http://247sports.com/Article/Preseason-top-college-football-teams-ranked...
In my opinion:
We're ranked too high. Should be in the 20-25 range if anything, especially considering GT is #30. As much as I hate them that doesn't make sense to me considering how our seasons played off last year. Also, Stanford at #7 and Marshall at #31 are weird to me.
Oh well, we're ranked high, that's always nice!
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Haha, about to post this after seeing it on reddit. But anyways, yeah, we are too high IMO. He must either think our offense becomes average, or our defense turns into 2011 LSU. Either way, I like it.
way too high right now. our offense still hasnt shown we deserve that rank yet. hopefully we are 16 by the end of the year though
16???....hopefully we're top 10 by the end of the year.....don't limit your hopes. I mean if we perform as well as we all think the offense should with a more solid OL, a more seasoned QB, WRs who aren't freshman anymore and running backs that live up to their calling and a D that's coached by bud foster.....well I see no reason not to at least reach a top 10 ranking. National championship always takes a little bit of luck but top 10 would be awesome.
Ahead of Georgia Tech right now? We haven't earned any ranking yet. Let's check back about week eight.
I'm sad that we now think of GT as being ahead of us :(
We?
While we had them beat last year, their body of work spoke for itself down the stretch.
In a year. However I never assume they are better than us any year even if they performed better the previous year. I still always know that's a game we can and should win.
Kinda like the 4th quarter of last year?
I thought this was a prediction for the 2015 season?
To high.
Phil never met Brewer or talked to him about the nightmares he gets before games. This is Frank's year to make it or get fired
Did you talk to Brewer about his pregame nightmares? Is he ok?
Frank's done! Frank's done!
/sarcastica
Sorry, had to even out the first post flow here. And yes I just just replied to myself.
Let's relax guys. HokieCA made it pretty clear at the beginning of his comment that he is "to(o) high". He's not sure what is going on right now and thinks he is having a nightmare. Give him a break.
Ummm what?
Welcome to TKP, might I recommended a new "first post" to introduce yourself.
Edit: Up voted to negate the downvotes, want new people to post, you just have to bring in something more thought out.
Nah, that's boring.
My thought as well. mmmmWWWHHAAATTTTT?!?!?!?!
Welcome to the site... That said, you might want to create yourself a little TL buffer before allowing the crazy out to play.
listen to the man. He's damned near untouchable at this point
If this is true to form Phil Steele, then it does represent where he thinks the final rankings will end up. Historically, Phil Steele does not try to predict the rankings at the beginning of the season (unlike everyone else's pre-season list). He researches the teams and players and tries to come up with what things will look like when it is all said and done.
I'm pretty sure this is his preseason, meaning that this is how he thinks the teams are ranked right now.
Unless he's changed from previous years, his magazine rankings represent how he believes teams will finish the season.
Ah, I think I'm getting confused with his prediction for how the preseason ranking will be voted.
I think 16 is a bit generous...we're starting to get better but until we have some OL depth I'm not sold on us having a top 25 type of season. I would love to be wrong here but I don't see an 8-4 or 9-3 team cracking the top 20 this year. I think VT will be competitive in nearly every game and will finish runners-up in the Coastal with an 8-4 regular season record. That should never be a top 25 type of season
9-3 with a loss to OSU, some game we should have won in the regular season and the ACCCG is a top 25 team IMO......
If we go 9-3 AND get to the ACCCG I could see us in the top 25. I won't argue that. It's not what I was trying to say though.
My post may have been kind of confusing. Without any other qualifiers, I don't think 9-3 is top 20. Top 25, maybe, but top 20 is out of reach IMO. As in, if a (non-SEC) team finishes 9-3 but isn't in their own conference championship, they're probably 22 or 23. So I stand by my statement that I don't think a (non-SEC) team that goes 8-4 or 9-3 cracks the top 20.
Now my prediction is that the Hokies finish 8-4 and behind GT in the Coastal Division. That, to me, is barely worthy of top 25. Of course, with as much parity as there is in CFB, our ranking will depend on the performance of other teams. If every team has 2+ losses then 8-4 could be top 25. I just don't see it happening this year.
If each of the P5 conferences has 1 team that is either undefeated or only has 1 loss, and 2 or 3 teams with 1 or 2 losses you're looking at 15-20 teams with better than 9-3 records. That's not counting teams that aren't in the P5 which may also be undefeated or 1-loss teams. There could be 4 or 5 of those. If a team has 3 losses but they're still in the hunt for their conference title they may have a leg up in the voting because they've won when they needed to. If a team is not in contention for a conference title they're not likely to get as much love from the voters.
As I'm typing this, I'm realizing that I should revise my statement to say that I don't expect a NON-SEC team that goes 9-3 to crack the top 20. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see an 8-4 SEC team in the top 20 but we're not talking about SEC teams here.
There were 5 NON-SEC 9-3 teams to crack the top 20 before bowl season last year. Nebraska and Louisville (at 21) were the only 9-3 teams left out. The world isn't out to get non-sec teams
I see this as a positive sign. It's where VT can be with mistake-free football. I do think they have the capability.
Of course I also thought that last year, and the season other than Ohio State happened.
I agree with the above comments. Overrated until the season proves otherwise.
I hate to be the cynic here but when was the last time you witnessed VT play mistake-free football?
Every game man. I only watch the Hokie highlights haha.
Just don't watch the highlights of the 2013 OT Marshall game a.k.a "the tip drill touchdown"
Watch it. Love it.
When re-watching this just now, was anyone else yelling at the CB to get his arm up on the very last play that was (thankfully) dropped? French's columns take effect on me pretty quickly...
Yeah, I was definitely watching how he played the receiver and looking for him to get his hands in there. Luckily for the good guys the receiver just whiffed on the ball. Or else we might have seen 4OT.
That was a lot easier to watch with the inspirational comeback background music and video cuts to keep things moving past the bad plays.
Now imagine if I actually had a 10+ win season to work with.
I think you would almost be out of a job, just watching the games would be a highlight reel. I kid, your videos are so fetch. Btw, when will we be seeing 2015-16 hype videos?
the 2015 trailer drops on August 1st
*checks watch* Damn.
.
.
.
*checks watch*
well, the 1st is a Saturday...how about this, I'll move it up a day. Friday, July 31st.
edit: or I could do the following Monday, the 3rd.
well....that just took the surprise out of checking youtube all summer for it
cant wait
He's a bounty hunter; "fetch" is what he does.
Man I didn't even realize that we went for two looking back. Even if he caught that he would have had to convert to tie.
Although I do remember D Hop rumbling down the field with the fumble.....I was yelling at the tv "RUN RUN RUN" so heartbreaking to see him get caught but hey he was a DT so I guess it's ok.
I so wanted Hopkins to score that TD.
EVERYBODY did!!
VT at #16 means they'd probably go 10-2...or maybe 9-3. I think with a pretty light schedule other than OSU, that's doable unless injuries hit the wrong positions early in the season.
GT at #30 is about right. With their schedule, they'll probably be no better than 8-4 and more likely 7-5 (and it wouldn't be shocking to see them go 6-6). They had a lot of things go right last year and that isn't likely to repeat itself.
I'd be ecstatic with 10-2 or 9-3.
If VT's injury situation isn't too bad, anything less than 9-3 is a disappointment, IMO.
If there are early injuries at the wrong positions, just about any record is possible.
Agreed. A return to Charlotte and/or at least 9 wins should be the bar for success, assuming we can stay relatively healthy.
Really?!?!
Got the Top Wins Coach
Got a good group of Recruits coming in
A Stacked Defense
and a experienced O line
And a super easy schedule
9-3 is the low bar min and 10-2 is acceptable good
Yes Really!!!
That's just my personality, not too high, not too low. Some folks expect the world every year and they're the same ones who lose their minds after a loss. You're right, there's plenty of reasons to be optimistic. There's also reason to temper the optimism.
So maybe ecstatic was a strong term, how about super pumped for 10-2 and happily satisfied with 9-3. Anything higher we could say ecstatic, anything less would be on a sliding scale of disappointment.
I'm just saying it's a sign of VT football if 9 wins is exciting.
Really? Only 32 teams after bowl games had 9 or more wins. Would more wins than that be better of course but a 9 win season after last season is still not too shabby. But that means the year after needs to keep building.
So being in the top 32 is the goal?
You think VT with nine wins will be outside top 25? Of those 31 teams several are in the MAC, AAC, MW and other non power 5. I'll go back and count just P5 with 9 wins last year.
Edit: 20 P5 teams had 9 wins or better at the end of the season.
You're the one who said ONLY 32 teams had 9 or more wins as though that was some great accomplishment...
I'm already on record saying that if VT finishes at #16, it would be borderline 10-2/9-3 (reg season record). IMO, a 9-4 VT would probably be in the top 25, but not much more than that due to a fairly light schedule.
A 9-4 team in the top 20 would be acceptable after last year especially if that includes a trip to ACCCG.
Any team that plays in a league championship will be playing at least 14 games...
Fine, my point is I Will still respect a nine win season next year.
I'd kill to have a top 32 offense.
I agree with that, the last three years have certainly brought the offseason expectations tumbling on down. Again though, it's my personality. I remember 09 (9-3 regular season) as an exciting, relatively successful year. I'm sure plenty of folks would disagree with that.
'09 was weird - definitely a good year but it had its disappointments.
The team clearly improved compared to the previous year, both on the field and on the stat sheet. The previous season, I would flinch every time Tyrod dropped back to throw. About halfway through the year, that fear had faded. We saw Ryan Williams break out and have one of the best seasons any Hokie running back had ever had. Finally, we reached #4 in the polls (highest ranking since 2007, yet to return to that ranking), but due to our loss to GT, we didn't get an ACCCG bid, and we got sent to a less prestigious bowl than we had the previous year (despite being a better team).
Yeah I easily forgot we were ranked #12 in the chik fila bowl playing an unranked vols squad. In any other year, we should have been in the at large bid consideration, or maybe we were and I just don't remember how the cookie crumbled. Heck, we went to the Sugar Bowl 2 years later with a lower rank.
9 wins in the regular season is exciting because it shows steady improvement under our new coaches. With a few rare exceptions, most programs aren't turned around immediately. 9 wins gives us the ability to potentially win the ACC coastal, and even the ACC.
I would say this defense is solid, but just short of stacked. DL depth is a bit thin, and we are not sure what where Facyson is at in his recovery or if he will be back to his freshman form, plus new safeties replacing some veteran guys. Not to mention the new backer roles.
Obviously only time will tell how stacked they are but read over Foster's comments from last night and you might feel more confident about facyson and the rest of the defense.
http://www.thekeyplay.com/content/2015/june/17/chalk-talk-bud-foster-and-stacy-searels-nova-hokie-club-meeting
Replacing three starters and looking for a #4 DE and backup MLB is a pretty damn good place to be heading into fall practice.
A 10-2 VT team is probably top 10.
Maybe. The VT schedule is pretty weak though which is why I think it's borderline 10-2 / 9-3 to be #16.
Agreed. Who on our schedule other than OSU could be viewed as an acceptable loss? And if we lose to the only two teams on our schedule that seem worthy of the title of "acceptable loss", our weak SOS will drag us much lower in the rankings. I just don't see how we get to number 16 with two losses other than would have to beat OSU and then lose two. Its almost like our sched sets us up for Top 10 or barely in the Top 25.
Potentially GT (BARF) or Miami (DOUBLE BARF)
NC State could be tough
Yes tough. But Lane will be ROCKING on Friday night.
It was rocking last thursday night too. We don't have the homefield advantage we think we do
Why the hell was Lane rocking on the evening of June 11?
If the Lane is rockin' don't come knockin'
I think he's referring to the last Thursday night home game against Miami last season that didn't actually happen in my memory.
Unless of course you're kidding and left the /sar font off and the joke flew right past me.
NC State will be tough. That's all I'm hearing anyway. I don't see us losing to GT or Miami again. Maybe Miami, but not like last year. Not again.
I guess that's the frustrating thing about the Hokies. People have spent past off seasons talking about how tough teams like UNC or NCST or GT will be and we go in and whoop em, then turn around and lose to ECU or some team we have no business losing to because our players have a bad tendency to play down to our lesser competition.
Edit: The attitude of playing to the competition is a coaching issue which I'd like to think has been taken care of with the new staff.
Unless OSU is one of the 10, I doubt that. Voters tend to weigh program reputation more than they really should, and VT's reputation has taken a severe hit the last 3 years.
Sports writers forget reputation pretty quickly if you give them a reason to forget it.
I don't see us 9-3 and ranked #16. That would likely mean a loss to anOSU, and two conference games. If that is the case, I don't see many other potential wins that could vault us that high, especially if two losses come down the stretch in the ACC. 10-2 is a much more reasonable record for ending up at #16, but I'm thinking we either have to beat anOSU or lose a close one in that case.
I agree. But if one of those three losses is a close loss to OSU and couple of other close road losses and a number of impressive wins, it's possible.
Could be. But with a close Ohio State loss, and hypothetical close road losses to GT and Miami, I'm having a hard time seeing another win on the schedule that can put us that high. Who knows though, any number of scenarios could play out. 9-3 or 10-2 would most likely mean we're back in Charlotte.
I can't find the link, but I once read Phil Steele explain that his preseason rankings are meant to be more like year end predictions than a ranking of where he feels teams currently stand. IMO the two are completely different. Would be nice if all media member explained this before posting their rankings.
I believe this is correct...and he takes schedule into consideration as well (which most don't because that would require some actual analysis).
This is why I think GT at #30 is about right.
I ain't even mad
This is where Phil believes teams will finish, correct? If so I really like this list, especially how he ranks the acc team (with the exception of FSU). However I do think he fell into the trap of overrating some name brand teams, that just don't have a good outlooks for this particular season. I find in almost every preseason poll that Wisconsin, LSU, and FSU are extremely overrated. Sconsy is coached by Paul Chryst, LSU has no qb and lost their great DC, FSU lost their entire team save Dalvin Cook. Apart from that, and the fact that Texas A&M is hugely underrated (two stud qb's in a system built for offensive success, and LSU's DC along with tons of talent on the defensive side) Phil has a very solid set of end of season predictions.
Wisconsin's is all schedule. They miss OSU and Michigan State in conference play so even with Bama on the docket they should coast to 9-3 at the very least and probably 10-2, splitting @Nebraska and @Minnesota. They'll probably play in the big 10 championship.
If LSU can find a semblance of a pass rush, their defense should be very good with or without Chavis. That should keep them in games, as all that they lack is a QB (although their pass protection was awful last year too). Even with the terrible QB play, they were ~40th on offense on all the metrics (S&P+, FEI, FPI) and close to breaking through at 20th overall. Plus they beat A&M on the road last year and had a few close losses.
On the other side, A&M needs to figure out how to not be so incredibly awful against the run. Getting demolished in the month of October and struggling in November did not look good. Even with that talent, Chavis has a tall task. I'm not sure that Chavis or Chizik will be the miracle workers that people expect, even though they're very good DC.
I think the 15-20 range is about right for us. It's hard to argue too much with these rankings, the teams that have been good recently are near the top, the traditional powers that have had a rough time lately are a little further down. Oregon at 11, below Stanford at 7, surprises me a bit. GT being 30 is a bit low, I think.
All in all, not much of a surprise here.
I don't know, I think it's a bit weird how we're ranked higher than Clemson, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Nebraska. They all had better seasons last year and should improve or not decline a lot next season. Also it was quite surprising how Penn State and Miami sneaked into the Top 25 as well.
I think he's betting on things starting to click. Loeffler has been installing his system for 3 years, there was young offensive promise last season, the QB has had a year, and the defense is poised to be great. This is pretty consistent with how a lot of people view VT. If they had a consistently competent offense then they would be a Top 15 team, however that hasn't been the case in a while. I guess Steele is thinking we're on our way.
As the comment right above me says, I do think we'll improve over the course of the year and end up in the 15 or so range.
As for those teams we jumped, Oklahoma hasn't been very good in years, and I'm not sure they're currently trending favorably. By the end of the year, I could see them in a smoldering pile of rubble and Stoops out of a job because of their expectations.
Clemson lost their OC, who everyone thinks drove a lot of their success, so I could see them unraveling a bit as well. They also have ND and USCe OOC, so their schedule doesn't do them many favors.
Nebraska is like the fourth best team in the Big Ten and they have a new coach. Other teams in the Big Ten are trending upward more quickly, I'd say.
Mizzou, ah, I dunno. They came on strong for a minute but I don't think they'll sustain this level of success in their conference, but I don't think they're the best team in the East, so that makes them like the 6th best SEC team. I'd say we're competitive with them.
Ok, I get the "what have we done to deserve that kind of ranking" line of questioning but I have never understood the sentiment that people would rather be lower ranked and rise, voicing the old adage that "we play better as the underdog." IMO this is the wrong way of thinking. We want to be a big program. We ALL want a national championship so shouldn't the line of thinking be "We want to be highly ranked and win as expected of us" ?
This has nothing to do with the reality of where we are ranked, rather the idea that we "prefer" to be lower ranked to give us a chip on our shoulder.
I see what you're saying, but it's more of the the fact that I think we don't deserve the ranking. We were a 7-6 team last season, a team that lost to Pitt and Wake Forest. Yes we beat Ohio State, but that in itself shouldn't be enough to put us in the Top 25.
Looking at next season, our defense should be great as usual, but there are still question marks on offense. It should almost definitely improve, but enough for us to jump Clemson, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Missouri and Arkansas? I don't think so.
Also, I think we prefer being lower ranked because of how often we've been burned when high ranked. We've choked the past few seasons when it mattered most. Examples, 2012 Pitt, 2013 Duke/Maryland and 2014 ECU. I would love to have a high ranking but it would be nice if the team starts performing at a level where they deserve that ranking again.
Totally agree with what you're saying. Different points. Though Steele's prediction is an end of year prediction not start of season. he may view us as starting unranked against anOSU, but he sees us winning again, natch, and jumping into top 25 and finally landing at 16.
Guys,
This is preseason! What's with all the realism? We should have been ranked number 1! We will be the national champions. We'll be Brew'in up some great offense, and defense expectations should be Fuller!
Hypothetically, if we started the year at 16 and walk away labor day 1-0, do we leapfrog anOSU? It would be roughly 8 spots to jump for either team and I want to say something like this has happened before.
That's too much hypothetics (actual word, don't look it up) for me. Good news for you though, football will be back in approximately... never mind.
This looks about right to me. This is about the 5th or 6th best team VT has had since 1993 (1999, 2003, 2005, 2010, 2011...in any arguable order you prefer). Best defense in the ACC, top 5 in the country. Most significant improvement on offense will be a legitimate running game, but the skill talent at receiver is one of the top five ever at VT as well. 3 of the 5 swing games are at home (vPitt, vNCSU, @Miami, @GT, vUNC). A lot of returning talent on the special teams unit. I'm thinking 10-2 with loses to OSU and Miami, win the division by 2 games.
If I recall correctly, Steele had a pre-spring ranking on his website that had us in the 30's? Or did I make that up?
I would also argue that the 2000, 2006, and 2007 teams should be in that mix.
2000 = Michael Vick round 2, imagine if he stayed healthy
2006/2007 = best defenses in the nation and the WR corps of Royal, Morgan, Harper, & Hyman
I'm excited about this year's team as well but I'm going to have to see how the season plays out before I rank this team in the top 8 VT teams
Yeah, there have been a number of teams that were excellent on one side of the ball but marginal on the other. My memory of that 2000 team was that it had a lot of spots on defense with guys playing a little ahead of their time. Nathaniel Adibi wasn't a bad player, but he was better in 2001/2002 than 2000. Same for 2006 and 2007, some great defenses and some abysmal offenses. Lots of ugly, ugly wins.
I always include 2003 on this list because it goes to show that good teams may have shitty seasons. That team had a lot of talent, but it did have some significant holes at LB and Rover that cost us games. But more than anything, 2003 got themselves in some bad mojo and failed to cleanse.
To that point, can the offense perform well enough to not get in the way of the 2015 defense?
I think 2009 should be a lot higher on people's lists. People look at the 9-3 record and not how good that team (or the ACC coastal and that schedule) really was, especially at the end of the season. I will always maintain that we were a good linebacker away that year. In any case we were a legitimate top 10 team.
5th or 6th best since 93?
I'm excited about this season, but just dont think this team is better than any of the teams in my top 10 below (note: I didn't even include the 2011 team that won the sugar bowl)
We shall see - maybe this is 2004 all over again?
1. 1999 - obviously
2. 2000 - a very underrated team
3. 2005 - the 2003-2005 teams might be some of the most talented
4. 1995 - won their last 10 games
5. 2004
6. 2007
7. 2010
8. 1996
9. 2008
10. 2009
this could end up a long conversation, but I see your point. It depends if you are looking at results or talent. 2003 had more talent than 1995, but 1995 played great together. There is siginicantly more depth these days than the Vick era and more depth and talent than then 2 and 3* pre-Vick era. Beamer squeezed blood from a stone before Vick. From Vick to KJ, we were much better at the skill positions, but still didn't have much depth. After KJ, our depth matched those of top 20 teams if our offensive coaching has had its ups and downs.
The 1999 team accomplished the most, but they lost like 4 games to starter injuries. It was Vick and about 22 other good players, they had no depth. I would argue that the 2015 team has about 60 good players. The question is the playmakers. Will the RB's develop a consistent rushing attack? Will Brewer minimize mistakes? Can we keep our top 3 receivers healthy?
I think the talent is starting to come back. Some of it is still pretty young.
Here are what the better Hokie teams have done that the last few teams haven't.
Dominating inferior/mediocre opponents. When's the last time you watched a game at Lane where you felt the Hokies put away a team they should by halftime. That was regular occurrence in the later 90s/2000s. Great teams put away bad ones early and often.
Big play ability - 30+ yd TDs/pick 6s/ST TDs - A category that showcases skill position talent. The Hokies need more of these types of plays in 2015.
Turnover margin - Another area the Hokies have struggled. In 2004, the Hokies were 16th, 2007 - 23rd, 2010 - 1st. Last year they were 90th. A lot of that is chalked up to inconsistent QB/RB play. Brewer/Coleman and Co. have to do a better job of protecting the ball.
I understand everyone's hesitation to jump onto a train that has run off the tracks the last few years,; but, this year has the potential to be very special. If the freshmen turned sophomores make any appreciable progress in their blocking techniques (that includes you Mr. Hodges) and our gun slinging QB (yes Mr. Brewer may not be the strongest of arms but he has football deep in his DNA) takes more steps forward with the offense playbook over the Summer, this team will make a quantum jump up in the rankings. On defense, there is no doubt that this is a top 5 defensive unit with arguably the best DLine we have ever seen at Tech when you consider talent all the way into the 3rd level and as good a backfield talent wise as Coach Gray has ever had a chance to work with. I do not see a single game that the Hokies cannot win and fully expect the pendulum of luck to finally swing our way this year when it comes to the injury bug. This team will rise above the 10 win mark and will reassert VT as a team to be feared again. Remember the old hobo's advise, "Its easier to hop on a train that is just getting rolling than one that's already flying down the tracks." There is plenty of time to worry about what can go wrong if things break down, but right now, things look promising and until proven otherwise THIS YEAR will be a year to enjoy the hell out of.
Wish I could agree, but unlimited optimism scares me, especially after the last 3 years.
Props (and a leg) to the uber-optimist who takes advice from an old hobo.
^THIS.
Good Answer.
I'm always optimistic. Always thinking we will win every game.
"What?"
20% - its cool that someone believes in us
80% - I hate this high of a ranking to start the season
1000% - if we don't finish top-25, this season is a disappointment (not a failure). Our defense is TOO good and we have TOO many weapons on offense not to make that mark. (Unforeseen eventualities aside)
Just FYI, I think its been said above that this is Phil's best guess as to where the season finishes after the dust settles. So there's no telling if we'll have a ranking to start the season yet but he at least thinks we'll win enough to end up ranked.
My thought is this is also representative of expected parity in other conferences this year. SEC, a lot of guesses varying from Georgia being unstoppable to LSU resurgence, but mostly that they will likely all beat up on each other. PAC 12 will be in flux, some are saying USC has it locked, others that UCLA looks the best they have in a while (assuming the QB works out); Oregon will be good, but again QB needs to prove out. Baylor and TCU should dominate in the Big 12, but Oklahoma and Texas have a lot to lose (including the potential of putting two coaches in the hot seat), and they both have plenty of talent.
We all know the one conference that is an exception, so it seems until week 1.
Wyatt teller said it best - the whole season hinges on the O-line. If they stay healthy I feel good about winning 10 games (including the bowl). I'm very optimistic the offense will be improved. For some reason I've got a great feeling about Brewer. I really think he makes a name for himself this year if the O-line can give him enough time to make his reads. He's got the QB presence and accuracy, just lacks arm strength. I would feel a whole lot better too if we could develop a deep threat, but I'm not sure where it would come from other than Bucky. Can't wait for Labor Day
Eff it, it's June, Wyatt's mullet is still intact, Beamer looks & sounds great, Brewer hasn't thrown a pick in months, and Facyson is fully healthy. Hokies are my preseason and postseason #1.
Good answer, I like the way you think TH13!
edit: This is my first ever post with a gif. Mil Gracias to those who previously explained how to do this. Easier than I thought. Old dogs can learn new tricks, and VT WILL beat anOSU again.