-2) Vick, Marcus
2006-2007 (10-3) Glennon
2007-2008 (11-3) Glennon/Taylor
2008-2009 (10-4) Glennon/Taylor
2009-2010 (10-3) Taylor
2010-2011 (11-3) Taylor
2011-2012 (11-3) Thomas
2012-2013 (7-6) Thomas
2013-2014 (8-5) Thomas
I'd say The Regression started in 2012. Is this when coaching staff changed?
We had more Wins when we had a very mobile QB emphasizing the importance of running the ball with a dual-threat QB.
Our best records and closest we came to winning National Championships was when we had controversial QB's at the helm since the 1999 season.
The change happened after the 2012 season, when Stinespring made his way back into the booth with O'cain. 2011 was the only season O'cain was allowed to call the plays sans Bryan Stinespring. Stinespring was on the sidelines in 2011. Go figure, but as someone pointed out this past weekend, correlation is not causation.... 2013 was the first season with the new OC staff.
The regression actually started in the 2011 season. Yes, we won a lot of games, and we got an at-large bid to the Sugar Bowl, but there were a lot of warning flags that year. Namely, the only real quality team we played that entire season humiliated us twice. Once at home in a national showcase game, and the other in the ACC Championship Game. And then we completely threw the game away in the Sugar Bowl with the same kind of WTFedness we are seeing out of the offense now. Yes, we had better skilled players starting, but we had zero depth behind them, and it showed from the second the 2012 season kicked off. (and really, if you want to play it that way, you can really point back to inferior overall recruiting classes from 2009 onwards as the real impetus to our struggles now).
I disagree about the Sugar Bowl loss. Please keep in mind the following context:
1) David Wilson had an ego when it came to his running abilities and on at least two occasions that I can remember he pulled a WTF moment during his career at VT. The relevant moment for this game occurred during our first or second drive. We were at the 5 yard line, LT hands off to Wilson and he decides to run backward 15 - 20 yards and takes a sack instead of taking a sack with a loss of 3 -5 yards. Good or bad, David Wilson always believed he could out run or out-juke his pursuit.
2) Cody Journell. I never heard of a thug kicker before in football, but thanks to Journell, that term now applies. This kid decides to commit a crime before the Sugar Bowl and it thus left in Blacksburg. Our new kicker, who never kicked in a game before missed a field goal and we lose.
I do not have any complaints about the play calling except for that fake punt stunt by Beamer, but that is on Beamer, not on the OC.
Justin Meyer had been handling kickoffs since the second game of his freshman season. He had also attempted at least two long field goals earlier in the season, missing from 57 at the end of the first half against UNC and from 53 against UVA. He also did pretty well on field goals in the sugar bowl, hitting 4 out of 5,
Source: http://www.hokiesports.com/football/players/myer_justin.html
If I'm remembering correctly we had another kicker who was supposed handle the field goals in the sugar bowl who ended up getting in trouble on the trip and ended up taking the bus ride from hell back to Blacksburg.
That was when we lost three of the best skill players we ever had.
Listen fellow Hokies, we are going to be okay. You know why? Because Whit Babcock is a Virginia Native and he know what this program mean to Virginia. Also, I want to leave you all here with some names:
Mark Dantino (MSU HC)
Brian Kelly (ND HC)
Butch Jones (Tenn HC)
Tommy Tuberville (Cincinnati HC)
What do all these excellent football coaches have in common? Whit Babcock hired them when he was the AD at Cincinnati. I'm betting the dude has a plan in his back pocket because when he lost a great football coach, he replaced that coach with another great football coach. So I say we allow this little drama that is currently VT Football to play itself out. We don't have enough information to make reasoned arguments one way or another and honestly, I'm literally getting a migraine just trying to keep track of what all the theories are for our offensive woes. Things will work out as they are suppose to work out. I know I can't effect the process or the outcome.
Whit, who was only at Cincinnati for a year and a half, hired only one of those guys: Tuberville, who is 13-7 in two years. So maybe pump the brakes on declaring him a head coach whisperer.
I stand corrected, but I still think that Whit has a plan:
1) Tommy Tuberville still a good coach.
2) Buzz Williams.
Even if we consider just these two hires, I still think it shows that Whit Babcock has a contingency plan in place. As for how good or bad Tommy Tuberville is as a football coach, I believe his record is 142-84. Hardly a failure as a coach.
HIs record in the last 5 seasons (so far) is 33-24.
I see on your profile that you are Andy Bitter, the sports writer. I presume, the same Andy Bitter that writes the articles I read on-line. If so, then I hope I am not out-of-line in asking you a question. You probably interact with the coaching staff on a more regular basis than any of us ever will. There have been theories on this blog site and other sites concerning the offensive philosophy of Frank Beamer. The concern, at least for me, is centered around the perception that Frank Beamer will run his offense no matter what, even if conditions would warrant an adjustment.
My question to you sir is this, "Is that an accurate perception of Frank Beamer?"
Now I am not trying to put you on the spot and if this is an inappropriate question to ask you, then I apologize. Concerns about the offense is something that has been discussed among the fans for a while now. Thanks for any insights that can shed light in this area.
Frank Beamer, with all his experience, is 12-9 in the same time frame mentioned for Tuberville. Every objective national analyst confirmed that Tuberville was a surprisingly good hire for Cincinnati. Just as every national media analyst understood what a HUGE home run Buzz Williams is in replacing the overwhelmed James Johnson at VT.
I'll gladly stick with Whit being a 'head coach whisperer' far more easily than fearing whatever decisions he makes in the future about Frank. We can shuffle the deck & find some other OC that is willing to parrot Frank's antiquated offensive philosophy, while we continue to remain mired mid-pack in the ACC. It won't change what we all should objectively realize - the countdown clock has begun for Frank Beamer. He's not leaving after this season, or next season. But he's not coaching to the end of his current contract, that's a certainty.
We're going to go through an ugly period of mediocrity until then, but the reluctance to evolve in the past few years has pretty well cemented this happening.
I was there for the Tuberville death rattle at Auburn and I saw how he did at Texas Tech, which was bad. He was not a good hire for Cincinnati, which has groomed up-and-coming coaches very well over the last decade. I think that'll show over the next couple years.
Interesting angle. I too have always felt that Tuberville was a better hire than Cincy deserved but you are right, they had a tradition of identifying the right up and comer and Tuberville was counter to that culture. I agree that we are going to see that he was the wrong choice.
I wonder how much Whit will consider Bud. If Frank was willing to walk away this offseason, I'm not against just moving Bud up and letting him pick out his own offense. That way we at least keep our defense and our offense can't be any worse. If we hire from outside, we very well may lose our defense.
@ Bitter:
Care to elaborate?
Tuberville's end at Auburn and Texas Tech were not pretty (neither fan base cried when he left) and he's only 47-35 in the past 6.5 years. He had three great years and was mediocre at best most of the rest of his time as a head coach- only one conference title, only a couple of 10-win seasons.
Not saying that Whit doesn't make good hires, but Tuberville is not a great example...
aaaand that is pretty much the only reason i have hope for the future.
whit has shown he's willing to make a big time hire in buzz williams.
under weaver's leadership and up until whit made the buzz hire, and the way our football team had/has been trending, i had serious doubts about virginia tech football being able to return to dominance.
i'm certainly not on the #firebeamer hype train, but the way things are going right now, i'm just not sure he can right the ship before his career comes to a close.
i would love nothing more than for beamer to get this program back on track before calling it quits. whether or not he can, i trust that whit will bring in a great coach to replace him.
Edit: Bitter beat me to it!
Wasn't Whit only at Cincinnati for two years?
As I mentioned to Bitter, I stand corrected. Although I still believe AD Babcock has a contingency plan in place. But the evidence to back-up that assumption is thinner than I originally thought.
The three people I do not want to coach my team under ANY circumstances are Lane Kiffin, Bobby Petrino, and Brian Kelly. Woof.
This is a question I've asked multiple times this year, and it sounds like we're seeing some answers. I remember French having positive things to say about the offensive line after only a few games under Grimes last year. The question hanging over my head was whether we were seeing similar progress this year, and it sounds like the answer is no.
I'm still hesitant to haul all of the blame to Loeffler. He's instituting a brand new scheme that he isn't adapting much to his current personnel, most of which is young. Growing pains are to be expected, although I didn't realize they'd be this painful. I also didn't expect to be rendered almost noncompetitive in the process.
I'm still content to give Loeffler until the end of next season to demonstrate that he's the right guy for this job. He's got almost half a roster of his own guys on offense, a proportion that is going in increase next year. With time and experience under their belts, I expect we'll see improvement.
But if we don't start seeing some level of improvement before the end of the year, I'll be real skeptical that he'll be able to pull it together next year. And if we continue to perform poorly and don't make an on-the-field change if it becomes necessary, then I'll think we're heading in the wrong direction.
"Growing pains are to be expected"
Yes they are. Just need to see growth go along with them.
This this team isn't going to get any better in any foreseeable future until the o-line play improves.
We had 4 returning starters on the OL, only had to replace the right guard but Searels came in & switched evrybody to new positions, still can't figure that out.
I agree. I would have liked to have seen everyone remain in the same place, with Teller and Conte battling for the right guard spot. Perhaps Teller being at left guard is a precursor to a move out to tackle in the future, but it took any continuity that had been established the previous year and threw it right out the window. I will contend until I am blue in the face that the OL in 2013 performed far better than it has so far this year (and was much better than the OL during David Wilson's record-breaking 2011 campaign.) The added weight, reduction in splits, and tweaks in scheme (nothing major, but there has definitely been an impact as demonstrated by all the pre-snap penalties and hesitant "too much thinking" blocking stuff we have seen) have all resulted in a net-negative for the group.
Have not seen anything but his HS tape, but have to think Durk is the answer.
http://www.hudl.com/athlete/843678/highlights/98394387
At 6-4 240 with a smashmouth attitude to go with quickness and speed on the read option, I think he changes the whole attitude of the offense. Not to mention he'd have plenty of skill talent to rely on, unlike Logan. Just can't underestimate the impact of a QB that brings toughness to a team.
Hopefully its next year. It just seems we give up too much without a credible running threat at QB.
It'll be a change, but if Loeffler stays I doubt we'll have a "running quarterback" a la tyrod. Previously we had such a disjointed offensive scheme, the only success was found under a qb who could make something out of nothing combined with great atheletes scattered on offense. Without those game breakers, we had 2012. Under Loeffler we still don't have the game changing players back, but the system should allow for more consistent success. It hasn't yet, but I don't think a running quarterback solves the problem by virtue of his legs
Traditionally at VT, a mobile QB is a crutch for poor play calling and poor execution.
Agreed. I kinda butchered my point above, but I wanted to say that Loeffler wanted to remove the crutch by installing a system and using a (preferably mobile, perhaps) pocket passer like Andrew Ford or Brewer to exploit matchups. A running quarterback might cover up some problems, but unless he can make the reads and throws he wouldn't really further Loeffler's goal.
I agree with your point but Loeffler wouldn't turn down interest from another Tyrod Taylor for one second. Also, regardless of the system, Tyrod would use his wheels. As good as he was, he could have been better with a decent offensive coach.
If I could give this 1,000 turkey legs, I would. But I can't. I couldn't agree more and I've been saying the same for years.
I don't know about "crutch" considering our record with mobile QB's is pretty good.
The crutch is when the qb bails out the play by scrambling to run or buy time to let a receiver get open.
There havent been a whole lot of planned qb runs since MV1. Most of TT's rushing was from saving busted plays.
I don't understand how a running qb is a crutch or 'running' qb means 'can't pass'. I see it as a serious stress to the D that opens up all sorts of options in the run and pass game. Jamieos Winston, Mariota, Dak Prescott, Nick Marshall, Blake Sims, Everet Golson, ... the top 10 is riddled with running qb's.
I think the reason for a lot of this school of thought is the terrible experience with O'Canspring.
The idea of a "crutch" basically comes back to the fact that if everything in the play goes to hell, the superior athletic ability of the QB makes up for it. How many broken plays did Tyrod keep alive to keep a drive going, or even score? So many of our past QBs could do that. It further became a hindrance to our development because excellent athletes at the skill positions (especially QB) masked the inadequacies elsewhere so we could say things like "10 win season," "ACC Championship," and "BCS Bowls." No doubt we had some good teams in recent years, but even years where things were close to going down the tubes, we had someone, usually a mobile QB, that could make up for it.
I always think of this when people bring this discussion up:
Mobile qb's are fine. But we don't use a system that exploits their skills.
Seems like a lot of the issues with the OL are communication or flat out blown assignments. Is this what it is for the rest of the season, is it simplifying something with the calls in the huddle or on the LOS or is it personnel changes that need to be made?
It sure seems like VT just can't get out of its own way right now. I'm sure the players are doubting themselves which can't make it any easier to go out and perform at a high level. You keep expecting the erratic play to skew in the other direction and give us some of the bright spots we saw earlier in the season. Instead it has become just flat out bad football.
At this point, all we are asking for is some hope that things will get turned around.
That is some of it. But against Pitt and Miami, fact is the DL's of those teams far too easily neutralized the OL at the point of attack. This prevented the OL to slide off and get linebackers, and those linebackers are the guys making a play.
Based on what I have seen, Teller stays in the lineup. Farris is your RG, and McLaughlin and Gibson flips. The tackle flip is more looking long term, because the Hokies don't have a legitimate LT prospect in the system if Teller is locked in to guard. Mitchell and Pettit both have the reach and feet of guards. Smith was the guy I was hoping could project to left tackle because of his reach, but Osterloh at that spot scares the bejesus out of me and likely whoever next year's QB is. I expect McLaughlin to flip, and Hansen or someone else to play the right side next year, may as well move McLuaghlin there now.
Great write up/analysis, albeit super depressing.... It's depressing, because the cast of characters will be almost exactly the same next year. How will the OL improve if we have the same OL coach and a bunch of the same OL returning. I guess our hope is that Conte and Teller really improve in their second year starting, and we move JMac back to LT. You noted that the OL played better last year. Is this an indictment of Searels? Is Grimes a better OL coach than Searels, iyo?
Yes, this is an indictment of Searels. I didn't like the position switches. I didn't like the weight gain. I didn't like the seeming lack of attention to detail on aiming points and first step/quick feet. I don't like the use of tight splits with a zone blocking scheme.
Then the question that begs answering French is the obvious one, "Was Searels a bad hire for the O-line?"
I don't think he is as good a line coach as Grimes based on the film of this years team and Texas film from last year
Why do we hire scrubs from bad teams instead of looking for good new talent?
Need to put a help wanted sign in front of Lane. Accepting all applications.
Let me tell you about my credentials as a lineman coach. I read most of French's reviews most of the way through until I start getting confused about stuff (usually when he starts talking about linebackers). My recruiting strategy is to go to a highschool that wins lots of football games and offer the biggest kid there, regardless of whether or not they're on the football team. Blocking sleds will be replaced in favor of bulldozers. My stated goal will be to have the biggest, ugliest, big uglies the world has ever seen.
After Newsome was sent packing, it felt like a lot of time and effort went into finding Grimes (along with Loeffler and Moorehead). We had the luxury of being careful and deliberate in our search. At the time, Grimes was on the upswing of his career. He uses a zone-blocking scheme which is easier to learn and implement with college limits on practice time, yet the scheme is highly effective. Grimes is modern, new-school OL coach, perfect for today's college football landscape.
Contrast that to when Grimes left. It felt like we were desperate so we threw up our hands and said "Who's left?" In his desperation, Beamer trusted Mack Brown's opinion of Searles, instead of the body of Searles' work. Unfortunately, Mack Brown trusted Searles and the resulting poor OL play was a contributing factor to Brown losing his job. He uses a more complicated blocking scheme. Less time is spent mastering basic fundamentals, and more time is spent working out nuances. Let's face it, Searles is a re-tread on the down-swing of his career. He is old-school, so of course we hear things like him being a better fit in Blacksburg. I have to feel like there was some emotion involved in his hiring (the new school guy burned us, so let's get an old school guy). Unfortunately, to compete in today's college football, we need a modern OL coach, not a dinosaur with one foot in the tar-pit.
As Searels isn't an old man by a far stretch, I hope he isn't a dinosaur. That being said, I want to see a lot of improvement over the rest of the season. Being a great guy doesn't save you in today's coaching environment.
Sorry about the ambiguity. I meant more of a dinosaur in terms of philosophy/mindset in an evolving landscape, not age. A lot of dinosaurs died young.
Apparently we need someone who emphasizes the fundamentals.
Wow. That's a whole lot of blanks you're filling in there based on assumptions and conjecture.
And created a few blanks so he could fill them in with stuff too.
Then say, I declare this, this and infer this other is declared old school and we all know old is bad.
Where did I say old is bad? With age comes experience and wisdom. Would it have been better if I said modern vs. out-dated? I just feel like Grimes' system is a more appropriate approach to today's college football landscape, while Searles' system seems to be stuck in a by-gone era where you just fattened up the lineman as much as you could without regard for how that affected there athleticism. That is just my impression.
But, but, but... Searels throws his hat and yells a lot! AND he coached at UT, UGA, and LSU... AND was recommended by Mac Brownwhenhewasfired... that means he's a good o-line coach. Right?
After seeing Grimes at VT and now LSU, the answer is definitely yes.
Salt in the wound: http://theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/10011133-123/lsu-offensive-linemen-are...
Great article, especially with the reporter moving beyond the cliched Q&A, and displaying some of the detail that Grimes puts into his work. Grimes is a good person, it's nice to see him succeeding, even if it is not with us. It's a shame we couldn't provide him enough reason to stay here.
I'm convinced that we hired Loeffler to get Grimes.
At the time of the hires, I posted - a lot - that 'Loeffler might be a good hire, but Grimes is GREAT!' I was thrilled we got Grimes, and willing to give Loeffler a chance, although I thought all the media promotion of him as being a QB whisperer was vastly inflated by talking points coming out of Merryman.
I'm not going to diss Searels. Grimes is a great coach.
Thanks for a great write-up, French. I am more sympathetic to Loeffer after reading your post. I remember reading somewhere on TKP, that Loeffer faced a dilemma in his first two seasons. Does he try to install his offense knowing that he does not have the right players; or does he try to run the best offense he can with the players he has now?
I think last year he chose the second option. I am not expert enough to know whether the reason the offense has changed this year is that he has started the transition to "his" offense; but it seems like a possibility. Hopefully, the long term gain will be that the younger players are ready to run the offense he wants to run next year when he has the quarterback he has chosen.
Of course, no offense is going to work if we can't teach the offensive line to execute.
Good analysis. There is such bad play at so many positions. When one position executes, the other messes up. The team seemingly cannot take their assignment and execute as a team. On the vast majority of plays, someone is botching their assignment or botching their execution. And there is a lack of desire, a laziness mindset as well. My conclusion is there is something going on between coaches and players that is affecting attitude. Not sure what it is, but the team clearly has an attitude problem that is manifesting itself in poor execution and botched assignments, play after play.
I agree there is an attitude problem. I'm disappointed by the (seeming) lack of leadership on the field and the overall effort at times. I also agree that there is a lack of execution and missed assignments. I just don't know that the attitude problem is completely to blame. It's almost certainly a factor, especially if they practice like they play, but I would hesitate to draw such definitive conclusions without more facts. The dynamics that go on within a team are insanely complex and as fans we only see a small portion of what goes on.
All I know is that Beamer is nearing the end of his time at VT.
It would be great for him to exit with a great season at the least. Better yet with a National Championship trophy to his name.
But, as things are now, we are on track for having the worst record in over 15 years.
Great analysis as always, French. And now, here's Ari Gold acting out exactly what I did to my remote when UM scored that bullshit TD just before halftime.
Luckily the wife was out of town and I had an extra remote to replace the one that realized the extent of my rage.
Remote Rage..... It'll get after ya..
I bet that was gratifying for a couple seconds.
Oh it was amazing! I threw it at our brick fireplace and it blew up like that poor bird that decided to take in a Randy Johnson-pitched game some years ago.
I recommend everyone do this at least once before the season's over.
Throw a baseball at a pigeon?
We will get 6 wins and make a bowl. I wouldn't count on a win coming from BC ( we don't match up well to them). However, we do match up well to UVA even though they are playing better than us right now. They have an inconsistent, young, and slow QB with a predictable offensive game plan. Bud's defense has proven to be very effective against offense's similar to UVA.
Soo you're saying Searel is doing a worse job than Grimes.
#FrenchForOLcoach
Just OL? I hear there's an opening at OC.
Hell, #frenchforpresident
Personally, I welcome our French overlord.
French, did you eat a corndog for this game? If not, there's your answer.
Yep, two in fact from Captain Franks in Kitty Hawk.
French,
which grin was bigger? When you caught dis fish:
Or when you typed the words "Non-be-Leal-ber"?
One thing worth noting is regarding the offensive line rotation. The best personnel grouping featured Teller-Wang-Farris inside. I hope to continue to see that grouping.
Put the tackles back where they belong and you have something.
Disappointed in Conte's performance. I thought he was going to perform well this year. Do you see an eventual Conte to OT move for next season?
He looked even worse in space against Gayle in the spring of 2013. He is staying at guard. Hopefully that means he will improve.
Unfortunately strong doesn't always translate to athletic.
I think this says it all ^^^
The one play that bothered me the most was the 3rd down sack on the second offensive drive of the game, which you broke down nicely. I don't have the benefit of film review, or knowledge of the X's and O's that comes from any experience playing organized football, but even from my seat at the top of the stadium, I could see before the snap that Miami's D was overloading the offense's right side and was going to bring pressure there. How does Brewer not recognize this and either change the protection, or simply roll to his left to avoid the pressure? How do the coaches not see this and call a time out to get a more suitable play lined up? What the heck happened there? I think that singular play sums up my frustrations with this offense more than anything else.
I understand that it is the nature of college football fan bases to melt down when things go bad, call for all the coaches to be fired, and say that the VT players are soft, no talent hacks. I maintain it is far too early to give up on this team. Yes, we have played like crap the last two games but let's focus on a few positives...
1. We have the same team and coaching staff that gave OSU a beatdown at the Shoe. Remember how pumped and optimistic the fans were after week two?
2. We beat a team by 17 who beat the Hoos last week and could have beaten Notre Dame.
3. We lost two games in the last seconds and as bad as we played against Pitt, we were in position to win at the end.
Some are predicting the end of Virginia Tech football; that the program is in a downward death spiral; that we will lose to the Hoos and the bowl streak will come to an end. But it is far too early the bury the Hokies
Lets support the team and stop being fair weather fans.