Just throwing out my opinion. Several threads talk of the need for a new HC or a new OC. I think I'd prefer to see this staff remain as is for at least a year. With the decimation due to injury, and the fact that we've been close in all but one game, and with the quantity of experienced talent returning as opposed to this year's youth movement, plus the fact our OL coach just finished year one, I'm actually optimistic that next year will show a huge step forward.
Do you guys really believe that a substantial change will happen or that it is really necessary? Many points have been made here regarding the instability we'll likely see once Beamer is gone. Add in the risk of academic and/or recruiting violations with a new staff, and I'm just not ready to give up on these guys yet.
Go Hokies! Get it done tonight and hopefully I'll be witness to the beginning of a second decade!
Comments
I think it all comes down to tonight. A win vs UVA will keep Beamer around, but I am not quite sure about Lefty. We will have to win by a large margin if he is going to stay. If we are down 2 or 3 scores, you will see Lane clear out. This will be a tell tale sign that things are going to change. If we win 38-0(my prediction), all the pieces will be back next year.
Just my .02 GO HOKIES!!!
I have a really hard time seeing us being able to put up 38 points, especially against a highly ranked defense that UVA employs. Unless the defense has a field day and is able to score us a lot of points, I don't think this will be the outcome (unlike in 2011). But, I do hope you're right and who knows what will happen. Go Hokies!
I hope your score prediction is close. I'll be there screaming my damn drunk head off. Gonna be a cold (fun) one.
Win or lose, some kind of changes need to be made in the offseason. As a whole, the donor base right now is not happy, and Whit has been hearing that feedback non-stop since this slide began. A win over UVa will certainly help, but it won't silence the unrest. Fact is, this season our defense pitched a shutout in a game with a bowl on the line and we still lost against the worst team in the conference. That should never happen.
The donors need to feel hope again. They need to be excited about the future of the program like they are with basketball. They need to be energized. I'm not sure the status quo right now accomplishes any of the above.
Agreed, there needs to be new energy brought into the program
That's what we did 2 years ago. You can't just wipe the slate clean in the middle of a rebuilding process and hope the "new energy" you bring into the program will compensate. Let the coaches continue doing what we brought them in to do (rebuild the offense) instead of going the Michigan route of cycling through coaches until we're broke and losing, but "full of hope."
FTFY
^ yup
Ah, yes, playing a hell-ton of freshmen is the #1 indicator that the coaches have yet to start the rebuild process. Great point.
*snicker
Agreed
There's more to rebuilding than just playing young guys. Creating an offensive identity is far more important, and I think we can all agree that Loeffler has failed to even attempt that.
Hey, run, run, WR/RB screen is the ticket to success!
Actually, I can't agree that he has failed to attempt that. Presnap motion, hard counts, use of WR screens to effectively get 5-7 yards, consistent use of a check down on the passing tree, these are all features Lefty has attempted to install as foundations to out offensive identity. Year two under Lefty, it's pretty clear that our offensive identity will be attempting to exploit mismatches. We may not like that identity, but it's pretty clear that is the identity Lefty brings to our O.
One could also argue that such an offensive mindset is particularly more vulnerable to the injury meltdown we've had this year. Instead of a next man up mentality, Lefty has to reconsider his method of attack with each significant injury, since each significant injury changes the mismatch math.
Not to say that an opportunistic, exploitative identity is the right fit for VT, I'm just saying after two seasons it's pretty clear (to me at least) that that's the identity that Lefty brings.
Well we're arguing over semantics. When I say "establishing offensive identity", I mean establishing a set of base plays that the offense focuses on executing perfectly against certain defenses and then using certain constraint plays when defenses are forced to overcompensate to match up. It doesn't matter if those base plays are the inside zone, the inverted veer, the zone read, four verticals, triangles... it doesn't matter as long as you execute better than your opponent can defend it.
Saying your offensive identity is "attempting to exploit mismatches" is nonsensical. Every offense ever does that. I don't fault Loeffler for throwing in wrinkles every week to take advantage of an opponents weakness. I fault him for making those wrinkles the foundation of the offense, instead of execution of a few sound plays.
Here's Chris Brown from smartfootball diving into the concept of establishing an identity. I highly recommend every football fan read this. You'll notice that EVERY top college offense in the country is based on the idea of specialization, even if they specialize in different tactics.
Establishing base plays/specialization
Use of constraint plays
Oh, yeah, no, no argument from me over the fact that he hasn't ACCOMPLISHED it. I just certainly think he has a definitive vision and is trying like hell to install it. It simply isn't working.
As for base plays, nobody wants to hear it but the WR screen is definitely a base play. Also the zone read where the flanker comes across presnap and the give is either flanker field or tailback boundary on the read. We've seen some moderate success on that.
TBH, with Loeffler's love of package plays it might be damn near impossible to identify a lot more base plays, because one base play might have three different results when we run it.
But in summary, no, he hasn't been successful translating his vision to the field. When I read your original post I just got the sense you were implying he was kind of flailing about aimlessly with his scheme, and I don't agree with that. He has a vision which still primarily lives on paper at this point.
A vision and an identity are two different things. Loeffler does have a vision, but it's of an unidentifiable offense.
I strongly recommend reading the "constraint play" article written by Chris Brown. It explains how the WR screen is not a base play, but a constraint one. Basically, it's run when the defense puts more people in the box than Tech can run against. That's why Loeffler always says "the screen game is an extension of our run plays".
ACK! Just noticed the links at the bottom of your comment. Off I go.
Hmm. Okay, so, when I read that, I get the impression the author is saying, "The bubble screen is a constraint play...because I say it has to be a constraint play!" I honestly don't see why the bubble screen can't be one of the base pass plays you build your offense around. I do get the base/constraint play dochotomy, I just don't get the author's firm insistence that a wide receiver screen MUST be a constraint play. If anything, Lefty's claim that the screen is an extension of our run game actually argues that that it IS a base play for us. If we need five yards, the screen is a go to. Lefty definitely uses it more than just as a fallback.
Because of the type of assumptions an offensive coordinator makes when designing an offense. When you design the structure of your offense, you do so assuming that the defense will be playing sound football. That the defense aligns properly and accounts for all five eligible receivers. Then, you assume that talent level is equal.
Then you start drawing up plays that should work in those circumstances. Those plays, called your base plays, are the plays that you can rely on against a sound defense and a similarly talented defense because
you out execute the defense.
In the article Chris Brown addresses why the receiver screen can't be the type of play you base your offense on, a "base play".
If the defense is aligned correctly and stays true to their assignments, they will take away the receiver screen 100 percent of the time without any special practice during the week. That is why you can't base your offense around the wide receiver screen.
I don't know if that's necessarily true across all types of pass coverage regardless of whether the defense is in man or zone. Some defenses, like ours, are at a schematic disadvantage against screens because they base so much of the defense around pressuring the QB. Looking at Foster's love of extra pressure, I don't think I can say that our defense should be expected to stop 100% of screen passes if everyone plays their assignments, because in our base defense a large percentage of the time we have several extra defenders, often defensive backs, whose job it is to get to the QB, not defend against a pass. In those situations, a screen pass can be lethal if properly executed.
My point is, despite the article insisting otherwise, ANY play that you run the shit out of on practice can be a base play. And it's pretty obvious that we run the everloving shit out of the bubble screen in practice.
And then there's the question of how many of our bubble screens are part of a package play where it could have had a different outcome with a different read before or at the snap?
It was an interesting read, though, and it leaves me wondering if Lefty is suffering from either too many or too complex base plays. Thanks for the links!
Foster's defense has historically been very good against bubble screens. In fact, Foster goes out of his way to take away an opponents screen game schematically to force them to throw low percentage passes down the field.
Well of course its not necessarily true across ALL TYPES OF PASS COVERAGE. That's why it's in the playbook, to take advantage of when a defense gets into a coverage that doesn't respect the screen as a threat. In terms of what coverages will defeat a bubble screen, press man coverage will absolutely shut down any bubble screen unless the offense has just way more talent.
We're going to have to fundamentally disagree on the nature of Foster's "base defense" and his pressure packages here.
No. Thats only true if you use a different definition of "base play" than I think most football people would. A "base play" doesn't mean a play you practice a lot (although you should practice your base plays a lot), or call a lot in a game, or even your most successful play. A base play is the play that you know will work (from a tactical standpoint) assuming the defense doesn't overreact to your tendency (what football fans call "cheating"... as in "that alley defender is cheating towards the run, so you throw a bubble screen to the receiver he's not covering"). Theoretically, base play is a play you can run over and over until the opponent has to break their defensive rules to stop it.
A bubble screen will only work if the defense is willing to allow it to tactically, thus it's a constraint play. As Rich Rod would say, "The bubble screen is given, not taken". The term "base play" has a pretty specific tactical meaning and to say that Loeffler uses the bubble screen as a base play would be incorrect "football semantics", even if he uses it way more than he should.
The bubble by itself isn't a play you can rely on as an every down base concept,
the bubble screen also serves a more specific strategic purpose--as a constraint against teams overplaying the base zone run.
Some nice pictures
Your base plays should always work fairly well against a base defense, and it's up to your opponent to adjust the defense to them
Sorry if I'm not letting this point die, but as a football nut this is the type of thing that gets me going. Also, it's the biggest flaw of Loeffler's tenure as OC, IMO. The lack of a tactical anchor to the weekly gameplans. The lack of a base offense. I don't think it's a coincidence that so often lately the offense has had execution problems, you can tie that directly back to the offenses lack of a few plays it can rely on to be run flawlessly.
If Loeffler is going to ever be successful as an OC, his teams offensive identity can't be "exploiting matchups" or "being unpredictible" or "being extra, super, hyper prepared". His teams need to have at least a few base plays that they can run against an opponents base defense and reasonably expect to out execute the defense on.
Thank you for this series of threads. They have made me think more in detail about our offense than I have in a while. After reading through the material, It made me wonder though...if the base plays are theoretically intended to work against base defenses, what if Lefty's whole problem is that base plays get crushed by base defenses? This would then in theory put him in constraint mode all the time which makes it look like he has no identity. I've seen two years of Lefty with two very different looking offenses. I think I have made up my mind that if I were given the choice, I'd hitch my wagons to Lefty versus trying to shake it up again. So, in an effort to be a glass half full guy, I'm going to hope that with some offensive line improvement and improved qb play, Lefty will nail down his base package and be able to get into much more of a rhythm calling plays.
Oh and I would agree that the bubbles aren't base plays except that they are a pre-snap read option out of a base play. I guess that makes them more of a constraint, but they are definitely worthy of practice time because those reads are going to come nearly every game.
Thanks again for all the info and I will provide some turkey legs for your effort!
That's actually one of my theories for Loeffler's "all over the place" game plans the past two seasons. Look at what he spent installing during the time you'd expect a new OC to install their "base plays. When you look at the type of plays (particularly run plays) he was installing during his first spring practices and showcased in his first summer scrimmages before the Alabama game, there was a ton of under center inside and outside zone.
That's all but gone now. The under center formations are rarely ever seen. I think a lot of that has to do with the QB personnel he's had (Logan and then Brewer) maybe not being as comfortable with being under center as he'd like, but some of it also is the struggles of the Oline to run block.
I think he decided to leave that game plan behind (in fact, he's basically said as much in media sessions) and try to just win games by playing to his personnel. If that's the case, that was a mistake IMO. If he wants to be a guy who pounds the rock then he should be willing to take the lumps while he's trying to establish that.
Personally, I like to look at what Steve Addazio does. He essentially runs a system that he wants to run regardless of personel because he wants to show recruits what he wants to do. I think we're missing out on that right now a little bit. But on the other hand I'm just a guy who says things on the internet.
And because he wants his players to be able to focus on the simple things so that they can execute at a higher level. Ask a player to one thing fifty times in practice, and come game day he'll be able to do it perfectly. Ask a player to do fifty things once in practice, and god help you on Saturday.
It's funny... as fans we want our offense to establish an identity, but we also want a coordinator to be able to make adjustments.
As you said, Lefty appears to be adjusting his offense to suit his personnel. Would you rather we tried to pound the rock non-stop if it meant we would be 3-9 this season?
YES. I've been saying that since he abandoned the under center ground game last season. It was short sighted to change the game plan as drastically as he did on a week to week basis.
There are always going to be reasons to "adjust" to a different game plan from week to week, but Loeffler has wound up losing the forest for the trees. For God's sake, Loeffler has used every single non-Paul Johnson offensive tactic that I know of. That means he's had to take the practice time to teach his players how to run the inside zone, outside zone, stretch plays, power blocking, bubble screens, jail break screens, slip screens, Zone read, Zone read packaged with bubble screens, Veer, Inverted veer, Inverted Veer with Jet sweep motion, Play action off inverted veer with jet sweep motion... And he has to teach them those rules out of the thousands of personnel groupings and formations that he switches in and out of every game.
AND THAT'S JUST THE RUN GAME!
You know how many plays the elite offensive teams in CFB run? Maybe, MAYBE a quarter of the different schemes that Loeffler has employed over the past 27 or so games he's coached, and a heck of a lot less packages.
No wonder their players execute better.
Not disagreeing or doubting by any means, but I would love to see a comparison between how many plays VT employs vs. other teams.
A screen play can most definitely be a base play, because the true definition of a base play is one of the plays in your playbooks base set and why you would think a pos woman beater like Chris Brown knows anything about football is beyond me. tic
Whatever "identity" is chosen, I just want to see well designed plays that are executed properly. The blocking, or lack there of, from all positions kills us. And is the main reason the offense, whatever style, is so inconsistent. This has been a huge problem for the last 3 years, and probably even longer.
Read an article today previewing USC/nd. Last week both teams played 18 true freshmen or redshirt freshmen in their respective games. Lots of teams playing young guys.
Some questions to that 1) at what positions 2) what caliber "star" we're they coming in 3) playing because of skill or I jury?
also,
4) are their upperclassmen experienced in their respective systems?
Rhetorical question because I know the answer is yes, they are. I might also note that having uber-talented freshmen (as USCw an ND tend to have) is different than having a lack of talent in the ranks of their upperclassmen.
Not totally sure, I'm on road now. It noted that 18 of last weeks 22 starters have multiple yrs of experience left. Also noted USC is still playing with 65 scholarships because of sanctions.
I was referring to Beamer. I am one for him leaving after this year. But tbh and imo, Moorehead and Whit are the only people that we brought in that have brought in energy that get the fans and donors excited.
Do you think the staff that we brought in from Auburn was weaver's first choice? i'd argue a big part of them being hired was their financial situation where AU was paying half of their salaries. I don't think Whit would be looking for black Friday coaching specials if we try to find a new OC.
I think that is a major point.... Weaver went 'el cheapo' on the basketball hires and football hires both, and neither one, as of yet, turned out for the best
You owe it to the kids with only four years of eligibility to go in a different direction if mistakes have been made in hiring.
Well spoken, we need to chill and give the new coaches and their recruits time to do their thing. In spite of a very disappointing season, there is reason to hope that things are turning around. The OL is key and there appears to be some hope there with Teller, Conte, the return of a fully healthy McLaughlin and hopefully some of these new OL recruits that we are stockpiling.
I think next season is the make or break year - there needs to be a significant up tick to the offense. We have enough playmakers to be a top 50 or better offense if the OL steps up and the play calling gets a little more consistent. Play calling has been outstanding at times and head scratching at times this year. Loeffler has shown he can do the job well, but he and our offense need to improve on consistency.
Our offense also had the lead in the closing minutes of several games this season and the defense couldn't stop them from scoring. While I agree there are changes to be made I don't think this is the year to do it. We are an extremely young team that has been decimated by injuries, a QB that is in his 1st season as a starter, and a patchwork offensive line that lost 2 starters to injury before the season even started. I believe the staff deserves 1 more year to try to put it all together especially when you consider that most of the starters on offense are this staffs 1st recruiting class and the O line has had 3 coaches in as many years. Now if major improvement is not made next year like 9 wins and being in contention for the divisional championship all season long then yes it will be time to make changes. But to make changes now is acting with your heart and not your head and emotion based decisions are rarely the right ones.
On one hand with the injuries and rebuilding we've had this year I feel like loeffler deserves one more year, but the fact that we seem to be getting worse as the year progresses concerns me and would not make me too upset if things do in fact change.
No changes should be made this offseason. None on defense, none at head coach, none at offensive coordinator.
Having said that, Lefty should get to decide who is on his offensive staff. Maybe he likes Moorehead, Stiney, and Searles. Maybe he doesn't like Shane.
If any changes are made this offseason, I think the first in line for change would be Shane, then Searles, then Stiney, then Moorehead. But I think the ball should be in Loeffler's court on those decisions.
If we beat UVA I totally agree. Whit Babcock will have to analyze whether injuries and youthfulness were the primary symptoms to this bad season. If so, we should keep the upper coaching staff as is, and let Loeffler compose his own staff under him. With all of our losses sans Miami being close, and a dropoff in production after the injuries to our running backs, OL, and pass rushers we might just need a rehab off-season with what we have. With a loss against UVA, however, I think there needs to be some changes that I'll let Babcock decide.
Don't know how you can decide to make changes or not on a win/loss against UVA.....
It's less so about UVA and more so about going 5-7 and not making it to a bowl game.
I think replacing Searels.at this point would be disastrous. Not because he's the chosen one, but simply because you can't have four OL coaches in four years and expect any semblance of improvement from that unit.
Agreed. I would like to see Shane get a nice gig somewhere else for a few reasons, and I'd like to see Stinespring away from Lefty in the booth. Put him on the field or in the President's Box. I don't care. But I swear there were a few times this season that Lefty had to go take a dump and left Stinespring to call plays.
I still can't make up my mind about what kind of changes I'd like to see this offseason, but whatever it is I just hope it's something that excites the fan base, puts butts back in seats (for the whole game), and brings Lane back to its formidable glory. Lord knows we'll need it to sweep anOSU on our home turf. That being said, I'm supporting this team no matter what. GO HOKIES!
I couldn't disagree more. A win tonight doesn't keep the peace and shouldn't. Down vote me for this if you want, but I'd rather us lose tonight and make some major offseason changes than be satisfied with a 6-6 record, even with a W over UVa. You can't convince a team that scored three points against Wake doesn't need to make some major changes. You can't convince a team that was shut out until the final minute and a half against the U AT HOME doesn't need some major changes. This program has been steadily going down for the past three years so a win tonight does nothing to change my mind that this program is still in the right state. There's no better feeling than beating up the wussies from C-ville, but the fact that we're fighting for bowl eligibility on the last regular season game of the year definitely says something about the quality of the program. I really, really, really hope our athletic department doesn't have the same mentality that was stated in this thread. Again, I'd rather take an L and call this season a huge disappointment than be semi-satisfied because we beat another bad team in LOLUVA to finish 6-6. We're not even an average football team, and the whole athletic department needs to see that. End of rant.
Im with you on everything you said. I can't stand people who are like "Oh well just beat UVA and its a successfull season!!!"
.... fuck that.
Respectfully, IMHO, I don't believe anyone is saying "Beat LOLUVa and the season is a success." Some are just bringing up points to consider before any changes are made.
Whether its here or on some other board, I have seen plenty of fans say just that
I couldn't agree more, and I'm typing this after we beat LOLUVA. When we scored our first OFFENSIVE touchdown Friday night, it had been something like 117 minutes between offensive touchdowns (saw this on Twitter). That probably doesn't include OT vs Wake becuase that's untimed. The offense ran 141 plays (not including punts or kneel downs) between the last TD vs Duke and the TD vs LOLUVA.
There is no excuse for simply not being able to score on offense. Something needs to change.
What needs to change is that our players need to be healthy and they need to be able to spend some time learning the nuances of a stable system. We DO NOT need to change the coaching staff and system on these kids again. Lefty has been here 2 years: Year one was damaged goods as he lost the TE before the season started (we now see how much he likes the TE). We also graduated pretty much all of our receivers and had unknowns at RB, so he had to make the best of what he had with Logan, and the result wasn't great. It could have been worse. Year two, he has some of his recruits, has some young playmakers and a QB that can run an offense more to his liking, but he lost his OL coach and had to start over there, AND we had a hell of a lot of injuries. All told, still not a lost season with as we beat two ranked teams on the road and are going back to a bowl for the 22nd straight year.
Changing coaching staff now will only slow down the improvement that these kids are making. I see us as being a VERY dangerous team next year. Get us healthy, and I'd put us against anybody. I'm not saying that we will beat any team in the country, but we should have the talent and ability to give anybody a hell of a fight and give ourselves a shot at winning. These kids don't know how to quit, and that mentality starts with the coaches. Do not make a change now.
I get what you are saying. I think it is important to have stability in the coaching staff but Loeffler simply hasn't produced. We haven't finished better than 83rd in points per game since he took over. The loss of 3 primary running backs was unfortunate but we still had the #1 guy on the depth chart there from the beginnig of the season. I don't think having one TE injured gives him a pass on one entire season. And changing OCs doesn't guarantee we have to spend 3+ more years without any production on offense. There are first year OCs out there who had great success this past season.
There are first year OCs out there who had great success this past season.
I think you have to look at who they inherited, what kind of defenses they played against on a regular basis, and who was asked to contribute regularly. Last year, SL inherited a very talented athlete at QB, who he showcased well in the offense, and a handful of wideouts who were essentially overthrown by freshman-brought in by SL's staff- this year. The running backs were basically lead by a true freshman who many thought should have been playing linebacker instead, and the offensive line was in their first year under a new coach-who is now gone. The tight end, who he spent much of the offseason hoping to make a weapon in the offense was sidelined for the season with very little time before the start of the year. From this, I'd say we'd have a hard time finding any OC that could put up respectable numbers on a consistent basis last year.
You should expect some improvement in a second year, and despite what the scoreboard may have indicated at times, I would argue that we did . The offense did look like a middle school offense for stretches at a time, but it also looked really good for stretches. Correct if I'm wrong, but I believe I've heard that something like 90 percent of our points scored this year were scored by freshman, redshirt freshman, and Michael Brewer this year-all guys who have never had an offensive coordinator other than SL here at Tech. The guys that he has had time to coach and develop are the ones who are producing, and despite their relative inexperience, on an individual basis, there was anywhere from decent to great production from his guys. Top teams all over the country play freshman, and freshman all over the country make plays, but I cannot think of many teams that have asked for this percentage of production from young, inexperienced guys and had better luck than us. The key is that for every talented freshman quarterback you see, he usually has an experienced receiver or running back he can rely on. I don't think that's the case for our talented freshman/first year starters. They have other talented freshman/first year starters, who still make boneheaded plays from time to time as their supporting cast.
The loss of 3 primary running backs was unfortunate but we still had the #1 guy on the depth chart there from the beginnig of the season.
This I think was more a courtesy nod to JC than anything else. Trey was still injured, and starting a true freshman over JC in a game against W&M would have been a bit of a slap in the face to a rising junior. I know, coaches are in the business of playing their best guys, but I think Loeffler did that without stepping on any toes. JC started, sure, but Shai and Marshawn got ample playing time that day, and were listed as co-starters for OSU (just one game against a creampuff opponent into their careers).
We haven't finished better than 83rd in points per game since he took over
I know we haven't exactly looked like Oregon since SL took over, but it's hard to pretend we did before he came either. You have to go back to 2010 to find a Virginia Tech team that finished above 50th in the country in total offense-an expectation I've seen a good number of people on this board say they'd like to see SL meet next year if he stays. The thing about that 2010 team is that they scored 10.4 ppg more than we do currently, and they had a superhero at QB, the WR record holders from this school, and a stable of dominant running backs. The 2011 team that was an at-large BCS bowl team scored 4.6 ppg more than we do currently. The point differential between some really good teams filled with some of our most beloved hokies and our current team is not monumental. I honestly and truly believe that with another year to develop the talent that he has, recruit more talent, and retain an offensive line coach, this offense can score, on average, one more TD per game next year. A ridiculous number of injuries and heavy reliance on youth this year, combined with the growing pains of a new system/lack of talent last year have hamstringed the performance of this offense considerably the past two seasons.
I know that injuries, bonehead plays, and WTF games happen every single year, and I am not predicting that this team will win as many games as the 2010 and 2011 squads did next year, but at some point, you've got to think that all of the circumstances SL inherited have to have affected his performance somewhat. I think next year sees improvement on the offensive side of the ball, and I think the year after that is when we start to look like an offense should.
Question for people calling for major staff changes: new HC, OC or OL/RB coach or some combo of that. What are your expectations for next 2-4 years if those changes happen, because there will be major struggles for a few seasons while another new system is emplaced. I'm not saying changes are not needed for long term success but I don't think a change will suddenly, get the team 10 wins next season or the one after.
News flash we play in the worst division of any P5 conference if we make changes at worst we will probably be as bad as we are now. At the minimum we need a new OC and agreed he should be able to pick his own staff. There should also be someone other than Frank with ST oversight.
While your overrall point remains, I'm pretty sure that statement has been debunked
Just because you have a few teams with 8-9 wins doesn't make it untrue. Which P5 conference is worse? Big 10 west maybe, but they have Wisconsin over anyone in our division IMO.
This comment, while a couple weeks old says there are a couple worse, a comment right below it shows a source that also says the Coastal isn't the worst... I have no idea where they got the info or I'd get an updated one
+1 for the stats, but willing to bet with us losing to the atlantic divisions worst team that the coastal would be worse now. The atlantic also has a playoff contender and we have GT who while playing better is an average team at best, but because they get to beat up on the rest of the division look good.
They also beat up on Georgia just sayin
sEC East?
Good God, this is the single most dangerous thought in college football. When it comes to sports programs, it can always get worse.
We just lost to WF who was winless in a bad conference and scored 0 points in regulation...it can't get worse.
We're playing for bowl eligibility tonight and beat OSU this year. Case in point: Cal. They fired Jeff Tedford after a few mediocre seasons (usually in the 5-7 wins range) and hired Sonny Dykes to re-energize the program. They won 1 game last year and are now back to the pinnacle of their success.... at 5 wins, and just got absolutely crushed by Stanford. Again, it can always, always, always, 100% of the time, get worse.
You're arguing a hypothetical that can't be proven unless it actually happens. Considering how long it had been since we were scoreless in regulation it is a much easier argument to make saying we can't get worse. OSU would beat us by 30 if we played them tonight and we play in a conference where an awful GT team is going to win it.
Here is another case in point: FSU. Fired an even more legendary coach and won BCS games, national titles and will be in the playoffs this year.
Yep, FSU.... with the talent, money, and recruiting profile to be successful with relative ease.
Your whole point is that it can't get worse. I'm telling you it can. Not that it necessarily will (I believe that regardless of his job security, Loeffler has set up the offense to be much better next year than it is this year. If he is fired, the next guy is going to have a significantly easier job of it than Lefty did). But, you can't just assume that new will automatically = better. A lot has changed since we beat OSU, and darn near all of it was out of Loeffler's control.
I can assume that a new OC will be better. There is no argument you can make that will justify how poorly our offense has performed. Do we have 4-5 star talent across the board? absolutely not, but you can't tell me some of those directional schools that are ranked ahead of us in offense wouldn't kill for the talent we have. SL has tried fitting square pegs into round holes instead of adapting his scheme to fit the personnel we have, which is the exact same reason he got fired at AU.
Our own offense would look pretty dang good against those directional schools' schedules.
He ran the system the HC wanted him to run at Auburn. I think Lefty's problem is more the exact opposite of this. Instead of establishing the identity and sticking with it, he is constantly adapting the scheme to fit the players to try to scrape out a win. I don't think we have even seen the offense Lefty wants to run yet.
Not to mention the fact that the new HC was HC In Waiting, for 3 years prior to Bowden being forced out, so he wasn't new to the program & bringing in a new system. Even the with all of the 4 & 5 star talent that FSU was bringing in, it took a couple years to win the ACC.
We still have a bowl game as a possibility. It can get worse.
Because we have an elite defense. With any kind of pulse shown from our offense this year, we clinch a bowl game a while ago. Our defense has put a shitty offense in a position to win every single game other than Miami this season, and they're batting around .500 because of how inept we are. All those 1 score games from a team that fields an offense as bad as ours is painful, because we really are just a somewhat competent offense away from legitimately winning the Coastal this year. But the problem is, the offense is absolutely putrid, has regressed as the season progressed, and unless the OL has an epiphany in the offseason, it'll be more of the same next year.
I think you are forgetting the ECU and BC games. In both of those, the loss ultimately came down on the defense for giving up the late big play.
Things are rarely as black and white as people make it out to be.
Well let's see here, 3 season ending injuries to RBs, another RB that has missed several games to injury, one season ender to a TE, another TE that missed time because of injury, a key receiver who missed several games due to personal reasons and hasn't been the same since returning to the team, and I'm not even going to start on the injuries to the OL that started when we lost 2 senior starters before the season even started.
So yes, we have regressed, but when you look a little deeper than the water cooler banter about how everyone in the office knows exactly how to fix the offense , you find that there are reasons that we have regressed. I cannot remember a team having the number of injuries (on both sides of the ball) and being as young as we are this year and still making a bowl.
We all knew that our starters would be good this year, but that we lacked depth, that injuries could make this a miserable year. Well, we got the injuries, and we lost some games that we shouldn't have. But if, at the beginning of the year, you had told me of all of the injuries we would have I wouldn't have believed that we would beat two ranked teams on the road and be going to a bowl. I think the coaches did a very good job all things considered.
No one I've seen has said we'll automatically be a 10-win team next year. It's going to take time, but rather sooner than later. Do you really want to see this offense limp around for another 5 years? Because I sure don't. Changes are coming whether we like it or not. There's no way you keep saying, "next year, yeah we're set." We don't even have a definite starting QB going into next year! Beamer has been on the record as saying if we didn't have an awesome QB ready to go, he'd think about retirement. I'd argue this season has shown you don't have a guy ready to step in and lead this team behind center.
I think win or lose tonight some changes have to be made somewhere.. you have to look at the top down and decide who stays and who goes.
Obviously if Beamer goes it will be a major staff overhaul when the new coach comes in, if Beamer stays a shake up on the offensive staff has to occur, they just have not shown any improvement as a team on that side of the ball. I just don't see Lefty keeping his job, but if VT feels confident that Lefty is the man for the job then some of the position coaches need to go, give Lefty 'his guys' to help him get his offense going... but outside of scoring 80 points on LOLUVA tonight I think the WF game may be the final strike against Lefty
With Beamer in his twilight, it makes no sense to get rid of Loeffler. If you do, you will have a hard time attracting a quality OC, since that OC knows Beamer is on limited time. No decent OC is going to come into a situation that is inherently unstable and on limited time. My read: either Beamer and Loeffler stay together, or Beamer and Loeffler leave together.
Not to mention you've just proven to him that he'll have 2 years tops, even if Beamer stays through his contract, to completely rebuild the offense (although it's in a much better spot now talent-wise than it was when Lefty took over). So let's see: struggling offense in need of a major overhaul up front, aging head coach, and an administration that just canned the last guy dealing with the same issues after 2 seasons and 1 recruiting class. That's the exact opposite of a "good" job. That's a job you stay away from unless you just got canned by Florida.
Or a job you take if you have confidence in yourself and your system and you know there will be a HC'ing position open in the very near term.
Just curious how did it work out for SL's successor at Auburn?
Your Auburn reference is no good. Gus was the OC pre-Scot. So when he came back, it was all his recruits.
Your other reference concerning FSU is a long shot as well. I would say the chances of replacing a good coach on hard times and having the next bring you to the promise land are few and far between. Meaning not likely. Happened for FSU, but Fisher was already in the mix, and had something to do with the players and what not. A new HC at VT would have no background and would struggle for a few years.
+1 For the comment. Fellow Hokies we are not FSU. Virginia is not Florida (Football talent wise), and most importantly, we do not have an OC designated as "HC in waiting" who has been building depth with his recruits for two years before becoming the new HC.
It worked out great, considering he was the guy who recruited and coached those kids to a NC, and then got another great JUCO QB to run his system again (while the QB Lefty had to compliment his 1,000 yard rusher who got 6+ ypc is now a backup safety).
Glad someone else pointed this out too.
So many excuses rather than anyone being held accountable. Sounds right for VT offense defenders.
Perhaps instead of taking shots at those arguing against changes, it would be more constructive to the debate if you:
1) List some candidates for the OC or HC position
2) Explain where the money will come from
3) What kind of offense the new coach or coaches will bring
4) What other changes should be made to the program
5) Bud Foster's likely reaction if we do make said changes to the staff.
Just dont get negative for no purpose. You can always catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Good day to you.
1) the list would be very long if it just has to be an improvement from SL
2) SL's contract is up so it has to be renewed and we'd be paying his full salary now instead of auburn paying half
3) one that scores points against WF in regulation
4) OC, RB, ST coaches
5) if it's changes that put more points on the scoreboard and doesn't force the defense to win the game every week i'm sure he'd be thrilled.
There is a big difference between being negative and being realistic about our current situation. Where did the money come from to hire Buzz Williams when we already have money owed to Greenberg and now to Johnson? Whit understand it takes money to make money.
Fail on being constructive and using valid points.
I will give you cred for saying the same thing multiple ways though.
I have to give him credit for referencing the Buzz Williams hire. The basketball program was in probably the worst downward spiral I've seen. Kids were leaving the program, we weren't getting anything that resembled ACC talent, and the coaching staff got canned after just a couple of seasons.
However, we managed to get probably the best hire of the season under this limited budget of ours. It's pretty simple, money talks, and if anything I feel like Whit understands that in the end this is a business. He's willing to pony up because he realizes if the product improves, the money will follow. Donations and the like are down because the product isn't very good, nobody wants to pay top dollar to see us whip up on cupcakes every year. Whit spent big on a sport that has traditionally been an afterthought. What makes you think he won't be able to bring in someone with an even stronger pedigree for our football program, which actually has some sort of history and tradition?
Buzz came here with absolutely nothing in the cupboard and is starting to bring in quality players (and yes, I understand turning a basketball program around can be a quicker process than football due to numbers). Turnarounds are possible under a different regime...
In the end, I think Beamer and Loeffler will get another year, they deserve more than 2 seasons to clean this up. However, I imagine Whit will make it very clear that there needs to be improvement from all aspects of the program. I like to think that Beamer can fix this thing, but he also let it get to this point as well.
Something notable about Whit mercifully pulling the trigger to end Johnson's era of gloom in basketball, the revenue turnaround was immediate. Season ticket sales in 2013 for VT basketball - approx. 3400. Season ticket sales for 2014 - approx. 5100. That was accomplished prior to the first tipoff. Depending on the tickets sold, we already have banked almost a million more dollars ink revenue than last season from ticket sales.
Whit will make the prudent decision. That thankfully has nothing to do with fan sentimentality, but it will be the best decision long term for the program. He did it in basketball, he'll do it in football.
In Whit we trust!
Toxic , muted.
Rprt pls.
With no inside info to go on, I would think Frank will stay and Scot, and maybe others, will not. With this many coaches, odds favor at least some minimal turnover every year.
I can see the logic for keeping Loeffler. The OLs and QBs brought in under Loeffler and his staff, by far the weakest positions on the O, for the most part haven't played. The young RB's looked great and then got hurt. The young WRs are very good receiving but they can't block very well yet...that should come in time. People talked a lot about the use of three TE's as a major feature of the O and we haven't had three healthy TE's all year. We brought Loeffler in to install a modern passing game and maintain a power running game. He has in fact installed a modern passing game. On the other hand, it is hard to run effectively without better linemen and your best running backs injured. The biggest questions in my mind have been some of the play calls and sticking with Brewer. It is hard to imagine why Brewer is still the starter, but as a fan I don't get to see all the reasoning behind it.
If Loeffler leaves it may be because of his personality as much as anything. Frank, passed his prime or not, is everyone's favorite uncle or Grandpa. Bud is a badass, whose defense reflects his personality. But Scot comes across as aloof...the guy behind the glass that never says very much. That is a hard sell when the product isn't very good.
If Whit can bring in a hot name for OC, I think that will keep the natives calm enough for Frank to hang around a bit longer. But if everything stays intact, appropriate or not, Whit will need some high quality earplugs.
Oh, and beat UVA!
A week ago I wanted Frank to go. That was an emotional reaction to a loss I thought we didn't deserve.
Every result that is directly within Frank's control over the last few years, I think he's done a good job of. We needed better WR play, Moorehead was hired and he's coaching them up. We needed better OL play, we got a proven guy who left after 1 year - we replaced him with an assistant from Texas. We needed to rejuvinate the offense - we've had some pretty impressive offensive showings this year.
We've had some excruciating losses this year, but we've also beaten a top 10 and used-to-be top 20 football team too. We're young, we're injured, our QB has been inconsistent. Recruiting is up, we've made some good position moves :Bucky to TE, Teller to OL.
We have to let this play out.
Recruiting is up? In the deepest two years VA has had talent wise we've maintained our average. In a year where it was said we needed to land 3-5 DEs we have 1 on board currently.
Agree on the two position moves both of those may not have happened in the past.
Isaiah Ford, Cam Phillips, Shai, Marshawn - those are a few I am thinking of offensively where we've been lacking in the years prior. Those were big gets.
The deepest two years VA has had talent-wise? What do you base that off of? What is our average? If you're basing it off rivals rankings - TOTAL players plays a significant factor in that rating, if I am not mistaken.
How about our average for four star players? Or four star offensive players?
Trevon Hill 4 star, 12th in VA
Darius Fullwood 3 star, 9th in MD
Xavier Burke (listed as tight end but can also play defense).
That looks like 3 to me with 2 more elite prospects on the board.
It should stay put. Lot of moving parts, doesn't take a genius to see the cards that were dealt and potential for the future. Change the coaches and you are just asking to futz up the next few years (at minimum).
I hear a lot of talk about the donor base, however I think some of these comments that the whole fan base wants Beamer out is a bit exaggerated. A lot of Hokies I know (I'm in DC area, so there are a lot) agree that Beamer should at minimum get Battle at Bristol. They agree that it's brutal to watch, but that they will continue to support.
The only way I would support a change at OC is if they hired someone to come in, learn the ropes and be next in line for HC. However, if they did that, the new OC should pick all his own staff. Even if it means letting Moorehead go. You can't just mix it up cause it's convenient to others.
From all those 10 year win seasons to well below 500 in the weakest power 5 conference ( while mostly avoiding Clemson and FSU) the last 3 years. Frank is responsible for both. We will never have another in like we had with him and we should be forever grateful and I think will be unless he makes a mess out of his exit. It is also clear we will never get back there under him. He whiffed on the last OC hire and we get NONE of the big boys from 757 or Richmond anymore. If any SEC school, FSU, OSU or Clemson offers them they are gone. It wasn't like that 6-8 years ago. Even UVa is getting them.
Time for a graceful exit and all the well deserved accolades. He has earned it but everything comes to and end. If no changes are made it will be a massacre at Bristol because I can assure you UT is headed the right direction.
Can't say he totally Whiffed on Scot. We don't know the deal and background there. We know that they interviewed a few others, but don't know why we didn't get them.
Could have been about the money, which Beamer cant be managing.
You are absolutely right, the offense WILL look better next year. There is no way it could look worse, especially not with the returning talent we have at the skill positions. Whether or not the offense improves isn't the deciding factor on whether or not we should hire a new OC. The question is two fold.
1) Is it possible for a new OC to usher in greater offensive improvements over the next few years than Loeffler?
2) If so, is Tech more or less likely to hire someone who can accomplish more than Loeffler?
The first question is the easy one. I think we
canshould all agree that Loeffler isn't the best OC in the entire country. He may not be as bad as the results show right now (because of the injuries, lack of talent, new offensive line coach, etc), but there appear to be at least a few OC's that could do a better job at getting the ball in the endzone than Loeffler. For a lot of fans, this is as far as their "do we fire Loeffler?" thought process goes. The second question is the one that a lot of people don't ask, and it's the more complicated of the two. You can break it down into two parts.Do you trust Whit/Frank to identify a better OC than Loeffler?
This is a complicated question. First of all, we don't REALLY know how bad (or good) Loeffler is as an OC. He has fielded some fairly ugly offenses, no doubt. However let's not pretend he was working with the athletes that Oregon, Alabama, or even LSU have. Factor in the injuries, lack of talent due to poor recruiting, and the extreme difference in skill sets for his QBs in year one and year two. Loeffler could easily make an argument that over the past two years, no OC in the country has been dealt a worse hand.
But even if you do think Loeffler is terrible... What are the odds of Frank hiring a better one? Frank has struggled to field
greatgoodaverage offensive teams through the years, and only appears to do so when he has an NFL quality mobile quarterback. From Ricky Bustle to Stinespring, to Mike Ocain, now Loeffler... who is really at fault here? Sure Loeffler may have driven the offense into a ditch, but so did the last few OC's. Why does Frank keep handing the keys to such awful drivers? Can you reasonably expect the next guy Frank hires to be the one that keeps the offense on the road?Is Blacksburg a desirable enough location to attract an elite offensive coordinator, even if Whit/Frank can find one?
So let's say that Frank and Whit find a guy, and he's the one. Can they get him? There is uncertainty about how long Frank will stay at Tech. It'll probably take at least one season to see this offense turn into a top unit regardless of OC. Does Frank have that long? Could he survive another year as the head coach of a bad offense, considering how many fans are calling for his head now? A new OC would have to at least consider the possibility that he could lose his job after just a year if Frank gets forced out. Also, let's talk about the talent that's returning next year. If I was a sought after OC and a college wanted to me to come work for them, but they just had one of the worst offensive lines in over a decade, their top three running backs all spent more time in the training room than on the field, two of the top three tight ends did the same, and nobody knows who the starting QB will be next year (or how good they'll be)... I might pass. Doesn't exactly sound like a slam dunk.
Of course, there are plenty of reasons to come to Tech as an OC too. For one, you'll have the advantage of working with one of the top defenses every year. Better field position = more points. And while the offense has been horrible this year, that could be a positive for a hot shot OC looking to "Buy low, sell high". Any OC that come into Blacksburg and fielded a top-25 offense would almost immediately be considered one of the hottest coaches in the country, if only because of the historical unlikeliness of that happening. Turning around a unit is the best way to launch a career. Plus, Whit just made one of the biggest hiring splashes in the country when he stole Buzz away from Marquette, selling him on the idea of trying to turn around a basketball program that was in even worse shape than our offensive unit is. Why wouldn't he be able to do the same with the football program?
Regardless, the result of the UVA game shouldn't affect the answer in either direction.
If you fire Loeffler, who do you put in charge of finding his replacement? Beamer? He's already struck out on his last 3 hand picked choices for OC, being Stiney, O'Cain, and Loeffler. Do you really trust a guy that has that kind of hiring resume to make a decision with a team in as dire need of someone good as we are right now? So if not, do you leave it up to Whit? But if you do that, then what kind of a message does that send that the head coach isn't in charge of hiring out his own staff? And what if you bring in a guy and his philosophy and Beamer's don't mesh? What then? Who does the OC report to if the AD was the one that hired him? You do something like this and you completely undermine the authority of the guy in charge. But what can you do if you don't trust the hiring skills of the guy in charge?
This is the conundrum under which I say there is only one change to be made this year if a change is to be made. Either announce Frank's retirement, and clean house offensively, bringing in an offensive guru to work with Bud (either as head coach or as Bud's OC) and never look back, or retain everyone for at least one more year. There is no other choice that works out well in our favor going forward. None. Any change of OC that does not coincide with a change in head coach right now very likely ends up doing far more harm than good.
o'cain wasn't an OC he was just given the play calling duties. I think the question you are raising is the question that determines how much longer Frank is the HC himself.
I think you can easily constrain the argument before answering all those hypotheticals. Beamer will not look for the best OC available (they all work for offense first programs). He will not look for an OC that specializes in any modern offense scheme like the spread. He is convinced his way is best, thus he will look for an OC that runs an offense like, say, Stanford or Wisconsin. And because he lacks his own analytical approach for screening candidates, he'll ask his coaching colleagues what they think. Either that or he'll promote from within, hire a crony like Fridge, or a former player.
It's pretty standard in any field to ask for (and follow up on) references for a six figure a year job. I don't agree that asking the opinion of previous employers/coworkers of a potential candidate in any way points to Beamer "lacking his own analytical approach for screening candidates".
That seems like QUITE the leap.
Of course that doesn't point to it. Reading his books and observing him since '87 points to it.
I'm at a bit of an advantage in these kinds of observations due to what I do for a living. Beamer is simply not an analytical thinker. He's a social, relational thinker. He might not know the statistics of an OC, but he knows what the people he trusts thinks of him. He's also very inwardly focused, hence the former coaching buddies and former players who litter his staff. But the main thing about him is - by his own words - he fears change. And when the external environment evolves, he generally won't change until he absolutely has to.
FWIW, my own opinion is either a complete overhaul or keep everything exactly as it is. Plugging in another OC right now seems like a long shot to be effective. UNLESS, that is, we can find a Jimbo Fisher type coordinator who is definitely a heavy contender to succeed Frank.
I think Bud is probably our Jimbo Fisher, tho.
Bringing in one new guy and saying, "Here, make this work where the guy before you couldn't" is wishful thinking and sets us back. While after Wake a lot of people are writing off the offense as awful, I saw enough early in the season to still have some faith in what Lefty is trying to build here. I think the way our healthy offense played against OSU would have been able to beat just about anyone in the country. I also think that game was the most Scot Loeffler Approved game plan we've seen in two years. I still, post-Wake, believe that Scot has the potential to be the perfect complement to Foster.
But I'd also support a change of head coach and all the coaching changes that would accompany it, simply because that time is drawing near. Beamer's career is in its twilight regardless of whether or not he rights the ship one more time. We know change is coming, and now is as good a time as any. We can't be afraid to embrace life after Beamer, because we're guaranteed to have to live it at some point.
But no, just swapping Lefty for another dude...that decision I can't say I see much upside to. All or nothing, and I'm actually okay with either decision.
+1 for all of this.
Many great points. I think we definitely need a complete staff overhaul. I just don't think it happens now. I'm not ready to write off Beamer and I don't think changing the OC makes any sense, considering where our head coach is in his career. Like it or not, I fully expect a Charlie Foxtrot for a while when Beamer is gone. I haven't seen enough detriment to personally feel he needs to go yet. I say give this staff another year to see what happens.
I don't have the answer. But I'm not ready to fire Beamer and any other changes make little sense to me right now. Just my $0.02.
This discussion should take place after the game today not before
No way this game defines Beamer's success this year. We've been bad as a unit for most of this year so even if we win tonight, this doesn't mean squat going forward for Beamer's resume at Tech. Yay, 22 bowls in a row. The last three have been so far out of the BCS they might as well not even exist.
Agreed, this will not define success this year. But, to play devil's advocate:
A win tonight will define success for the weekend, a continued dominance of our in-state rival, and, if this ends up being our worst season on the way to reconstruction, then it means that even when we bottom out at the ass end of the division, we're still bowl eligible. All things worth fighting for for the next eight hours or so.
However, if we lose tonight, then we lose the weekend, lose the rivalry game to a team that is desperate for a win against us, and puts an exclamation point on the complete and utter collapse we've seen over the last few years, a culmination of the ineptitude that got us here.
It would be sad to see this group of players paying for the failures of the past, but if tonight marks the end of my football season, then I'm sure I'll cope...somehow...
Getting ready to head to B'burg and bar crawl until kickoff. I get on here and read a lot and sometimes post a thought or two. I am probably a little older than some of you and thus have seen VT at less fortuitous times. I have really enjoyed the past 20yrs although I would have liked to have seen more bowl wins. There was a VT before Beamer and there will be VT after he departs. Last week as I left the Wake game I listened to a crowd of folks proclaim they were letting their tickets go, were dropping donations to Hokie Club, etc... I cannot remember a time in my following of VT that the fan base has been this disgruntled. I will also point out that many of these "diehards" had never been to VT prior to 1999. Anyway, I'm still going to go stand and yell in the cold to root for VT. There are issues in our program and I'm not the one to fix them, but I do wish that folks are allowed to express their views on recruiting/coaching/attendance, etc...without being called names or made to feel they are less loyal to the team. This is just an Internet site for fans to vent, bitch, tease, or gossip, there is NO right or wrong post. Now, where did I put my bourbon? Go Hokies!
The scenario with the greatest chance of success, I think, would be for CFB to step down after tonight's game, with Bud assuming the HC role with a multi-year contract. This move has several advantages:
1) we keep Bud, who may not stick around without Beams and passed over for the HC job (despite ties to the NRV)
2) there's really nobody I trust more than Bud to identify an OC to complement his defense
3) there is at least some continuity with recruits
Bud could bring in a top notch OC, and bring a fire and competitiveness at the HC role that we haven't had for a while. Plus, if you believe in the concept of 'earning' things in college football, he has earned a shot.
Bringing in an outside HC is a gamble, whereas Bud has plenty of upside with less risk. I don't think we will ever return to competitiveness with Beamer at HC and Loeffler at OC.
EDIT: The outcome of tonight's game has nothing to do with whether Beamer should stay.
I can agree with this. How many games have been lost due to player error and not play calling/scheming? Brewer doesn't throw either the pick six or the last int in the GT game we win that. Illegal motion not called against Pitt where ford catches the td. Ford makes the block on the rb against wake and jc Coleman takes it the distance. Those three plays right there could give us three wins leaving us looking to get win number 9 against UVA and going for a potential 10th win in the bowl game. Those plays weren't schemeing errors those were player errors. If we are looking at 8 wins (and that's not including a defensive stand against bc, motuapouaka misses bc qb on long score). Everyone here is singing a different tune. Not saying everyone would love the offense that we still have but I think everyone would be more willing to let Loefler have another year or two to get his offense set instead of him leaving.
Either way I have no say in the decision. If we can't move the ball next year tyen I think sl is seriously in doubt as the OC. And until CFB loses confidence in CSL then he's not going anywhere. Whit may have a serious discussion about it with CFB and CSL but I don't think there is change at OC unless Beamer says so.
If we chose to replace any staff members, we're competing with Florida and Michigan this year, two teams that have significantly deeper pockets and more tradition than Virginia Tech.
If we chose to replace just Lefty, we're going to need to go with an up-and-comer (Mid-major OC/HC or a current FBS OL/QB coach). I don't think anyone is going to make a lateral move for a few years.
So your logic is because two major programs are struggling for the past couple years we need to wait another year and hope another two other programs don't have bad years? How about we dictate our own pace and let other teams find their guys how they want. Just seems a little wishy washy for a reason to not fire a guy, simply because other teams have to get theirs.
Not necessarily that we should wait, but it's something to consider. In the event we make a staff change, our athletic department needs to have a plan. I am not willing to trade our current staff for a Derek Dooley equivalent (even if we lose this game tonight). I would be open to trading our staff for a James Franklin level hire.
I realize that I am significantly simplifying the situation. Just suggesting that the job market and the potential candidates must be considered. I trust Whit to take all things into account and make a good decision.
There will always be a big boy looking for a new coach. Last year it was Texas and Penn St. The year before that, Auburn. Before that, Ohio St... Now its Florida and Michigan. There will be more the next year.
I think it is nicker???
Just got home from the game. Scot did enough to sooth my savage beast somewhat. A bowl win will put it to sleep for another year. 434 yds offense against a top 10 defense. Well balanced run and thrown. There were actually a lot of plays that were the correct call that we didn't quite execute properly.
As far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out on Loeffler. There are still some real head-scratching play calls! Should he be retained, we need some absolutely tangible improvement next year. I think a Top-50 offense would be a fair benchmark. But I think we need to stick with Searels (to build an OLine system and depth) and definitely retain Moorehead. Stiney is doing just fine in his element. Other than that, I'm totally fine with maintaining the status quo.
whit is going to have to look at the pros and cons of the staff throughout the entirety of the season. the uva win was great but you can't forget the embarrassing wake loss as well as how bad the offense has been. I don't think Beamer will be gone but loeffler is clearly on the hot seat and deserves to be.
The fella in your avitar and described in your signature once lost to JMU. And I think we all feel a certain way about him. Just sayin'....it's probably not great to use a loss to Wake as a reason to make major personnel moves. Also probably not a good idea to assume a UVA win saved anybody a job if there were already thoughts of going in the opposite direction.
Well he also led us to the ACC championship, so I don't think it's fair to compare the jmu loss to this. Even ignoring the Wake anomaly our season has been pretty poor across the board save Ohio State, something that Tyrod never had to experience.
What would this team's record have been this year with Tyrod leading the troops? I think it would be hard to argue that he could have changed all the L's to W's except one... I know it's not a good argument for the offensive coaching since we were all ready to strangle Stiney during Tyrod's time; but, it's fun to imagine.
I don't think it's fair to compare Tyrod Taylor's involvement to the JMU loss and Scot Loeffler's involvement to the Wake loss
Tyrod Taylor was a player who was 'coached' into a 'system' and he did everything he could to win games but he couldn't do everything by himself all the time. He shouldn't have had to but that was the reality.
Scot Loeffler is the Coach responsible for putting players in position to win. Could that JMU loss be placed on Stinesprings shoulders? Yes, probably. Could you then compare the JMU loss (due to Stinespring's shortcomings) to the Wake loss?
yes, probably...I still think the Wake loss was worse...and I definitely wouldn't put the blame on Tyrod Taylor
The Wake game can pretty easily be blamed on poor coaching.
that's also why I mentioned the entire season should be taken into account I was more pointing out both highs and lows the team had and that no one loss or win should define success or failure
A letdown loss 5 days after an even bigger letdown loss in a season where we ran the table in ACC play en route to the conference title and an Orange Bowl bid is a lot different than getting shut out by the worst team in the ACC with bowl eligibility on the line a full week after what should have been a momentum building win in a season where offensive issues defined our lack of success.
The point was not to let one game define anything. There is a huge difference. But, in no way whatsoever is a loss to JMU better than a loss to Wake...ever...
Better? No
More understandable given context? Yes
Nope, nope, nope. I think you have self-medicated yourself by over-rationalizing how an ACC championship team can lose to an FCS school...AT HOME. I will never understand it unless there is proof that those space jam aliens returned to the home locker room of Lane Stadium.
Chaaaaaaaange?
An inconsistent QB.
4th string RB starting.
An OLine that doesn't have many starts together. At all. People pushed into roles.
Lots, and lots of Freshmen.
How many season ending injuries?
1 year contract for Loefler.
I don't see us getting Shai or Juice back next year though.
As long as JC can keep eating his wheaties and performing like he is right now and Edmund's comes back...and wright? I think well be ok there I'm more concerned with the oline still
Not sure how you've come the this conclusion.
Shai has had his second ACL tear, later in the year than before, and we already saw that the "fast" rehab was not enough. Juice tore his later and will probably be out through the summer. It sucks big time, but these guys need more complete rehab. Maybe by late in the year, but I hope they don't get forced into duty too quickly.
If Edmunds can stay healthy and JC keeps up his recent performance, we'll be OK with McClease coming in and McMillian and Reid coming off redshirts. With Wright and Caleb (hopefully) still in the mix, it's not like the cupboard is bare. I'd love to have Shai and Juice back, but I'd rather have them back at absolutely 100% before they even attempt to get on the field.
Yup, with their injury history, I'd almost expect a medical redshirt on both for the 2015 season. By the time we'd get either back and fully 100%, the season will be far enough along that a med RS might be in their best interests.
The first season back from ACL surgery will ALWAYS result in performance less than predicted by the player & coaches. Every time, the player is eager to get back & 'thinks' he is 100%, when in reality he is more like 75%, tops.
Because of that, I don't expect any contribution from either Shai or Williams next year. They might as well redshirt, but if they don't, you can guarantee they won't help us more than a negligible amount. Despite the enthusiasm over Coleman the last two games & the memory of Edmunds from part of last season, I don't think we'll be any better at RB next year than we were this season. Yes, we've got heralded recruits coming in next year. Just like we had heralded recruits coming in this year. Until I see the production on the field that proves otherwise, I will expect next season to be similar to this season for our corps of RBs.
I agree, I think both Williams and Shai are going to medical redshirt next year. The tears are late enough in the season that if you figure a year for rehab after the surgery is week 11 of the season? I haven't heard that either player has even had the surgery YET!
IIRC Shai already had surgery (someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember that). Haven't heard about Juice, but it's been a while so I imagine the swelling has gone down enough for them to operate. That was all the doctors were waiting on.
Very possible that I just missed the announcement. Great if Shai has already had the surgery, now comes the recovery. Take his time and do it right.
I say stop the Knee-Jerk reaction bull-stuff and let this play out. I see our team being Very dangerous next year. If/when everyone comes back healthy, and with everyone overlooking us, we have the potential of having a great year.
Personally I think that our D-line should give the other teams OC and QB nightmares. Put 20 pounds on Dadi, Ken has been playing like a MAN lately, Maddy comes back, and Marshall and Williams have really be turning it up. Look out!
I was one of the 'fire Lefty' supporters after that Wake game...
I have to give him a huge pat on the back. What a ball game. Im not going to say my opinion has changed fully, but I will say that we could have a legit offense next year.
Go Hokies!
I think I would keep him one more year. I was of the opinion he should be gone until just recently. The UVA game saved his job IMHO. I don't think he's a great coordinator, but he could be good enough. Year 1 with Logan there were NO weapons. Year 2 has been a string of cruel injuries and sweeping youth movement. We saw what he could do vs. tOSU with a healthy roster. I just think trying to start over this soon, with Beams on short time, would be very difficult. This staff recruited these superb freshmen. Let him have another year with hopefully a healthy roster, more experienced playmakers. VT has always been about continuity, another new offensive system may just set us back further.
The biggest problem with next years team will again be OL, we lose 2 more starters. If the OL performs, we have a chance to be very good.
QB-Brewer Motley
RB-JCC, trey, shai, marshawn
WR-Phillips ford Stanford
TE-bucky Malleck
OL-Teller, Conte, JGlock
Defense returns everybody but chase and the safeties. Reavis and fisher and Motuapaka ready to step in.
Stroman Newsome back at specialist.
Got a chance.......
Don't forget about Kalvin Cline at TE. I'd love to see what we could do with all three healthy at once, in a rhythm. As for Safety, though we'll be losing a good deal of experience, I think we'll be gaining physicality.
Loeffler can come back on the condition that he's only allowed to call one bubble screen and one jet sweep per game.
For either: unless it goes for 10+ yds. Then he can continue to call it until it fails to gain 7.
I don't like Loeffler and I don't think he makes great decisions play calling. That being said there are a lot of execution problems on the O-line, a lot of injuries, and a lot of freshman (same thing everyone says, I know). I think that if the O-line can tighten up and get on track, it'll take away the sting of everything else and it all may come together. I'd say give it one more year to see what happens.
FB leaves on his own, most likely after 2016, he's earned this much. Jumping off the bandwagon now because of a slump just shows your true colors. I trust Whit to make the right calls to get everything back on track from his end. It's all going to be ok, literally nobody is going to die over this...
Not picking on you, but I'm genuinely curious: why do a lot of fans think FB leaves after 2016? Is it just because of Bristol & ND? Because he'll be 70?
2016 feels like a year just far enough in the future for the Beamer-as-God fan to accept he should leave but just soon enough to admit the program really needs a shake-up.
I think it's a few things:
1. Bristol
2. Good schedule
3. Fourth year under the coaching overhaul he did after 2012 so those first recruits will be seniors and have been through "the system" (whatever it may be) with hopefully some continuity (Grimes aside)
Really, I think point #3 is the most crucial one. I don't see Beamer shaking up the staff again unless someone forces him to by leaving. He hates change and he will tell Whit exactly that when this year is done. He wants to see the 2012 overhaul be the last one he has to do, and hopefully he did it well enough to get back to where we all want to be in terms of success. If not, at least I think by that point the program will remain in a strong enough place that we will carry on fine.