In some ways, Scot Loeffler has been evaluating 2016 quarterback Joshua Jackson of Michigan's Saline HS since he was a toddler.
Jackson says the pair first met when he was just a baby up in Ann Arbor, but have no fear; this is no story of college scouting gone to an insane extreme.
"My dad was running backs coach at Michigan for 23 years, including when Coach Loeffler was there, so he's known me since I was a baby," Jackson said.
Fred Jackson has indeed been a fixture at the school, serving as RBs coach since 1992 before stepping aside once Jim Harbaugh took over the program, so it makes perfect sense that Loeffler would get an introduction to the younger Jackson.
Since then, the pair has stayed in touch over the years, especially as it became clear that Jackson was gravitating toward the very position that brought Loeffler so much success at Michigan.
"When I was in elementary school and middle school, he'd come watch me throw and give me some tips," Jackson said. "We've had a good relationship for a while."
But that relationship quickly changed from personal to professional as it became clear that Jackson was developing into a legitimate prospect. The rising senior, who's rated a 3-star recruit by the 247Sports Composite ranking, earned an in-person visit from Loeffler on May 6.
"He came and watched me a throw a bit," Jackson said. "Then he called Coach Beamer about me, and after that, that was when he offered."
Blessed to have received my 16th offer from Virginia Tech!! pic.twitter.com/46R5rDgTZC— Josh Jackson (@joshiejack17) May 6, 2015
For Jackson, the scene surely seemed a bit surreal given his connection to the coach, but it was a welcome feeling just the same.
"I've known Coach Loeffler all my life, so I was just so excited," Jackson said.
Now Jackson has agreed to return the favor and make the long trip down to Blacksburg this coming weekend for his first visit to campus.
While he says he initially weighed a visit to Southwest Virginia on the weekend of June 20, as the coaches said "a bunch of NFL guys will be there" including Logan Thomas, he ultimately decided to move up his trip to match his ideal commitment timeline.
"June is about the time I want to be committing, I maybe even end up committing there," Jackson said.
But that's certainly still contingent on the quality of the visit. Jackson says he wants to "meet the coaches and meet some of the players" and get a better feel for the program.
"I know how great a coach (Coach Loeffler) is...and I know Coach Beamer's been there for a lot of years," Jackson said. "I know they had a slight down year last year, but that happens."
Yet Jackson hardly lacks for interest from other schools across the country as well. He says that he regularly hears from schools that have offered him like Northwestern, West Virginia, Minnesota and Oregon State, as well as ones that haven't, most notably Penn State.
Jackson says the Nittany Lions' decision on extending an offer could easily change the complexion of his recruitment. If they do offer, he'd "probably announce a top five," and likely add State College, Pa to his schedule of visits.
As it stands now, Jackson says the Hokies, Wildcats, Mountaineers and Gophers have all earned visits from him, yet he's not looking to draw out his recruitment unnecessarily.
"Hopefully I can just commit and get it over with," Jackson said.
Jackson admits that part of the reason that all this attention feels a bit overwhelming is because it's seemingly all come at once. While Jackson possesses plenty of athleticism to go with his 6'2", 200-pound frame, he says he wasn't able to showcase it his sophomore year.
"I transferred schools, so I didn't play sophomore year," Jackson said. "Now I think they're seeing that I have a lot of upside."
Jackson is particularly proud of his accuracy, which he says is an emphasis for him when he steps on the field.
"I'm athletic, but I can throw well," Jackson said. "I'm accurate, I only had three interceptions in 14 games last season."
Now he's looking to refine his game for the next level, wherever he ends up heading.
"I'm just trying to get college-ready, working on my footwork and throwing mechanics," Jackson said.
Loeffler certainly has the experience needed to mold a young, raw passer like Jackson, and his reputation as a QB guru, along with the pair's decades-long friendship, should keep the Hokies competitive for his services for the long haul.
"I just want to find a good staff that's going to push me," Jackson said.
Comments
Didn't realize Joshua had switched sports!
With that name, how has he not already committed to Oregon?
Interesting scenario we could end up with regarding our QBs. We have Mikale Washington also possibly interested but I could see one of them switching positions if we get both of them?
I don't think Washington gets an offer if Jackson commits. I think JJ is definitely Lefty's first choice - out of the two at least.
They might offer Mikale as an Athlete and give him his shot at QB with the likelihood he will be moved if he does not look to be a contributor there. Mikale being 6'4" 190 already could be a big bodied WR or devastating safety
WR please God WR. We need height in the post-Bucky era.
Holloway and kumah are both 6'2
Not quite the clutch corner fade weapon height. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have a 6'2" receiver than a 6'0" receiver (all else being equal, obvs) but I wouldn't call a 6'2" receiver particularly tall for his position.
true but they are also WRs now, which seems to be more of the trend we have been going to. Finding guys who have played and excelled at that position.
And thank God. Hopefully the days of the "athlete" receiver are over. But now watch Joel Caleb excel at the position for two years and make us rethink our strategy there.
That's the kind of problem I'd be happy to have.
I'll be honest. If Caleb goes straight HAM as a receiver, I'll actually be a little pissed at AMo for not investing the time to develop him. But we'll wait and see if he ever does anything as a receiver.
Three picks in 14 games? I am IMPRESSED. Not at the stat, but because in watching his highlights, he set his feet on maybe 40% of his passes. This kid can throw on the run with touch as a junior in high school.
My knock is, sometimes he didn't set his feet even when he could have. He looks to have kind of the same "happy feet" in the pocket that Sean Glennon had. But his escapability looks much better than Glennon's.
He looks like a pass-first mobile QB. That might be perfect for Lefty's system. I want this guy.
I had that same thought about his happy feet, but he makes the passes as well. Reminds me of early Tyrod.
This is an idiotic comparison, obviously not in terms of the production I expect, but I see more Joe Montana than Michael Vick, if that makes sense.
EDIT: Just to be clear, I mean MY comparison to Joe Montana is idiotic, not Shoog's comparison to Tyrod.
Seem's a bit harsh...
I just wanted to make it ABUNDANTLY clear I was not saying Joshua Jackson = Joe Montana. I'm okay being self-deprecating to make a point.
Oh - I thought you were insulting the OP you were replying to lol. Carry on!
Its all good.
I'm very comfortable with my idiocy.
Me too apparently!
Me too!
So, you're saying Joshua Jackson is a combination of Joe Montana and Michael Vick, right?
It's like if Joe Montana and Michael Vick had a kid... then over here, Steve Young and Donovan McNabb had a kid... and then those kids had a kid....
Please don't throw Kaitland in here!
He will be the best LB since Joe Montana!
*TE
That was Joe Montania
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think most pocket passers are taught to chop their feet in the pocket to quicken redirection across the field, like THIS guy does
I know this may sound a little far fetched, but I could see this kid starting over the Lawson kid.
After watching both of their films it looks like JJ is reading coverages more than Lawson. Maybe Lawson could be our next All-American TE?
Far-fetched? Perhaps.
But wouldn't be a bad thing if he did. May the best QB win!
This.
We need a QB on roster to legitimately challenge Lawson for the job. Even if Lawson doesn't get beaten out, an open competition will make him that much better.
He certainly looks like he's been playing QB for a long time. He isn't nearly the physical specimen that Lawson is, but he's a little more accurate. Both still need to work on their footwork and delivery, but it's all fixable. I would still place Lawson above him, but I would put him above Washington and around the same ranking as Byrd.
I agree. He won't throw any home run balls, but he's a great at finding the open receiver. Id much rather have a guy like that than one with a big arm and all the attributes but can't put it all together on the field. Plus he's quick but looks for the pass first. Needs to get stronger, but all high schoolers do.
if he comes in a year after Lawson and is able to beat him out it either speaks to loeffler's inability to develop Lawson or the skill of this kid. Personally I don't think he has the same type of arm as Lawson.
true but he did say he wanted to get better with his feet and mechanics. So it's not as if he thinks he's ready to go. He seems to understand that he has areas to improve on and is willing to work on them.
His footwork is a mess, but you could say that about the mechanics of virtually all quarterbacks coming out of HS. I don't see anything that can't be fixed, and fairly quickly.
A toddler QB recruit. Loeffer does start making his connection early. Lets hope it pays off.
Looks like Josh Jackson is also the #1 basketball recruit for 2016!
Oh, the gif possibilities are endless...
Ducks fly together?
quack...quack...quack...quack...QUACK QUACK QUACK QUACK (ok, this isn't very effective on a message board...)
(Semi) Serious question: is there anyone who frequents this site who is still in high school? Do you know of/ever heard of the Mighty Ducks? I'm terrified of the responses...
...i've heard of mallard ducks
Say it aint so VPI! That the mighty ducks were right in the middle of your childhood!
the mallard thing was supposed to be a joke...yes I've heard of the Mighty Ducks
I just cant get it together today...
Loeffler still has a good deal to prove, his recruiting success and efforts not withstanding.
I think we have seen glimpses as well as the unbearable during his tenure. Talent and player familiarity are there for him, so 2015 should be make or break on his future as our OC.
You're right, we've seen the good and the bad. I honestly think it has a lot to do with the fact that he's a relatively young OC and still figuring things out. And I agree with most everybody else on the boards. It's year 3, the pieces are in place, its put up or shut up time.
About the tenth time today I've seen and agreed with this idea.
But it makes me think, what's the threshold? What mark does Lefty need to hit to justify his retention? I have a feeling after this season we're going to have a lot of disagreement about Lefty regardless of how good or bad the offense is. Some people will never be satisfied, and some will be lifetime apologists.
if we aren't in the top 70 in major offensive statistics it's a failure IMO, and that's not asking for much.
and this is pretty conservative. We could still be in the bottom half of all FBS teams and meet your requirements. I think the biggest obstacle to getting there is our OL. Sure the starting 5 figure to be pretty decent, but if one or 2 guys suffer injuries the drop off is pretty steep and we're likely going to end up in a world of hurt. I believe Loeffler deserves a longer grace period than most fans are willing to give him simply because the mess he had to clean up was astronomical. The offensive line, a unit which takes years to build from scratch, was left in absolute disarray prior to the hiring of Loeffler. It didn't help his cause that he had a one-and-done coach for that unit right off the bat.
All that being said, I am expecting to see pretty significant improvement offensively. I did not expect a whole lot in the first couple of years because the deck was stacked heavily against Loeffler. With the talent he's brought in and the time he's had to install his offense he's starting to run out of excuses in my book. If we see little to no improvement in at least 3 offensive categories I think that raises some serious concerns. However, if we have key injuries on the OL that could derail our offensive production in a hurry and I won't be entirely convinced that Loeffler is totally to blame for that. I'm not going to feel comfortable about this offense until we have a serviceable 2-deep in the trenches.
So do we consider an offense in the top 70 to be sufficient signs of success? I don't know. It doesn't sound like a high enough goal. I'd like to be in the top 7 in the ACC and top 60 overall. Even that seems achievable with this team.
I don't necessarily think that's true, but rather we need to be reasonable about our expectations and how we judge his performance. In my mind, you can't reference the last two seasons when judging the upcoming season. That was the installation phase. Things get stupid during that. So we take what happens on the field in 2015 and evaluate it. It doesn't have to be perfect, we just have to see production. And we have to rationally look at things that happen, like a potential OL injury, and evaluate how that affected the offense. Because part of an OCs job is adjusting to unforeseen circumstances.
To me it isn't so much total offense and scoring offense, which can be misleading, but more like YPC, red zone TD%, few to no 3 and outs when holding a one possession lead, etc. Situational stats tell me a lot more about how an offense is functioning than the "big" stats.
This. Totally agree.
There are a lot of variables that go into the successes and failures of the past two seasons. When looking at the last two seasons, our offense wasn't producing because of the mess that was created by a lack of coaching at the offensive line 3-5 years ago.
You can't come in and expect to have extreme change overnight. Sure, there are coaches that have done it, but that was usually at a place where 5* talent is at every position. I think that Grimes did a great job putting us on the right track, and according to everything I hear from other college coaches, Searles is one of the brightest minds at the position.
The proof that our OL is getting better can be seen over the last 4 games of our season. JC Coleman did not do that by himself. It was a combined effort from the Line finally understanding the schemes/concepts & Coleman rising to the occasion.
Also, I have been pleased to see that we are actively trying to recruit quality offensive linemen. As Searles developes more guys and the Line becomes more productive in games we will attract the better recruits. But let me be clear, developing an Offensive Line into a lethal unit takes more time than other positions.
I have to admit my optimism about the offense. Currently we have proven quality coaching at almost every offensive position. I like what Searels is doing, I'm enthusiastic about the Burden hire, Stiney has a proven track record at TE, and Lefty certainly seems to be bringing in quality recruits at QB (let's see if he develops them). My one concern remains Shane at RB coach. He hasn't produced a dependable feature back since DW4's senior season, and in my mind he hardly gets credit for that. I think he was close last year but injuries plagued his efforts. But until he proves to put reliable running backs in play it will remain my one concern.
I agree with your concern for Shane. One of the big things that I like about him, though, is that he knows how to excite the players. He's someone they can relate to and he is one of the "get hype" guys on the sidelines during games. While I DO NOT think that football is all about hype & excitement, I DO think that there needs to be a proper balance of it amongst the coaching staff.
He has a proven track record as a recruiter & was rock solid at USCe. I think that this year will be different for our RBs, barring injuries.
agreed. I'd definitely love to see higher expectations, but after the last two years being near 100 I think if we start saying top 50/60 people will say that is unrealistic.
Chiming in, but for sake of discussion, let's say that FB gets a second wind and we keep our current staff intact for the next 5 years:
I would expect/want top 50 offense this year and even better each year after for a peak of top 30-ish.
I subscribe to the party thinking that if you give Bud a good offense that can burn the clock, we are in the picture for the playoffs.
This... is a considerably lower threshold than I was expecting from you.
it's the same as what I had thought should have been the goal in his 2nd year, which we didn't come close to. Not going to say he has to go from two 100ish type ranks in a row to top 50. I just want to see signs of improvement, of developing an offensive identity and developing the talent that we have.
I guess this would be my question then: given the situation we were in during the transition from 2013 to 2014, with the loss of LT at QB and the lack of supporting talent in his senior season, did you see any objective reason to believe there would be offensive improvement year over year? I understand the general mindset that, hey, it's year two, we should see some improvement. But would you have expected improvement from an established OC given the specifics of the personnel on offense from 2013 to 2014? In general, our offense took a hit from the previous year because we lost a senior QB, dismissed a tailback and lost some key O line personnel. Outside of the "it's now year two" mentality, there just wasn't anything there to expect improvement.
I think it depends on where your offense was ranked the prior year. When we are near the bottom of D1 rankings in offense and we generally recruit at an above average level I think it's fair to assume you should improve somewhat in that 2nd year. Understand we lost a NFL-qb, but it's not like we had stellar play out of that position either. We had a deeper RB group, returned multiple WRs that at least showed they could make plays at this level plus incoming stud freshmen and had an OL with quite a few starts under their belts.
I'm not sure this counts. They had a new coach who, if I'm not mistaken, had a different style of coaching and came from a different school of thought than the previous coach. In all likelihood, the OL was worse off in year 2 just because they had to unlearn everything they just put to use over the previous year to learn new stuff. That sounds like a recipe for disaster. What really compounds the problem is the fact that the OL takes so long to rebuild. It was a complete mess when Grimes came in and he did what he could with what he had but it wasn't exactly pretty. Then all of your 'experienced' linemen who have a lot of 'starts under their belts' are turning around to learn yet another completely different style with another new coach. I'll bet their heads were spinning...
Also, Searels puts a much bigger emphasis on size than Grimes did, and ideally wants all his linemen to be 300 pounders. That means the linemen who did have starts also had to learn how to play at a significantly heavier weight.
right. the theme here is that the OL has had the odds stacked against them for years. It's pretty tough to actually realistically expect success from that unit based on everything they've been through. I'm hoping that we'll start to see some improvement there this year now that they've had a full year with the same coach who will be coaching them this year. Stability is pretty important.
This is an excellent point. I think if we win the ACCCG there will be very little complaining, and if we win 8 or fewer games there will be very few people making excuses for Lefty. Assuming it's somewhere in between, though, the argument will go on.
I don't know. I think there will be arguments regardless of record. If we win 4 games the Lefty supporters will have excuses for him (I'll admit, I've been more supportive of Loeffler than many others). For instance, if we have 3 season ending injuries on the OL it could really derail our season and can you really put all of the blame for that on Lefty?
If we win 15 games it will be because of our defense in spite of our offense. This is CFB, where you just can't possibly make everyone happy. If we manage to win the NC and have the #1 defense and let's say an offense ranging from 30-40 people will still be critical of Loeffler. I can just about promise that.
if SL gets us in the 30-40 range he'll be a HC somewhere the following year.
okay, well, that wasn't my point. Either way, I doubt if SL gets a HC gig in the next 3 years. IF he were able to get our offense into the top 30-40 range that still leaves 30-40 other OC's ahead of him in terms of candidacy by that metric alone. I don't know how many teams pick up new HCs every year but I have to doubt it's in the neighborhood of 30-40.
An OC that takes a team from the 100's rankings to that in one year will generate some buzz.
First of all, if he does get the offense there it will have taken him 3 years, not 1. Detractors will point to our soft schedule and the ability of our defense to continually put our offense in position to succeed as reasons for his success. I can guarantee that Loeffler will still be in Blacksburg in 2016 if he fields a top 30 offense this season
it will be one year between being ranked around 100 to the hypothetical 30-40 next year. Yes this will be his 3rd year here, but that's a monumental jump from one season to the next. Tried to find some statistics for the largest turnarounds statistically in one year, but ran out of patience.
making that guarantee is meaningless, it's an opinion just like mine.
statistically speaking the offense would make a huge jump but the building process has, to this point, taken 2 full years (3 years by end of next season) to get there. Sure they weren't very good statistically last year, but they were still in the process of learning a new system with new plays. We had a first year starting QB who didn't even have the luxury of Spring or Summer camps to learn the playbook and develop rhythm with the receiving group. Our best running backs were true freshman, both of whom went down with knee injuries. Our tight ends, as talented as they are, have extremely limited experience and our best receivers were also freshmen. Our offensive line has been in tatters for ages and is slowly improving but they were playing with a first year OL coach.
Older players had to unlearn bad habits from the previous coaching regime. New players had to learn from scratch and they wouldn't have had a whole lot of help from the older players since everyone was basically on the same learning curve. Older OL players were learning new techniques from their 3rd coach in as many years. New OL players were trying to learn everything for the first time and also bulk up to play. Running backs were dropping like flies. There were a lot of things working against this offense over the last couple of seasons, but SL has been working tirelessly to try turning things around. There have been glimpses of competence from the offensive side of the ball but it has been limited. There were gradual signs of improvement over the first two years but the statistics won't back that up. Statistically, the offense went nowhere. I believe we were much closer to being a competent offense in year two than we were in year one despite the fact that they seemed to be about the same statistically speaking.
I maintain that although the statistics might suggest a huge jump from one year to the next, the actual building process has been pretty gradual. In year one with SL the offense was basically the LT show. He was the most talented athlete on the team and we leaned heavily on him for production. Year 2 was a clean slate with a bunch of new faces who had to learn a new system with the older veteran players. I got the sense from watching games that the offense was closer to turning a corner than they had been previously. Sure, statistically they were terrible, but what you don't see in the stats is how close the team was from breaking through and putting up reasonable numbers. I expect year 3 to see an offense that can move the ball. I honestly don't think we'll have a top 30-40 offense (that whole set of arbitrary numbers came from a separate argument), but I do think we'll be significantly better than we have been the previous two years. I imagine there will be a big jump from year 2-3. A much bigger jump than from 0-1 and 1-2. It's not fair to say that SL achieved that in just one year. He didn't. It took 3 years. Period. End.
depends on how we got to the ACCCG. If it was the defense having to carry the load 10 out of the 12 games or if the offense was actually able to bail out the defense on less than stellar performances.
and this is exactly the point I was trying to make. SL can't win. IF we win the ACC there will still be critics calling for his head.
he can win if the offense isn't something that commentators are yawning at and talking about how boring it is. We need to develop an identity and stick to it, which we haven't done in the last several years even prior to SL. If we get to the ACC CG and the offense has pulled it's weight I don't think you'll see many, if any, people on here complaining about him.
I would love to live in your world. Unfortunately, there are people out there who will continue to find something wrong with everything. Virginia Tech is never going to have an Oregon/Clemson offense under Frank Beamer. It. Just. Won't. Happen. Until VT puts up offensive numbers like Oregon, Arizona, Clemson, etc. people will be dissatisfied with Loeffler. It's not fair, or logical, but that's just how it is. Some people just want to watch the world burn.
SHOULD Loeffler 'win' if the offense plays an integral (positive) role in winning the ACCCG? Yes, definitely. And I'll back him. But WILL Loeffler get that benefit? I seriously doubt it. It's hard to believe, but there are fans out there who have bad things to say about Frank Beamer and Bud Foster, despite everything they've contributed to VT. There will be people out there who will be critical of Loeffler no matter what.
If future performance is measured in the length of a recruit's highlight tape then JJ is going to be a Heisman winner.
looks like a great pickup if we can, and I love the Lefty connection. Too bad everyone knows Lefty has no idea what kind of QB he wants. /s
Brace for impact...
He's a wreck but who wasn't at 16? Make up for it though.
Coaches son who has spent his entire life around a major college football program...that's usually a good thing.