Since there's no game from last week to lament, we decided to take some time and just talk about our feelings. In a season that has vacillated between horrifying and stroke-inducing, it's time to just air everything out. Got something that hits you in the feels? Share it with the group. Just remember something that you've repressed for weeks, like losing by a million to Al Golden? Share it. This is group therapy for all of us.
Jeff Beyer
Was Mark Leal's announcement to leave the program a bit surprising? Sure. But can we fault him for it? Certainly not. From what I've read, Mark had already graduated and had a great career opportunity to pursue, so he went after it. I'm sure Coach Beamer, after recovering from the initial shock, was proud. Especially after how much focus he puts on the players getting their degrees and having them for life after football. He always said things happen that can keep you from playing football, but once you get your degree that can never be taken away from you. I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision for Mark to make, to consciously leave something that he's devoted his five years of college towards just a few weeks from the end. Sure he'll miss his senior night ceremony and the chance to play in front of the home crowd one more time. But he was able to weigh that against the future ahead of him with this career opportunity, and I think he made the right decision. Sometimes the timing of things doesn't always work out perfectly, and this is a good example of that.
Regardless of what the TV show Blue Mountain State wants you to believe, being a backup quarterback is tough. I'm not talking third or fourth string back-up, those roles are easy. I'm talking second string, true backup QB. It's one thing to be able to come to practice, watch the other QBs on film, execute a few plays drawn up on cards for the scout team, then signal in the plays from the sideline for the first team. All that is done in the 3 hours of practice per day. I was able to come to practice, do my stuff, then leave and not really have to think about football outside of the time on the field. I was okay with that. But it's another thing to be always be wondering what you need to do to be better, to see the field, to prove yourself to the coaches. That can be mentally draining.
I thought about quitting almost every time spring practice came around. Getting away from the games, the hype, the excitement of football season always made me question whether I should continue or not. But I never had a good reason to leave the program. I loved what I did for the team, and it gave me a hell of an experience. In Mark's case, he's got that strong reason to leave. He has chosen to put his life after football in front of what he has left to gain as the No. 2 QB, and had the resolve to take that big step. I really hope that step is the right direction for him, and that it leads to greater success later on in post-football life. From one backup to another, I wish you the best of luck Mark.
TheFifthFuller
If any season was going to put me in therapy, it's this one. At least in past years, we've just been all around mediocre; offense not quite reaching the giddy heights of below average, defense not quite able to hold the opponents to negative points to make up for the offense. This year, it seems like we've just gone completely mental. Good things happen, but then worse things happen as some kind of evil karmic balance, like:
- Beat the serious non-conference team on our schedule (at night in THEIR house), lose to East Carolina and BC at home.
- Defense makes tons of huge plays in the backfield, then gives up huge plays in recompense to the other team.
- Bring in a veteran QB transfer to steady the ship? Loves throwing interceptions.
- Speaking of which, said quarterback throws zero interceptions? We're 0-3. Throws 1 or more? 4-2.
- Shane Beamer actually tries to pare down his running back rotation, they proceed to drop like flies and he has to go seven deep into his depth chart.
- Get our home Thursday night game AND #ALLMAROONEVERYTHING back, lose 6-30.
- Possibly the worst Coastal Division ever (which is really saying something), Hokies are 1-4 in conference.
But it's not only that. Even with our readjusted expectations from the last few years, we've still be able to count on some things which we don't seem to be able to count on anymore, like:
- Play tons of young guys the last few years to build for the future? THIS year, play the YOUNGER guys because the older guys haven't developed or don't bring as much talent to the table. Seriously, I've heard the joke "they don't rebuild, they reload", we're like the opposite; the only analogy to the current state of our program's "rebuilding" is the house from the Money Pit.
- Preseason articles about possible best #DBU secondary ever? 6 interceptions through 9 games, Brandon Facyson headed for a medical redshirt, Corey Marshall tied for second most picks on team.
- Hokies engineer several fourth quarter comebacks, manage to lose all of them anyway.
- New offensive coordinator has "fresh" game plan; screens.
- "Commit" to running the ball; pass.
Okay, so the last two aren't actually new to this year. But it still feels like this entire season is being played through some weird cocktail of prescription drugs that manage to cause ALL OF THE SIDE EFFECTS. The only thing I can give them credit for is finding new and creative ways to lose, which is at least keeping the pain fresh and interesting.
My only hope is that something knocks the hangover out of this team by Nov. 27, because no matter how weird things haven't gotten, I can't imagine what it would be like for all those fourth graders out there who have yet to witness LOLUVA hoist the Commonwealth Cup in their lives.
Pierson Booher (PhillyHokie007)
Let's put this topic to bed right now: Regardless of how this season shakes out, expect to see an open competition at quarterback come spring.
The enigmatic play of current starter Michael Brewer has hardly put a choke hold on the position. With talented unknowns in Andrew Ford and Chris Durkin waiting in the wings, and Preseason ACC Player of the Year vote-getter Brenden Motley (I half kid) finally healthy, it would stand to reason that each would get a legitimate shot at earning the starting gig. And they should.
Brewer did not turnover the football against Boston College for the first time this season. He once again exhibited a knack for slipping out of would-be sacks and extended plays by rolling out and finding receivers downfield. He led the Hokies on three second half touchdown drives that illustrated what this Hokie offensive could, or maybe should, be. He finished with 345 yards passing and a 64% completion percentage, which — after the last two-and-a-half seasons — would make most Hokie fans jump for joy.
Nine games into his starting career and we're seeing some progress, right? Sure. Maybe. I don't know. His freewheeling attitude has been reeled in to the point where we are seeing less turnovers but less big plays. The dynamic offense we have caught glimpses of has been reduced to an inconsistent unit that has struggled to put everything together since September 6th.
This program has steadily amassed an exciting group of playmakers on the offensive side of the football — and continues to do so — but has failed to properly utilize those attributes and put defenses on their heels. Is this a product of inconsistent quarterback play, or is it a sign of some degree of dysfunction amongst the coaching staff? Who knows. What we do know is that something is missing.
There have been rumblings from fans indicating a need for a return to a "prototypical Virginia Tech quarterback," which apparently is a dual-threat type of field general. Honestly, I could care less whether they run a 4.4 or a 4.9 40-yard dash so long as they make good reads, reliably accurate throws and execute Loeffler's system.
Maybe that person is Michael Brewer. Maybe it's not. What's important is that the coaching staff takes advantage of the spring to see what they've got at the quarterback position — both for the 2015 season and beyond — and give those players meaningful reps throughout the offseason to best prepare them for the 2015 campaign.
Alex Koma
Looking back on all the wacky, bizarre things that had to happen to get us to a world where the Hokies sit in the Coastal division's basement in November, I keep coming up with the same thought over and over: the Ohio State win might've been wonderful, but Lord knows it's had plenty of negative effects on this program as well.
Sure, the OSU win felt glorious. The streets of Blacksburg were truly a magnificent place to be that night. I won't soon forget it.
And sure, that win was ginormous for recruiting. Recruits, especially the ones in Columbus that night, are going to remember the Hokies going into the 'Shoe on primetime TV and embarrassing what's turned out to be a very good Buckeyes team.
Yet it also ratcheted up expectations for this team in a HUGE way that's probably been detrimental to the players and fans. I know my first thought after the win was "with our cushy schedule, and this win under our belts, this could be something." I suspect many of you felt the same.
But all along, coming into this season I had no expectations that this would be the team to get to the Promised Land. Did I think a throwback 10-win season was possible if all the chips fell right? Absolutely. Yet losing to FSU in the ACCCG is the ceiling I was looking toward here.
Yet this is an incredibly young team with a schedule that isn't much tougher next year. Most of the offensive and defensive starters are returning, and it's always seemed like Frank and the rest of the coaches were looking toward next year, and even the year after.
But then we all started expecting greatness, and it probably wasn't fair to this team, which we all knew had plenty of flaws. We forgot about them for one awesome night in Columbus, but they've reared their ugly heads time and again afterward.
Should we expect better than the truly reprehensible outings we've seen the last two Thursday nights? No doubt.
Still, I can't shake the feeling that we jumped the gun a bit. This 2015 class is shaping up to be dynamite, and 2016's could be too.
So that's why I'm not ready to cry about the state of the program and call for Frank's job, like so many seem ready to do.
There's a plan here after a few years of aimless drifting, and I don't think we've seen the finished product yet.
Joe Lanza
If this is a therapy session, then I'll vent and share my outlook on the program. I'm not happy to be a fanatic of a middle- to bottom-of-the-pack ACC team, but even with Charmin-soft schedules these last couple of seasons, being a bad team was a more-than-likely possibility. Program killers like poor recruiting classes in 2010 and '11, a potpourri offensive scheme, lack of innovation and ingenuity in Merryman and some coaches too comfortable with their job security, among others things, collided together and created a disaster. I was mentally prepared for this possibility a long ago.
Many of these issues have been addressed by Beamer Co. There's young talent on the roster. The 2013 and 2014 recruiting cycles were two of Tech's best ever. 2015 could quite possibly be the best of the recruiting star era. A no-corners-cut indoor facility is being built, and Lane's new video board is big and beautiful. Bud Foster and his defensive staff, among the best in the business, are still in Blacksburg. Although, the jury is still out on the Scot Loeffler offense, Shane Beamer as a running backs coach and Stacy Searels coaching up a bigger offensive line. However, I'm still along for the ride as a back seat driver, at least through the 2015 season. Anything less than 3 years isn't enough time for the program to climb out the hole it dug.
The 2015 campaign will be Tech's third since Frank Beamer made significant changes to his staff. On paper, next year's schedule will be slightly tougher than this year's with road games at Miami, Boston College, ECU and Georgia Tech. Still, it's more than manageable for a team that returns the core of its defense, has had freshmen score the majority of its points and is recruiting more top-end talent. If next year is a disaster, or really anything less than a December trip to Charlotte, it'll be more than fair to vigorously question the direction of the program.
Also, it sucks the only bright light right now is next season. Remember when Tech used to hit its stride in November? Those were good times.
Joel Smith (joelestra)
A few years ago a close family friend was nearing the end of her battle with cancer. Regrettably I procrastinated on sending a last hand-written note thanking her for the impact she had made on me, but finally I sat down to write out all of my thoughts and dropped the letter in the mail that day. She died unexpectedly the next day, before my words could reach her. Her husband later told me that the letter was (of course) received too late but that it still meant something to him; he said he wished he could go back in time to warn me that the positive feelings I felt would be short-lived.
I still have the Ohio State game on my DVR. I started to turn it on not long ago, but as it turns out going back in time is great at erasing the positive feelings before tragedy but is worthless at avoiding the negative feelings that come later.
That's what is so great about loving a sports team: in the age of media being all about teasers and on-demand content and social media-coordinated hints at what happens next, sports play out live, right in front of you. No one else has any more idea what will happen next than you do. Certainly at 9-0 the stakes would be higher, but at 4-5 I already feel anxiety for playing Duke. Every play is a lottery scratch-off, and most end in disappointment or simply winning back your money but every now and then you find yourself in disbelief at your good fortune, checking and rechecking to make sure it is real.
Invest yourself emotionally in the Hokies and the goods will always bring you higher highs than the bads will bring you lows. If possible, go to every game. When Enter Sandman plays, jump like you want the stadium to crumble underneath you. When the opposing team is lining up for a play, yell like hell. When they have third down, jingle your keys while you yell like hell. In the red zone, chant "Stick it in".
9-0 teams breath a sigh of relief after a big win. 4-5 teams rush the field and talk about it for years. The energy is always there when you love your team.
Start jumping.
Brian Marcolini
I've spent much of this season in the North End Zone with my remaining college friends, packed into the metal bleachers like sardines soaked in green label Evan Williams and Keystone Light. Normally I don't get to be as observant in this type of environment as I hope to be, considering that I barely have enough room to turn my head, but I noticed something interesting as Tech played Boston College.
For a number of reasons the stands weren't nearly as packed as usual (though I would say that on percentage the North seemed to be be the fullest section at kickoff), and I had the chance to observe what was going on.
At some point during the middle of the game, I looked down to see a man in a maroon jacket standing alone about 30 feet from the tunnel in the northwest corner of the stadium. It was Whit Babcock, collar turned up against the rain, taking in the scene before him. He was watching the game, but during every stoppage in play he would stare at a different section of the crowd, grimacing while taking in the "55,000"-person crowd.
I was fascinated. What was he thinking? What was his plan? Is it even fair to assume he has a concrete plan at this point?
These are the only two things we know right now:
- Football is cash cow that makes everything else happen. Remember that little piece of news this spring about paying a basketball coach two million dollars a year? We all know basketball hasn't exactly rolled in the cash the last few years.
- There was an announced attendance of just over 55,000 fans against the Eagles. That's Babcock and Co. publicly stating that 10,504 tickets went unsold. If we calculate that out, estimating that an average ticket costs $50 face value, the athletic department lost $525,200 in ticket sales alone.
I don't know what he's thinking, or what he's going to do. What I do know, is that something will change come January, simply because there's no other alternative. We just have to trust that whatever he decided to do is the right thing.
Comments
I'm VTMaroonOrange and I'm a Hokie-aholic.
...it's been over a month since my last win.
I most agree with what Alex said, I do believe there is a plan here. It could be a fatal mistake for Whit or Hokie fans to jump the gun, this team will be good over the next few years. Patience will win.
I would have to agree. I do believe the program is heading in the right direction, I am not as certain as I was after the OSU game, but I do think there is a real chance that this team will be VERY GOOD in 2015 and 2016 and hopefully far beyond.
Until then stomping LOLUVA and a bowl win would ease some of the pain of this season. I will also go out on a limb and say I think our guys beat Duke this week to get an early start on a strong finish to cap a frustrating year.
My mood greatly improved when this therapy session started with a picture of our cheerleaders. So, more of those, please.
Well then...
The worst part about this season is when people ask me about the current record. The other day I was at the gym, sporting the colors, and some guy saw me and explained his daughter went to Tech. He asked me what our record was and after telling him 4-5, he kinda gave me a look and asked if I was sure. When I repeated it, it made me cringe on the inside like never before (this season). He went on to say he saw the OSU win (of course) and whatnot. That is the worst, when people don't even recognize you by anything other than a big win against a team most didn't see you winning. Still proud to be supporting the team of course, but telling the same folks we're 4-5 and have won two games since OSU is not fun and often a tad bit embarrassing.
We have lost to ECU, GT, Pitt, Miami, and BC. As I said a few weeks ago, I refuse to draw conclusions mid-season given all the factors at play here. But, if we lose two of three and 1) don't show signs of improvement or 2) land 3+ of the biggest targets left on our recruiting board, our ship may have sailed. Everything is momentum. We need a string of victories, not moral ones, but real ones. I have learned over the past few years to not take this as seriously, but man do I miss the "boost" I got in the past when we put the hammer down on an opponent, a boost that has been replaced by the "thud" that each mounting loss brings.
Basketball season starts this week!
.
.
.
That's all I've got
Never thought I'd say it, but that is actually therapy.
You know you're an ACC member when...
10 things only an ACC (and B1G) fan will understand:
Their football team caused widespread heartbreak. You won't believe who this adorable fanbase rooted for next!
BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
The young talent on this team and the upcoming recruiting classes are exciting and definite reason for optimism. Here's the thing though...Virginia Tech had established a fantastic cycle of players who knew what it took to get to an ACCCG and win an ACCCG. It made it easier for the upperclassmen to lead because they had been led by the upperclassmen before them. To the current roster, that is practically history now. We have a few players that went to the 2011 ACCCG and Sugar Bowl (both losses), but pretty soon, there won't be a single player on the roster that has been there and truly knows what it takes.
That fact is going to make it a lot harder to ever get back there, even in the Coastal division. Now it's different. Now, to get back there, well, it's like having to do it for the first time again. I think we can get there within the next couple of years, but it won't come easy, which is evidenced by this season. However, it will be all the sweeter when we do because of it.
It can't start next season though. It has to start now! #3-0 #38-0 bro #11 straight #Bowl Win
Frank and Bud have been there. It's time to see if they can re-teach that
I remember during our streak of 10 win seasons, I looked at the historically big named programs (ND, OSU, FSU, UT, etc.) and they, at some point or another, had to suffer through some mediocre seasons. After becoming a national player in college football, Tech, for the most part, has been a very steady program until these past few years. There were no deep valleys that we had to pull ourselves out of. This is something new for the program, that they'll need to learn from. Not just the team, but the fans.
We gripe and moan and wait for the sky to tumble on us, but the fact is EVERY major college program goes through this. We get so caught up in the minutia of the despair that sometimes we forget that we need to step back a bit and gain some perspective. We've been lucky to have avoided this for so long (and a lot of credit for that goes towards the continuity of our program). But here we are now, and how it is handled by or program (and us fans) will speak volumes.
I will leave you with words of one of our greatest modern philosophers:
Edit: for clarity
Well said, OHHERRO.
I agree that as the reality of this season and the recent past/near future sets in, we have to reflect on the program relative to the success that other programs have had. That list you mentioned (ND, OSU, FSU, UT, etc.) was great fodder for us during our steady peak as it helped us realize how consistently strong the program was. But the comparison of consecutive bowl streaks or 10-win seasons served as our 'trophy' through that period. While we hoped to obtain the ultimate trophy (probably unrealistically), we were satisfied reaching that steady plateau of winning seasons.
The difference with some of those top programs is that they went through more severe crests/valleys, but ultimately reached that National Championship at some point. They have been able to reach higher levels of achievement typically after unprecedented lows in the prior years (more volatility). I don't wish years of rebuilding upon our program at all--I strictly mention because we should truly relish and appreciate the consistency of success that we have had without enduring seemingly tragic valleys during that stretch.
While the thought of a loss to UVA this year is almost unimaginable (dull spoon through my spleen), I believe that the program, the fans, the school, and future recruits all believe strongly enough in the DNA of this program and that it will continue to push upwards towards consistent success and that ultimate prize; and, that it will be done in the right way (without NCAA violations).
I have faith and will continue to be a proud Hokie.
TheFifthFuller's give-and-takes could all be "Bad-luck-Brian" memes. Just sayin'
This season has certainly been hard on the liver and the team has been inconsistent at best. I hold out hope that we beat Duke mostly because I think the D matches up better with them then any of the last 3 teams we've played. What happens after that I'm not sure, but it will interesting for sure.
As I think ahead to 2015 I actually get a sense of excitement. For all the negativity and the questions around Frank, I think back to all the heartbreaking loses and the "old" teams (circa 2000 and on) and how they played following them. In the time I've followed the Hokies one thing has always seemed to be true; we play better as the underdog when no one gives us a chance. When things seem to be darkest old Frank finds a way to get the team back to where they need to be. I can't think of a time in recent history where will we be given less of a chance and thought of as poorly as we will be entering 2015. Even best case we will come out 8-5 but we have been 4 seasons removed from the often publicized 10 win streak. The fan base is growing restless and a larger and larger portion is questioning Frank and watching was Whit does. I can't think of a more perfect opportunity for all the questions to get answered. Will Fancy Gap Frank pull out the dork magic once again with an underdog team and get the ship righted, or will we find out that Frank doesn't have it left in the tank and begin the process of moving on from a legend?
Personally I think he pulls it out. I think fat Frank comes back with a vengeance. I think the program gets back to playing with a chip on their shoulder. I think we get back to what made us love watching the Hokies; heart, determination and hard work. I think the team plays angry and everything starts to click. I don't see Frank leaving any other way then being a winner. I know that the fairy tale endings rarely happen and reality is a cruel mistress, but Blacksburg is a different, almost fairy tale place, so why not? And if Frank doesn't pull it out, at least every one, especially Frank, will know it's time and I trust Whit to do what needs to be done.
Brian nailed it at the end. Financially, we cannot afford the dropoff we're seeing right now. We're paying 3 basketball coaching salaries, one of which includes one of the highest contracts in the ACC. We're still paying off renovations to the West Stands of Lane, the basketball practice facility, Cassell renovations, the VT football locker room, and we just took on the burden of paying off the indoor football facility. We simply cannot afford to keep losing ~$550k per game due to unsold tickets to football games. Allowing that to continue is a very quick process in allowing our Athletic Dept to wither into a financial mess that cannot afford to pay its debts.
Changes are coming. They have to be coming. We cannot afford for them not to come.
I get that football is the bell cow for revenue but most of what you listed are investments/poor investments into the basketball program. Should we be looking to that program to pay it's own way?
As for the football attendance argument, we've just sold out the Miami game and then came back and have had 1 poorly attended BC. Sure over a long period of time the lack of attendance is an issue, but we are one game removed from selling out. For all of Weaver's faults he did leave the department in the black so it's not like we were at a poor starting point.
It is wrong to paint the investments in basketball as being poor investments, for a myriad of reasons. First, the 'investment' in Greenberg as a head coach paid dividends zero people expected when we joined the ACC. Yes, his effectiveness at VT had maxed, but that doesn't mean he was a bad investment. Especially considering he was the lowest paid head coach in the ACC for the bulk of his career. As for Johnson, the way Weaver worked out the Greenberg payout & Johnson's incredibly cheap salary, Weaver was actually saving money than if he'd retained Greenberg. So - you've got the cheapest head coach in the ACC getting a buyout with his replacement being a net savings on top of that. Greenberg's salary comes off after this season, and Johnson's severance after next season.
As for pretending investment in basketball facilities was a poor choice - that is the equivalent of saying that we made a poor choice by expanding Lane, building the indoor practice facility Frank demanded, and the upgraded locker room. it's the same thing - if you take the lazy blindered mindset of Jim Weaver and pretend no money should be spent, you will always be the basement program in the ACC. Thankfully Whit is not so willfully ignorant as that.
As for claiming we are only one game removed from being sold out - I guess some folks have chosen to ignore the news that our previous home games this season were not sell outs, either. Denying the truth about the matter doesn't make it untrue.
Thanks for focusing on semantics. The greater point still stands, if we are in the hole from an athletic department because of the basketball program then wouldn't it stand to reason that it should be helping pull itself out of said hole? Whether they were good or bad investments we are still paying 3 basketball coaches.
So we aren't one game removed from a sell out? How is that "denying the truth". Also for your reading pleasure Jon Solomon on CBSsports.com wrote this article showing that attendance across college football is down 1%. Guess how much VT is down? 1%. Even a school like Ole Miss is only up less than 1% (the article was written on 10/1 so they were still undefeated). Also since this is from 10/1 it doesn't include the Miami or BC games (which I would guess that if you average them out puts us close to our season attendance average).
Look I agree with the greater point that continued low attendance is a financial issue that has to be addressed, I just don't buy into the it's here now and we must do something. The answer to it also isn't as simple as fire Frank. I find us speculating on how much the athletic department does or does not have is worse than speculating on coaching since we don't have any access to their books (unless we have an insider among us).
It's not a semantic argument just because you don't like it. First, I pointed out why the screaming about 'paying 3 basketball coaches' is not a concern after this season. We 'saved money' on paper by firing Greenberg & hiring Johnson, thus already banking the money you think we're losing. Secondly, people need to stop being myopic like Jim Weaver and looking at program expenses like they are line items. We just lost nearly the equivalent of what we're paying Greenberg & Johnson combined by having bad attendance at the BC game. You know, the football game? Not the basketball programs where the dirty finger was being pointed? The football attendance against BC just cost us as much as paying all of our fired basketball coaches. The football game that was the fourth non-sellout game this season for us.
So, the fake strawman 'semantics' argument can be used, but then promptly shot down as totally wrong. As to the sensitivity over the discussion of Frank's tenure, I didn't see that mentioned in this thread, except for those calling for it to be a point of no discussion. I don't really see anyone calling for Frank to be fired. What I do see is the slow realization that the mantra of 'Frank is the only one to decide when he leaves' is rapidly vanishing. No matter how much it bothers some.
The revenue argument pitting basketball against football totally ignores the rest of the athletic department. We've got a lot of sports where the entire annual budget probably was smaller than the amount of revenue we lost by not selling out the BC game & gaining concessions from it, as well. The football program is a concern right now. Denying that doesn't make the problem go away. It's not horrible, but it is a concern. It's amazing how many want to even deny that. Thank goodness Whit is rational.
Actually no, it was semantics because it was a small statement that really had nothing to do with the greater point and you chose to attack it instead of the greater point.
Also, please forgive me for projecting forward that the next conclusion was "fire Frank" given some of the posting history around here. If that's not the direction these posts are heading then where are they heading?
Aside from that I never denied that there was a problem, I stated that jumping to a conclusion that everything is down the crapper because we didn't sell out the BC was a big jump. I can't imagine that someone as smart as Whit would base his budget off of the assumption that we sell out every single football game.
Again, you're incorrect. Your first post had three paragraphs. One was about 'poor investments' in basketball, which I showed was a false premise. One was about the attendance not being as much of an issue as some stated. Again, I showed that was indeed and issue. The third was about Weaver leaving the athletic department in good shape, which we know is not accurate, and I pointed out why.
See, no semantics, just rebuttals of incorrect assumptions. As for someone avoiding the larger issue - the larger issue was about the football program being a concern, not the basketball program being an anchor.
Above, I mentioned a heightened sensitivity about Frank's tenure coming to an end, and said specifically that the mood isn't really about firing him, but about not allowing him to continue indefinitely, only stopping when he so desired. Yet, you ignored that to ask me that very question. So...? What about my answer did you choose to make semantic? As I said above - heck, just go back and read what I said above and don't take it personally. I already answered you above.
Why don't you go back and read the statement. Regardless of if they were good or bad investments (and as I clarified below I think they were good) it doesn't matter. If there is debt from the basketball team shouldn't they be at least somewhat responsible for getting out of it? The point of it being a good or bad investment is completely inconsequential to the question asked and you are arguing it.
Great no issue with this. You have a different opinion than me, no problem.
Actually I said he left it in the black. I didn't say anything about it being in "good shape". Whit himself said the same thing so I'm not sure why that's controversial to you.
For someone who is so quick to tell everyone else to re-read what they wrote perhaps you should follow your own advice and not twist what I wrote.
Anyway, have a great day.
Unlike Jim Weaver, Whit has already taken the proper steps to improve the basketball program. Unlike Jim Weaver, and some others, Whit understands you sometimes have to invest - aka spend money - to improve a program. You can't just do it by reducing the amount of money spent on the program, like Jim Weaver repeatedly did over the years.
That's what Whit has already done - spent money in a prudent manner to improve the basketball program. Which really had nothing to do with the football program's current state, but was introduced as a tangent to change the discussion away from football to basketball. The football program is a concern. Yet some would rather look elsewhere instead of at the football program. That doesn't make the concern any less real, even if some refuse to discuss it.
Enjoy your day as well. At least it is sunny outside and not cold as heck.
What were the poor investments?
Greenberg? Our program was every bit as bad as it is now before we hired him, and he took us to relevancy. And he did this while going from the cheapest head coach in the ACC to almost the cheapest head coach in the ACC throughout his tenure. Mind you, he earned 2 ACC Coach of the Year honors during this timeframe. He was a wise investment.
Johnson? Ok, I might give you that, he was a knee-jerk hire in a desperate grab to hold onto Erick Green. The bottom was in the process of falling out of the program and we brought in a guy who was in way too far over his head. Then again, he was by far the cheapest coach in the ACC during his time, so while the hire was a mistake, I still believe that getting rid of Greenberg was the right call, we just spent the money foolishly. At least it was a pennies on the dollar mistake. Could have been a lot worse.
Practice facility? Absolutely not. Before we built this our basketball facilities were so far from being even close to the standards of the rest of the conference that it was legitimate negative recruiting aspect that was used against us, and worked. In the premier basketball conference, our facilities were high-schoolish. The lack of investment in our basketball program at that time was embarrassing and we were in absolute desperate need of this facility. We would not have Buzz Williams if we didn't have this facility. This was one of the smartest investments we've ever made.
Buzz Williams? Jury is still out, but the fact of the matter is, without playing a basketball game, he's taken the worst team in the ACC and is in the process of bringing in his 2nd ranked recruiting class. Ticket sales are up, people are talking about the team, and analysts are beginning to think that in a couple years we're going to be a good team. Sure the price was high, but you're not going to find many people willing to say it wasn't worth it. And the team hasn't even played a game, yet.
So I'm curious on where all these bad basketball investments are. Care to elaborate?
I was making the statement to cover both sides of the argument so that I could make the greater point. Looking back that was clearly a mistake. Perhaps I should have just said "investments" or "expenditures" but hindsight is 20/20.
I do appreciate you taking the time and effort to spell these out though since I actually thought they were all good moves.
No biggie, good to know we're on the same page.
There are those out there that automatically assume if we're not spending money on football, the investment is a waste of resources. Thought for a second you fell into that crowd.
The practice facility was not only a win for the basketball program, it was a win for the olympic sports as well. With the practice facility built, one of the auxiliary gyms in Cassell was turned into a new Olympic Weight room and the other gym is a dedicated volleyball gym that can still be used for basketball purposes when need be. There are still conflicts with practice schedules, but that is because there are only so many hours in a day and when you have three teams competing for court space, conflicts will happen.
Absolutely. Lighting and sound were in discussions before Buzz arrived, but with him being here, they were expedited projects. Buzz wants to create a professional environment on game days and details like the lighting (especially for the entrance) was a priority. Graduation will be the first event the lights are used for and come ACC play expect to see something new as far as pregame intros go.
It's not about one game anymore
Year Total Sold Change from previous year
2011 397398-0- Sellout
2012393792-3606 (-1.0%)
2013383993-9799 (-2.5%)
2014370,634-13,359 (Assuming UVA Sellout) (-3.5%)
2014 365,281 -18,71 (Assuming Average of 5 games shows up UVA. Avg Sold Tickets per game 2014 60,880 ) (-4.9%)
Year over Year change in bold
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance/2013Release.pdf
http://www.hokiesports.com/football/
In 2010 there were 7 games that sold 463,631 tickets and this year it could be 95,000 less tickets sold
True but how much extra merchandise was sold after the OSU game? Attendance is very important but there are more ways for an AD to make money. Hell those "Mission Accomplished" shirts that everyone hated probably brought in enough revenue to offset the unsold tickets from the BC game alone.
1 game on the coldest day so far with forecast horrible weather just after a major letdown does not a representation of the season make, which is how you portray this.
I know your forte' is to point out the miscues but, mine is to point out that your indications of failure are mere speed bumps that every team meets.
Something other people pointed out to me is something I noticed at the stadium.
Despite the vacancies, the stadium was loud. Really loud. The 4th Q was just about as loud as I've heard it.
Cheers won't pay the bills but, $50 per seat is not what was paid by those boosters to make all those sellouts, and a lot of those seats were turned back in by BC.
You machinations of doom are ill conceived, my friend.
Which would make sense if people only bought tickets in the days leading up to the game, but that is just simply not the case. Bad weather is a strawman of an argument when you're talking about tickets that have been on sale for months. Its not like the ticket sales were opened up in the middle of October and people got scared because the weather was looking sour. In previous years, including years during the recession, this game would have been sold out before the season started, and the only tickets available would have been whatever BC returned. Even if that was the case this year, and BC returned their entire allotment of 5k tickets, that still leaves 5k tickets that out Athletic Dept simply couldn't sell from Day 1. And this is with the full on advertising blitz we're seeing from the Athletic Department on trying to sell tickets this year, which is something we've never had to do before.
Saying that the only reason for the sad attendance at BC was the weather is completely ignoring how these tickets have gone unsold over the course of the year. The red flags of apathy is beginning to kick in. Hell, we had to full on advertising blitz to even sell out the Miami game, which is something that would have been unheard of 2 years ago. Ignoring these red flags would be a monumental screw up in the big picture.
The problem here is the argument equates "attendance" with "tickets sold." Those two aren't the same, and the former is necessarily less than, or equal to, the latter. Do we know how many tickets were actually sold for this game? I know it wasn't a sellout, but it likely wasn't as bad as the attendance would indicate in terms of the bottom line.
Virginia Tech has historically reported ticket sales as the measure of attendance. That has been the rule for well over a decade, perhaps for two decades or more. Based on my personal anecdotal observation of the home games this year, nothing has changed in that regard. Certainly there has been zero public acknowledgement of any such change. Thus, it would be completely reasonable to expect that the approx. 55K attendance number was for seats sold, and actual butts in seats was no more than that.
Thus, the math on the sales lost would be closer to accurate (if it took into account student tickets sold). Meaning the half million dollar loss was real.
Teel's tweet on sales and attendance.
For some reason it is not letting me post the tweet.
https://twitter.com/DavidTeelatDP/status/528650506093481984?s=17
@hokiesmash They sold 60-something, so not sure what today's figure was.
12:59am - 2 Nov 14
My 2 family group had purchased a total of 6 tickets.
2 people attended so, we left a total of 4 seats empty which had been purchased.
These 4 seats went empty because my 2 girls are very young and would not have withstood the temps and rain.
My wife had to stay behind to watch them as the girl that was our babysitter was to use the last seat but, she had a sore throat and decided to stay home due to the weather too.
Just because the seat is empty does not mean it was not purchased. So your doom scheme fails yet again.
Also, I don't think you really know what a strawman logical fallacy is as it in no way applies here or, you do and tried to pull it out anyway.
In either case, your previous post is proven incorrect or not relevant to actual empty seats in the stadium.
Ticket sales are a problem everywhere right now. It makes me fear for the sport of football for the first time ever. Why is it that even students won't come to games? Something has to be done to make the cost and effort of attending games worth it over turning on the tv. But make no mistake, the tv is worth more than tickets. Its a balancing act!
Found this: http://time.com/money/3208397/college-football-student-tickets-fans/
The apathy towards football is certainly there right now, and our Alumni Chapter is seeing it first hand right now.
In 2011 we had over 440 people show up to the Duke game, buying tickets and/or tailgating passes through our Chapter. We bare bones advertised for the game, barely getting the word out, and still, demand was through the roof. Through this event, we fundraised about $5k for our chapter, which has lasted us over the last 3 years to get us through to today.
In 2014, even with us advertising fairly heavily on TKP (definitely want to thank Joe for allowing it), TSL, 247, Facebook, Twitter, email, through the Hokie Club, through the overall Alumni Association, and on our website, we barely broke 150 tickets sold. And this is with the open advertising that Whit Babcock, the HokieBird, and the Cheerleaders would be in attendance, something that did not happen in the past. People knew, and just didn't care, and its going to significantly impact our bottom line going forward. Simply put, for the first time since I can remember, we are going to have to dip into the main Alumni Association reserves to get by over the coming years to afford to run the chapter and pay for our scholarship simply because people just don't care about the 2014 Virginia Tech football team.
The apathy is there, we're seeing it first hand. To say that the BC game is just a one off situation that isn't indicative of the fanbase overall is simply not something that is being seen in a ticket demand sense. People are not buying tickets, even with the increase in advertising. They simply don't care.
I think there's a difference between ticket purchasing and not caring.
Which one is the outlier, 2011 in high sales or 2014 in low sales?
Also, economics sometimes enters the discussion as well.
How about the difference between the afternoon game Saturday before Halloween in 2011 vs the 12:00 kickoff the Saturday 2 weeks before Thanksgiving? How much value is there in purchasing a tailgate ticket for lunch for 2 hours time?
My buddy runs a lunch truck at Hokie Village and deplores the early kickoffs as a business hindrance as well.
2014 is the outlier. Both games are/were slated for noon, so kickoff time is meaningless between the 2 games. In 2011 the game sold itself. In 2014, we can't even give the tickets away.
I can see first hand the impact the now 3 years of mediocre to bad football has had on our fanbase, and the impact that the increasing apathy is having to our bottom line. For years we have relied on the steady and strong fundraising we got off the VT vs Duke game to essentially run our finances for the next 2 years. This year, our income from the Duke game won't even cover us for a year. You keep saying there aren't any swells of apathy within the fanbase, but we're simply not seeing it right now in any sense. Our turnouts for game watching parties have been slowly decreasing over time during a period where we're getting the word out more often about where the gatherings are during a time period where more alumni are moving to the area than departing. In the 2010 UNC game, we easily sold over 100 tailgate passes before the game, and while the numbers were awful in 2012 (which was mainly because of the event being vastly overpriced, something we corrected this year), we still had to essentially beg people to come to get the totals over 40.
Bottom line is, we're seeing a significant decrease in demand for VT football events this year, and its something that has been trending in this direction for a while. Yes, we're just an Alumni Chapter, but I can't imagine things are much better in Blacksburg right now.
Ok, thanks for confirming apples to apples.
BOOM- so now Football is being packaged with Women's & Men's B-Ball.... that can't be good.
please no groupon please no groupon please no groupon please no groupon please no groupon please no groupon please no groupon please no groupon
it is a pretty nice deal though.
I'm going to go with the "I can pick up 3 tix in the parking lot for $60" method.
THAC, thank you for adding real world numbers to what (nearly) all of us attending the games are seeing with our own eyes, as well as hearing from others who have been regular attendees in the past.
It's not 'good news', but it certainly does not need to be debunked just because it is a painful truth. Pretending it isn't happening will not stop it from continuing, or even worsening. It is a legitimate concern, and a reality.
Guess Bama needs to fire Saban then? If I recall he called out fans for not selling out the stadium.
This is waaaay too knee-jerk for my taste. For one, we're in a very good position financially, moreso than the majority of FBS football athletic programs. The reason Whit was able to come in here and spend money like he has is that we have such a strong financial foundation (thank you, Weaver). The football practice facility is, if not entirely then at least mostly, paid for and Hokie Club (and student HC) participation and donations are up. A couple bad football seasons aren't going to kill the athletic department. A bad decade would. Just about everything that could have gone against this football staff has, starting with a lack of experienced talent and progressing through injuries to key players on both sides of the ball. I'd say they have plenty of time to get things figured out (at the very least another season) before we start clamoring for more changes (and more expenses mind you) for the sake of the dire state of the athletic department's checkbook.
This has been a year of progressively lowered expectations.
At this moment, I'm down to the following:
I'm not even adding "win the rest of the games" because I'm not that confident we'll beat Duke (who so happens to lead the Coastal side of ACC things) but would really love to be proven wrong in that regards.
Beating Duke would mean that we would be one win away from bowl eligibility and that next win should be versus UVA by all means.
At the very least, I hope we don't lose the Commonwealth Cup.
Everyone says we won't beat Dook so, just like anOSU, we will.
This would be my game plan for Dook.
Coin Toss: VT wins toss, elects to receive.
VT receives kickoff, kneels in the endzone.
VT advances the football to beyond 50 yard line.
VT is faced with a 4th down and long from the Dook 49.
Brewer throws an intentional interception.
Result: VT's win probability increases to 66%
Rest of game: play game as game allows.
Strangely (or not so strangely), I approve.
This was a great feature. You guys should schedule one of these for each bye week and a few times in the offseason. I liked how everyone touched on independent but related issues.
Quality work.
This is the part where I started crying
Despite a ton of sacks/TFL, they are not generating turnovers. Remember, the last ACC title team (2010) couldn't stop anyone, but forced a ton of turnovers. That isn't happening, mainly because the guys who get traditionally get picks in Bud's system (free safety and field corner) are not ballhawks and are being forced to play a ton of man coverage.
I remember when Bud's goal was to force 3 turnovers per game, and the defense usually got them.
This needs to be a point of major emphasis moving forward. In most of our losses the field position has been killing us. With an offense/defense that has trouble winning the field position battle, forcing turnovers would help dramatically.
Jeff brought up a good idea. I t would be great to get Mark Leal back for Senior night, let him get out on the field, receive a framed jersey from Coach Beamer, and let the crowd show its appreciation.
Fifthfuller really nailed my thoughts on the season. The analogy to all the changes being like a prescription giving us all the side effects was particularly poignant. I found laughing at my desk was better than crying.
dmcross's comment about the team soon being void of the players that were around for the success is frightening. I hope this team and next years team gets that hunger back and fights to get VT's reputation back on track.
Not much else to contribute other than this - some time ago (can't remember when) I was watching some college football show, probably on ESPN, and they were discussing some program that was on the rise with a new coach. They were in the 2nd or 3rd year of the coach, and the analyst (probably Holtz or Mark May) said something to the effect of "when you get a new coach that delivers, you are going to have a progression. You lose, a lot, during the first year. Year 2 - you still lose, but its close. Year 3 - you start winning the close ones. Year 4 - you start winning outright."
Given that we didn't necessarily get a totally new coaching staff, i would argue we are in year 2 of the above progression. This notional, natural progression, plus the amount of young talent and the praise we are getting for our incoming recruits, gives me some immediate hope for next year. The inconsistency this year has been maddening, but its the sign of a young inexperienced team. My hope is that next year is a roller-coaster of emotion, but one that ends up with a lot more notches in the "W" column.
VT is 0 and 4 in one-score games this season. Brighter days are ahead.
we're about ~8 plays away from being 8-1... maybe another 8 plays that go the other way (against Miami) and we're 9-0... sobering to think about the "what-ifs"
Frank's cliche of - 'We were only 2-3 plays away from winning' sounds eerily similar. It also ignores that the opposing team could also cherry pick 2-3 plays per game where they either missed a tackle on a TD of ours, blew an assignment by one DB, or failed to slip one tackle where they would have scored yet another TD to widen their winning score against us. Every team in the country is only 2-3 plays away from doing a lot better in every game. Both the winners and the losers. Thus, that line of reasoning has no real substance.
Except that its the truth. The margin of error between winning and losing is usually small. Its not a mentality that belittles anybody, its simple coaching. Fix the inches and gain feet. Its just not always simple to fix the inches without giving up some elsewhere.
Close wins is one of the metrics analysts use to pick "dark horse" teams. For bad teams on an upward trajectory you want to see a pattern of lose big, lose small, win small, win big
You missed my point, though. Sure Frank can watch game film and find 2-3 plays that 'could have gone for a TD, if...' However, the opposing coach could also watch game film and find 2-3 plays that 'could have gone for a TD, if...' for HIS team. So the hypothetical game was just as likely being a 4-TD blowout as it was us winning by a point or two. Frank's (and others') constant retreat into that excuse is pointless. Especially when Frank (and others) use that excuse as a way to dismiss legitimate discussion about our losses. The losses are real, and they aren't any closer than the score. Frank (and others) pretending nothing is wrong, that we are 'only 2-3 plays from winning' ignores the reality that we are 4-5 because of MANY more reasons than 'only 2-3 plays...' per game.
You are correct in that the close win argument goes both ways. However, I'm saying that losing close is better than losing big. Similarly, winning close usually means you aren't as good as you want to think you are. But you can't correlate what a coach says to media with what he really thinks and coaches. If you're waiting for frank to open up and give you juicy details at a presser, you'll be waiting a long time.
We also have to remember that what we get is "Coach-Speak Frank". Coach-Speak Frank will always build up the opposing team and focus on the positives that happened post-game (win or lose).
Is the "2 to 3 plays away" an excuse? Yes - but only to the fans. We really don't know what is going on behind closed doors. At the same time, I am quite certain that the "2 to 3 plays" that the other team missed out on are being addressed by the staff as wel as the ones VT failed to execute.
You got it. Winning teams have problems too, but we only focus on the negatives after losses.
What I don't like about the 2 or 3 plays comments is that it kind of signals the fault of losing the game lies on the players who didn't execute those 2 or 3 plays. Our losses this year have been team losses. Offensively, defensively, and Special Teams, I'm not sure there is one game out there that we lost where you can't go back and say that all 3 phases of the game need to be improved as a whole. To keep saying it was 2 or 3 plays from a win ignores the core issues the team has.
What frustrates people when they hear this from Frank is that this is the same kind of thing we heard on those losses that kept us from really reaching the pinnacle during our string of 10 win seasons. Sure, we might have been 2 or 3 plays from winning, simply because our defense kept us in games, but our offense was for the most part always abysmal during these years, and when we kept hearing this same excuse it hammered home the fact that the coaches were happy with the way the team was playing, despite the ineptitude on the offensive side of the ball, which was perpetuated by the fact that our offensive coaching staff hung on as long as they did while putting up annual putrid numbers. It caused the whole "2 or 3 plays" excuse to become a punchline that shouldn't be taken seriously, which is why you see the reaction you do now when its said.
I think you make a valid point in that of (hypothetically) 8 plays, if they just executed in 2 or 3 of them, they could have pulled out a win, so it glosses over the real issues.
That said, Frank is never going to throw his team under the bus in a public press conference.
I agree he would never throw the team under the bus, nor should he.
That being said, I wish he would stop using the 2 or 3 plays excuse because, as you said, it glosses over the real issues. Just say the team needs to play better. Something along the lines of "we're simply not executing plays well enough to win right now, and as a coach it frustrates me to see this because as a staff we have to get these kids better prepared for games, and that starts at the top with me." Now, I'm not saying Beamer is the main reason we're at fault, but he's the one making all the money. Take the heat off the rest of the coaches, take the heat off the kids. He's survived here for over 25 years as head coach, and not all of that time was rosy. Fans are out there putting every aspect of the program on blast right now, because nobody is willing to take any of the heat.
Contrast what is going on with us to what is going on with FSU right now. FSU is an absolute mess, but they're doing one thing that I kind of like, from a business standpoint. Jimbo Fisher is out there saying the things to get the media talking about him and not the kids in the program. With everything that is going on, the heat is falling hardest on Jimbo because he's standing out in front of the program deflecting all the attention away from the players. If I'm a kid in high school, I hate to say it, but that's the kind of coach I want to play for. He's willing to put his ass on the line to save his team. That's not a quality I've seen out of our coaching staff for a while. Don't get me wrong, we used to be that kind of staff, but things changed.
Something I've noticed is that just about every head coach talks the same way. A few are blunt or fiery, but most are diplomatic. They all say the same things. I have listened to some of the pre-game and post-game statements from Nick Saban, arguably the most successful FBS coach in the last decade or so, and he talks just like Frank. "[Other team] is really good at [some aspect], so we have to be prepared," "we need to execute tonight," "some plays didn't go our way," etc. He's avoiding #hottakes on the spot that can get him in trouble. Those who prefer to be more analytical will wait to see what's on tape before giving specifics. Is it a cop-out to those of us who want answers? Yes, probably, but it's a tactic that most coaches use.
That's right, expectations of any other post game speech is futile.
With the exception of a few catch phrases "Get after ya", etc, if you put most of these successful NCAA coaches into one of those anonymous source booths at the TV station and you won't tell them apart.
Complaining about the 2-3 plays thing and thinking it's actual content is just plain wrong.
Yep. Players need to know that every play matters and the difference between winning and losing is in those few plays every game. I could care less if Frank is a boring interview as long as he is teaching the players to be better and avoiding bulletin board material.
It's not at all about Frank being a boring interview. He's been a boring interview for almost three decades now. Nobody is complaining about that, but some folks like to throw that out as a tangent to get away from the point. Which is, again... Frank (and some internet folks) hiding behind the false excuse of 'We were only X plays away from winning...' while completely discounting the fact the winning opponent was also only the same number of plays away from doubling their victory margin.
But hey, we can pretend every thing is 'justhisclose' to being wonderful. Like the same people did last year. And the same people did the year before. And next year, the same people will be pretending the same thing because nobody addressed the reality. It's all good.
Which is of course the crux of the problem.
You here state his interview is to be ignored then state the problem is he says we were only a few plays from winning.
Take your own advice here and ignore the interview, it means absolutely nothing.
You're wrong again, but I'm used to it by now. There hasn't been only one interview like you wrongly portray once again. There have been many interviews with the same comments and many false defenses by the same people. That's why I'm used to it by now. Which doesn't make it true. Which also doesn't make the attempted tangent work. Which also means the same problems remain, despite the attempts to ignore them by resorting to the tangents. So some people can deny to their heart's content, but it remains a concern. Which some will deny until well after the fact, by every means they can devise to divert from the topic. They never discuss the topic, they obsfucate constantly. Which never addresses the concern. So the concern remains. Enjoy doing that.
Can we dial back on the condescension, please? Many of your posts on this topic (and a few others, if we're being honest) are extremely dismissive of others. You have strong opinions, great. So do other people here.
To the point at hand, I believe that Frank, Bud, and all the other coaches that use this adage are right. Football is a game of inches. While an individual game could be cherry-picked either way, the point literally and figuratively stands. The point that is being made is that attention to detail is important. Telling your team they were 2 or 3 plays away from winning keeps them hungry and keeps them from getting discouraged. The coach is saying, "you weren't good enough today, but you're good, and with a bit more work you can be great." The first job of any team is to have enough attention to detail to prevent the other team from making those toss-up plays, the ones that can go either way. Then, they have to build on that and swing more plays in their favor. That's how a close game is won. And most of our games have been close.
So while the anxious fan base can debate whether there are literally 2 or 3 plays that can change the game (probably an unwinnable argument in many cases, given the nature of the game), the larger coaching point stands. You weren't good enough to win the game today, but you were really close and if you keep putting in the work, you'll get there.
The Condescension stuff is really going both ways on this whole site. Both the people who are generally perceived as "negative" or "program detractors" as well as people who are generally perceived as "positive" or "program defenders" are talking down to each other all...the...time.
Perhaps it's selective observation on my part, but it seems like the only people who get called out on said behavior are the negative people. I dunno, I could be wrong. But it seems like over and over again one "side" is allowed to get away with being snarky, sarcastic, jerks while the other "side" isn't.
It's led to me not really wanting to post here as much, I drop in every once in a while now. I still read the articles and stuff, but it's starting to feel like some opinions aren't welcome, and you're certainly not allowed to respond in kind...so what's the point.
But maybe that's the point...fewer posters like me, lol. I'm just saying, every thread on this site is turning into the same thing...and it takes two to tango, it's not the "doom and gloomers" who are entirely at fault here. Just my $0.02, I know no one actually cares...
No we do care.
And for the record. I do try to make my case with as much detail as possible.
You are correct, it is frustrating, I am sure, for both sides.
Sometimes it is easier to have these coversations face to face with beer in hand.
You make my point, misrepresent my point and then claim victory in a condescending manner.
I have stated it's the same speech for the past 20 years.
"We were close, those other guys are good and well coached, everyone fight hard, we'll look at tne film."
You think this is an excuse speech. It's not, it's a coaches speech.
Bad mouthing Frank for making this speech is silly.
Now, play nice and talk like an adult having a conversation.
'Now, play nice and talk like an adult having a conversation.'
Hmm, condescending.
No.
A plea, a request for civility.
Seriously? Its very rare you get complete hypocrisy in one statement like that. Sure, sometimes you see someone say one thing and then a couple comments later, its complete opposite, but to begin and end a comment like this?
Don't start out a comment calling someone out on something and then end it doing the exact thing you called them out on. You can do your "request for civility" without getting on a high horse and calling someone else names. Your last sentence is a prime example of the condescending tone you called him out on to begin your statement.
i always get the feeling that swvadon and Alum07 are RL friends or something lol
There's no need for this kind of statement. Its a personal attack aimed at cutting off the credibility of the user and not the statement itself. Statements like this have no place on TKP.
yes, clearly such a vicious and brutal personal attack
i'm out of control, take me away guitarman!
Again, I must agree with you.
Asking for an adult conversation is inappropriate. I will not do it again.
You can ask for civility, but don't be condescending about it, especially after openly downvoting someone else for being condescending.
I will pick this out as an example of trolling.
But, I will not do it in a condescending manner.
Ahem, Ahem. Please do not call me a prick again, sir.
I edited... something you should think about doing in a few of your comments
Once again sir, I agree with you, you edited.
Once you knew I had seen your adult conversation, you altered, I suspect in an attempt to not be called out by the moderator but, you absolutely did alter your post.
@Everyone
Thank you.
Looks like I picked up a serial down voter on all the threads now anyway.
Even my post asking if anyone knew what the Blue Man group uses on their face makeup in the Foerensics thread and that I hope Williams is 100% in the Bitter blog thread.
Eh, they must think it's currency or something.
Now, that's funny.
VTGM, for the record, I stopped commenting on this whole thread last night. Also, for the record, for all concerned, I've not downvoted anyone on any post in any thread in well over a month. Even those that deserved it for deliberately flaming, trolling, etc.
How exactly is this false? If it's a one score game, it would seem pretty clear that the game was literally a few plays away from going the other way
Personally I'd like a little variation every once in a while...
The whole situation just makes me sad.
No trees being cut either...
A little humor is good therapy for everyone.
Hi VTMaroonOrange! That was difficult for you to say, and we're proud of you.
My sentiment for much of our season.
I watched this after the Pitt game.... It's coming, don't you worry.
Will the youngest fuller beat the NCAA and declare early so my raiders can pick him up with the #1 overall pick. Next year?
This team is bordering dangerously closely to what could be a long period of mediocrity. Beamer is just not on the cutting edge of football, no matter how you look at it. I feel like we are at a very pivotal point during this offseason. If we put together another lackluster season in 2015, than expectations can slip, and interest can slip, and TV coverage and national interest turns regional instead of national, and the next thing you know and we wake up as Tennessee.
scary stuff, hope we can turn it.
I keep hearing this Frank isn't on the cutting edge, Frank is too old, Frank can't keep up.
But I don't see any detail to backup the discussion. Just more generalities.
Point out to me what Frank does to show he's not up to speed, please.
These guys have been pretty good at winning the past few year
Nick Saban, Alabama
Jimbo Fisher, Florida State
Mark Dantonio, Michigan State
Hugh Freeze, Ole Miss
Art Briles, Baylor
Gary Patterson, TCU
Gus Malzahn, Auburn
Mark Richt, Georgia
Bob Stoops, Oklahoma
Les Miles, LSU
Brian Kelly, Notre Dame
David Cutcliffe, Duke
Bobby Petrino, Louisville
Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State
Bill Snyder, Kansas State
A lot of PAC 12 coaches I can't think of
What are they doing that Frank isn't. It's no longer just one thing
You guys are making the point he's not cutting edge.
You tell me what he's not doing.
Pointing at other teams and telling me they've won more games is not an argument. It MIGHT be if there was a static in the football program but I can point to lots of changes and show there's a dynamic there.
Other coaches have won more games lately. I agree. Thanks for a list of coaches and their teams, though.
Well lets start at
As a Team
Win 3 National Championships after a 30 year drought has left your crazy fan base rabid for success,just small pressure
You win your games, Miss St has about the same SoS as us 45 v 40/9-0 v 4-5
Selling a top program to recruit the best
2/3/2012: Jameis Winston letter of intent to Florida State
Coach players to greatness
K State
2012 - Kansas State quarterback Sr. (3* QB recruit) Collin Klein is one of three finalists for the Heisman
Baylor
2011 Heisman Winner (4* QB)
Know when it's time to change the game you coach
Gary Patterson, TCU
But at the end of the day it's about recruiting
How are you selling your school to those that want to win
Look at the teams playing for a NC in the last 5 - 10 years and then look at how well they recruited the prev 2 years before they were there
Ok so, cutting edge is winning NC, winning games, recruiting the best, coach players to greatness, change the game you coach, recruit the best again?
Cutting edge, to me, seems more to be an action or series of actions rather than the results and so this may be where we are having a communications disconnect.
I'm expecting the cutting edge demand to be stuff like:
1) Making full use of modern technology to spread the recruiting dollar further rather than having to rely on actual travel so much.
2) Using a modern specific design indoor facility as close as possible to the locker rooms and other football facilities in order to maximize the time allotted by NCAA into more efficient use of that time and practice more effectively in inclement weather.
2) Computerized tracking and trending of each facet of a players training, conditioning, nutrition, game performance, etc to help staff determine strengths and weaknesses. Use this data to improve the weaknesses and takes full advantage of the strengths.
3) Some new and innovative thought on the use of a combination read option that includes both pass and run on the same play.
4) Periodic use of no huddle to keep the opposing defense from comfortably settling into your game speed.
5) having the punter reduce his punting distance in order to maximize the effective yardage gained by a punt.
6) Use economic analysis to determine that as long as your return guys can consistently make 15 yards on a return, it's a good risk because the several small times it comes out to the 35 it is more of a positive impact than the majority of the times it doesn't make it to the 25.
7) change recruiting schemes so that instead of having coaches assigned to recruit in a specific geography, group recruiters or assign them by position.
8) Offer earlier in order to impress on the kids that there is interst there.
9) Go big on recruiting, you may miss a lot but you can't land a fish without a hook in the water.
10) Attack those off field areas, like money, that other teams have an advantage over us and find ways to be more efficient to reduce the advantage they have.
11) Our team does not win well at noon games. Stop the noon kickoffs.
See, stuff like that. Build a case, don't just say we haven't won a NC after a long cold spell and that's proof he's not innovative, it's just plain lazy, like just tossing the ball towards the basket and expecting it to go in.
My biggest problem with the coaching staff is that we stopped being innovative years ago, and now we are seeing a team playing as such. We have our system, and we're going to stick with it, to hell with the personnel. While some may not see this as an issue, it goes completely counter to what the teams that are routinely playing at or near the top of the game do. Case in point, just yesterday I read an article about Chip Kelly, saying he doesn't have a set standard offense. He will tailor his sets and his playcalling based upon the players he is able to play, and the offense you're going to see him run under Sanchez will be different than the one he would run under Foles, because they're different QBs. There's absolutely no wonder why this guy is already in the NFL, he's a new aged pioneer of the game, and the game will be forever changed because of the new policies (all the sports science stuff he does is fascinating to read as well) he's implementing that other franchises are studying. The problem is, I don't see our staff doing anything like that. We're stuck in a 90s mindset that you must chew the clock and dominate TOP in hopes to slow the game down enough for the defense to win it for you, but its not working because the offense has been awful for nearly a decade, and the defense is starting to wane because lack of talent we've recruited. (ironically, the Eagles, even with all this offensive ingenuity are on the verge of setting a single season record for defense and special teams scores.... The offensive genius of Chip Kelly is out Beamerballing Frank Beamer.... crazy)
I want to see us try something different, to get ahead of the game for once. We were there back when Beamer schemed our Special Teams to be a significant advantage, but it stopped the second teams adjusted to put that mini wall in front of the kicker. Ever since then, we've been a reactionary program, always adjusting to what everyone else was doing. We allowed our peers to dictate how we played the game, and it got us completely away from having any kind of identity, and its slowly degraded the team to what we see now, and I'm not sure that will ever change under the current crop of coaches.
Ok, but, you guys say there's no innovation.
I listed 11 items where there's already been implementation, some that are still in process, some that are ideas and one that's just silly - kinda.
I'm looking for a little more depth of argument than, be like Chip Kelly and play offense like the personnel you've got.
I mean that's a good one but I think that's happening already now at VT to a certain extent. Example, TE's are on the path to a record breaking year in catches.
I don't think I've seen much chewing the clock except in particular circumstances where it's appropriate and in 1 game where I think it was an effective strategy.
I have not seen that as a specific strategy game wide anywhere else this year.
I know you'd like to see us run Hurry up/ No huddle almost all the time. That we don't I don't think is a reflection of ld 90's thiking on huddling every play and hiking at the last second.
I see it as playing to what this team can do with so many new players to the team. You can only run so many no huddle plays before your new players start to lose communication with older players, their QB and errors occur.
I've seen the guys lined up before and Brewer take a long time to ask for the ball because guys were still adjusting. They have to set before the hike or it's a procedure penalty.
I think the coaches ARE adjusting to what they have to work with. What they have to work with is changing rapidly this year. It's uncommon for those changes to give them more options rather than less.
Again, I'm seeing a lot different football this year than I have in the past. You guys still have not built a case for me to be convinced I'm wrong. Good or bad, the process and methods here are no where near the same they were 5-8 years ago.
We try to do it most every game for the majority of those games... We just suck so much at it that it usually turns into a 3 and out
Agreed, its not the 90s thinking that I'm complaining about. Then again, when you only go no huddle hurry up 1 or 2 series a game, I wouldn't exactly use that as your ace in the hole to show the coaches are being innovative.
Funny, other teams run this kind of offense almost exclusively and I rarely see these kinds of errors that you're saying will inevitably happen for us. I guess those teams are just coaches better than ours, right?
lol. I'm sorry but this might be one of the funniest things I've heard all year. The coaches are adjusting? That's complete news to me. Funny, and I thought it looked like we have been trying to establish the run all year long with a team that has routinely showed it cannot run the ball. Guess they fooled me.
Shocking. You're not convinced there are issues. Totally wouldn't have called that with the tone and style of your posting over the last couple weeks.
I'm not saying there are not issues, this is an example of a strawman. You put words in my mouth and then easily strike them down.
I'm saying I don't see an lack of innovation. Huge difference.
I also note that your debate style takes a specific from me and answers with a generality which bulds no case.
I guess so. You have to establish a run to a certain extent in order to keep the defense honest with a passing game. I think that trying to say we're not also trying to establish a passing game is a suspect conclusion as well with 11 INT in the first few games. I think we're still working on the passing game but being a bit less wild with it to eliminate the turnovers. That's worked but stifled the passing.
Brewer is passing more than any other QB in the past decade but you think we're stuck on trying to establish a running game.
I am going to have to agree with you last sentence I quoted from you.
If everybody could be a pioneer, the definition of pioneer would have to change.
This is a contender for post of the year, right here. This is what an argument looks like. The moderators should post this with one of those signs that says "your argument must be at least this tall to be taken seriously." Those who want to disagree are, of course, welcome to disagree -- by building a case at least as strong as this one. But if you haven't taken the time to think through the issues to the extent displayed in this post, you're wasting your time and ours by posting "fire Beamer because he's old."
Thank you very much.
Yeah, they did a good job with those QB's.
Examine some examples from us going on right now.
Hodges wasn't a TE. I think in a couple years, with the steady growth he's making he'll be a monster. This guy might have an NFL career and good draft coming to him. He improves steadily, that's coaching.
We identified Rogers early last year due to his enthusiasm. The kid is truly becoming a monster. Fullback with 70 yds receiving last game. I suspect we have another walk-on winner in this young man. He's doing everything right now.
Sir, a leg to counteract the person who is downvoting.
The coaching staff surely hasn't
How have they not you ask
Rogers walked on the team receiving no scholarship offers. He enrolled at Tech to play at his dream school and pay his own way. He is living his dream and isn't missing a min of it. The same I'd say for anyone on this site given the opportunity.
At least with Jack Tyler we gave him a scholarship after his freshman year. that is seeing the potential of someone
Rogers is now on scholarship IIRC.
He was invited as a walk-on by Shane.
Edit, here's the vid telling us he got a scholarship beginning this year, Like Tyler.
NBC12 - Richmond, VA News
There's an amusing article out there, my googlefu is failing me.
Tells of how no one FBS offered him a scholarship and Frank asked why we didn't pursue him. Shane replies that they hadn't really figured out what to do with him. They were at a HS football awards ceremony in Richmond. On the way back.
Frank told Shane to get him on campus to visit.
When Shane discovered that he only had offers from FCS schools, they pursued him as a preferred walk-on.
ahhh well. A well deserved Scholarship glad to see
While losing Leal stings and I wish him nothing but the best, part of me feels this will help Brewer out. It seems obvious to me that he's been hesitant to pull the trigger after his INT frenzy. AND I really don't think it helped him to hear Frank say mutliple times that he had confidence in Mark. Even if Motley is better than both of him, he's so far behind on reps, that he's not really a threat to Brewer at this point in the season. I think Brewer can pull the trigger a little bit more freely, with the idea that the threat of a benching (in game or next) is not really an option now for the coaches.
It also begs the question on what the heck Frank is thinking? He hired Loeffler, he obviously ok'd the idea of recruiting Brewer and bringing him in. The team talked about being more up tempo all preseason and early part of the season. Frank had to be ok with this then, but it seems like he got scared when Brewer had some INTs. True, some were horrendous, but we have new QB in a new system for him with a bunch of new playmakers around him. Yes we weren't running the ball great, but we knew that'd be an issue due to the OL and young backs, and injuries have exacerbated both of those issues. Seems like Frank has to trust Loeffler and Loeffler has to trust Brewer.
As miserable as this season has been at times--really just heartbreaking in coming up short time and again--the one thing I will never get out of my head is the sight of the whole offense pushing and willing Bucky Rogers into the end zone during the 4Q of the BC game. They are not giving up, so neither can I!
/\
See above, please.
"There have been rumblings from fans indicating a need for a return to a "prototypical Virginia Tech quarterback," which apparently is a dual-threat type of field general. Honestly, I could care less whether they run a 4.4 or a 4.9 40-yard dash so long as they make good reads, reliably accurate throws and execute Loeffler's system."
While good decision making and execution are critical, you can't discount the value a dual-threat QB has, especially for us. Look at what those types of players have done to our D the past few years, and what having one (T-Mobile) did for us. Players like Taysom Hill, Colin Kaepernick, Nick Marshall, Dak Prescott, Braxton Miller, Marcus Mariotta, Johnny Manziel, etc. etc. have the ability to change games. And with the O-lines we've had it's even more critical as it keeps the opposing defense honest. It would be great to have an AJ McCarron, but we don't have the luxury of surrounding him with 5-star talent so he has time to make those good decisions and execute. Just my opinion, but I think a dual-threat QB is exactly what we need.
ITT:
Ok, wow.... tangent slap fight city lately on the boards. I suggest we introduce a new TKP voting button: the "S" vote that should be next to the downvote option. If a comment reads +10 "S" votes then it automatically is replaced with the following gif:
I say this being fully aware that I have caused some tangents in my time. I used to bitch slap hokieknight and his nonsense all the time until it was painfully obvious how fruitless that was. I have sparred with some other great TKPers over football related stuff as well, but tangent slap fights seem on the up this season, never more ironically than in the "therapy" thread that is meant to be cathartic for everyone to voice there football related woes.
Having been guilty of these tangents in past I have been trying to exercise restraint lately because I felt I was detracting from the greatness that is TKP for other readers. I am sure I will get into another one in the future though and not trying to say I am better than anyone. Rather just saying that everyone of us that are more frequent voices on TKP should maybe stop bickering about downvotes and using condescension to make our point. Anyone with more than a 1,000 legs should have a feel for the site. Plus in the end we're all Hokies.
I find this condescending towards anyone with less than 1,000 legs. You should edit your comment.
...sorry, I tried to fight the urge but I had to.
(Bromance alert: vtfly I do believe you and I would be pretty damn good friends in non-TKP life)
hahaha, that was hilarious.
though I think the word "should" is a tad strong and condescending as well. Perhaps better as such: You may want to consider editing your comment.
You two are being incredibly condescending towards everyone not included in your bromance
Edit: Apologies for labeling your relationship a bromance. That is very judgmental and I apologize for bringing stereotypes to TKP.
Agreed on all fronts, if I ever make it to China I'll hit you up, but I find your use of big words like "strong" and "perhaps" to be disrespectful...
Note: I believe this was one of those aforementioned tangents you alluded to...whoops!
whoa, whoa, whoa... careful with how you use "hit" and "China". No need to bring domestic violence and race into the conversation.
Note on your note: True. That Squirrel vote button would really be helping some people out right now.
Warning:
But seriously...
,
,
,
,
,
Turkey legs for all.
I think we can accuse you of starting a tangent gif fight now as well...
that clearly doesn't apply when you are using squirrel gifs.
Bring it on!!
This has always been a fear of mine except a snake pops out rather than a squirrel
angry squirrel is angry
I think it's time we set aside our anger and have a brew or two...
first I'm like
then I'm like
then you're like
No drinking alone bro
good plan, I'll attack any human pointing something at me
Nice, I'll watch your back
Do you get the feeling that no one else is reading this thread anymore?
It's actually probably my favorite thing on TKP right now. Keep going, guys!
Unfortunately it's about time this squirrel...
Alright Fernley, see you later
I'm with GuitarMan. This is the best thread that I have read on TKP today despite that fact that some posters not knowing the difference between a squirrel and a chipmunk is really poking at my OCD.
I think you need to take your issue to Google image search. I can assure you that I've only been googling for squirrel pictures.
are you kidding? People LOVE squirrels! It's other squirrels you gotta watch out for
yupp nuts.. I mean upvotes for all