Hype Train Engage!
For those of you who don't venture outside the safety blanket of TKP:
http://www.gobblercountry.com/2015/7/14/8955979/virginia-tech-national-title-contender
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
We will know Sept 7
Darkhorse......on a treadmill
Edit: Spelling is not my strength
we've treadmills for houses now?
Duh. Invent the future!
Let's just get past OSU first....and actually, let's just get past August practice without the injury bug rearing its ugly head.
At this point, I would say lets just get past July. (See Reavis, C.J.)
Why? All we need to do is lose and then grow as a team.
Sadly I drink the kool-aid every.damn.year.
Have a drink of choice ready after drinking the Kool-Aid to enhance watching experience. Or to lessen the disappointment of something
But it sure beats the heck out of Zima
Hell, I help make the kool-aid every year.
I just always chase it with whiskey.
ALWAYS chase with whiskey! I consume a LOT of that every season
as well...
Which you always keep handy in your AssPocket.
Here we come!
If, and that's a big IF, we have just have a mediocre offense (average around top 40-50ish, we have a chance.
We have had a mediocre offense. We need an average one.
mediocre is a synonym for average...
but yes, we've had a below average offense
Woah, the more you know
ya learn something new everyday!
It's too early for me to start saying Tech will win the national championship this year. That moment will come a few hours before the OSU game after I have had a bunch of beers.
Don't you mean Vodka's Comrade?
I envision that saying "Tech will win a NC" will be said through a drunken mouth full of chips
Lol no way. I love the team as much as anyone else but we do not have the offensive weapons to pull it off. I'm not talking about our recievers, I'm talking about our Oline, running game and quarterback. None of those are national championship, heck not even Top 10 material.
Defense will only get you so far. We're definitely an ACC Championship favorite, but saying anything more at this stage is wishful thinking.
and what's wrong with wishful thinking?!!!
Nothing wrong with that! Unfortunately I'm too much of a realist sometimes, I get annoyed at myself for it as well :-(
Claiming VT as a darkhorse contender is sort of a win-win for Phil Steele. He can pick several teams with similar situations (lots of returning depth, favorable schedule, history of consistency) and claim them as outside shots at the title. If one of those teams gets close to the tournament, he gets instant credibility and major props. But if none of said teams get close, no big deal because they were "dark horses" anyway.
His context in this statement is forced, as in "so I'm required to list them as a darkhorse contender" and not "look out for these guys, everybody". He even has GT listed higher in his power rating than us (116-111), but he believes that strength of schedule favors us, even if we lose to GT. It would be a rare event for the winner of the VT-GT matchup not to win the Coastal.
Well even if they do beat us they still play both fsu and clemson this year so they may end up with more conference losses.
ACCCG? Sure. NCG? I'm not exactly buying it...
Funny thing...I remember people saying the same thing about OSU last year after we beat them. "They'll never make the NCG, they lost to the Hokies."
Guess what...the state a team is in at the beginning doesn't really say much about what state it is in at the end. It's possible, but growth has to happen, and the injury bug has to not happen.
I think it should be NC or bust. Aiming lower than that is just stupidity.
Yeah but, if the Hokies lose to OSU, they are not going to the NCG. It just wouldn't be allowed.
Only if OSU stays even or lower than us in the loss column.
It would take a lot of luck, but if VT loses a close game to OSU, and wins out there'd be a chance, but it would require nearly every other team in nation losing twice. Chances are slim, but we've seen that scenario before
The difference is now there are 4 slots to fill instead of 2.
A 12-1 VT that is ACC champ (which is your scenario) should have a really good shot at the CFP, unless all of the Power 5 champions are 1 loss or less. Of course, there would be the "any SEC win is better than any other conference win" camp that we would have to listen to.
In 2007, when we were largely hampered by that loss to LSU, we probably could have gotten into a 4 team playoff, even with the potential of a rematch against LSU. We were ranked #5 in the AP (even had a first place vote) and #3 in the BCS.
BCS actually stuck as at 1 or 2 if I remember right after LSU loss to Arkansas
No, we were 3 at the end of the season, after we beat BC to redeem ourselves after the Matt Ryan debacle. Pollsters jumped LSU over us for 2 because of the head-to-head
Maybe the computers did, but the overall rankings did not.
Week 12 rankings had LSU #1, VT #8.
Week 13 had VT #6, LSU #7 -- these would be the rankings going into the conference championship games.
In order, it was Missouri (11-1), WVU (10-1), OSU (11-1), Georgia (10-2), Kansas (11-1), VT (10-2), LSU (10-2).
OSU was already done for the season, with no championship game. Georgia wasn't playing the SEC title game, so everyone knew they would be falling. Kansas had lost to Missouri, so they missed out on their conference title chances. And I don't know how VT was ahead of LSU based on that week 2 game.
So realistically, the pecking order looked like this: Missouri, WVU, OSU, LSU, VT. Basically, the top two teams that didn't lose during the final week (championship week for the SEC, ACC, and Big 12), were going to the BCS title game. Missouri and WVU lost, which made the top three OSU, LSU, and VT. OSU only had one loss, and LSU beat VT head to head.
We were ahead because our 2nd loss was to the #2 team in the nation at the last second, whereas they lost to maybe-ranked Arkansas, and somebody else... Kentucky? I forget. Point was, emphasis was still on who had the "best losses"
Both of their losses were in triple overtime. (combined 8 points)
Both of our losses were against #2 teams. (combined 45 points) LSU blew us out.
I'd say that LSU had "better" losses at that point.
But bottom line, everyone knew that the only way for VT to stay ahead of LSU was for VT to win the ACC, and LSU to lose the SEC.
I think if we had beaten BC the first time, we edge them out for that 2nd spot.
Oh, for sure. 1 loss vs. 2.
We dont have to make the NCG now for a NC. We have to make the playoffs.
Oh, so they're handing out NC Trophies to all teams that make the playoffs now?
Why? OSU lost to us and still made it into the playoffs. Not exactly a good look on their resume last season.
I think the post was meant more to be sarcastic, but looking at OSU, they were very close to being left out of the playoff if I remember correctly. If it weren't for the sheer beatdown in the B1G title game, they might have been on the outside looking in. Being the big brand name certainly didn't hinder them either.
Well, in anOSU's case, the injury bug bit pretty hard. They lost a 2 time Big 10 player of the year QB, replaced him, went 11-1, lost him, replaced him with another QB, who won the BIG 10 title game, playoff game, and NCG. That is some attrition at a key position, they just overcame it.
QB has proven to be not the most key position for OSU. With all of Meyers teams through the years, the QB gets way more credit than he deserves. It is the system that wins the games for them. When it comes to the QB, it is sufficient to avoid int's and fumbles while feeding the ball first and foremost to the stud RB and then getting the ball to wideouts who get yards after catches. If they had lost 3 starting OL and Zeke before they were halfway through the season, you honestly think that they would have "overcome" the injury bug???
Well, your description of the QB's role and the importance of a system is pretty much what almost every team wants, i.e. run the option and be able to pass the ball. To me, what was key was the ability to replace the QB and not miss a beat. I do agree if we ran an Oregan style offense the QB role is much more important but even then if your backup can run the system then you still are OK. Even so, in our system you really need a viable dual threat QB or else teams can cheat on the pass to stop the run. We just happen to have 3 guys who fit Meyer's system and are pretty good at it.
As for losing Zeke and 3 OL guys, yes, I doubt we would have performed as we did but then again can you name a team that can lose 4 key players on one side of the ball and not struggle?
As for your chances to get into the CFP if you win the ACC I think you have a pretty good argument to be included, especially since you CG should be against a team that would be high in the polls as well. The CFP format is forgiving of a loss, which is good.
Agree on all your points and don't mean to insinuate that your trio of QBs isn't the envy of most fans in the country. My only point was that Zeke is probably a more important cog and the OLines ability to open creases for him is the grease for his gears. Tech, as you may or may not know lost two projected starters on the OLine before the season even started and then quickly started losing more after that. Also, we not only lost our first string RB but second and third before we started to get things figured out at the end of the season. I agree that if we beat OSU which, if you are not a complete homer (nothing wrong with that by the way), is certainly conceivable with the talent we bring on the defensive side, we can start to worry about playing up to our potential the rest of the year and maybe being in the group of 4. OSU could still probably absorb a loss from us and work their way back in. First things first though, time to beat the Bucks with no excuses this time from the media about catching them at the right time.
No worries. I agree Zeke is the key to our power run game and as long as out Oline opens up holes we'll ride him like a rented mule. That's why the loss of Spencer hurts because he was a great blocking WR; his hit opened up the lane for Zeke's 85 yards through the heart of the south. It looks like Miller may be 100% and thus be our starter so our run game should present some real challenges, since Zeke will also be 100%.
While I agree you could beat us I don't think you can count on your D to win the game as I think we will be able to score on you. I think we will win by 10 - 14 points so to win your O will need to be able to score some points while your D keeps you in the game. I see us scoring around 31 - 34 points so your O will have its work cut out for you. OTOH, if your D shuts down the run then it could be a very different outcome.
As for working back in, I think you guys have a good chance to do that if you go undefeated if you lose to us. In fact a close game, even if you lose, will get spun as "Tech hung tough and got better as the season went on."
Up until now, I haven't found anything you've said to be outlandish. You ruined it. I don't see either team scoring 30 points. It's going to be more like a final score of 21-17. Your offense is good, but our defense is as well. And in an early game, defense usually shows up more often than offense in my experience. But we will see how it plays out on September 7th.
Sorry about that. I don't doubt you have a good D, especially your secondary, I'm just pretty confident that our O will be ready to play. I could see 21 - 17 going into the 3rd and think it will be that close or closer. It could wind up being a low scoring game, but I think our O will wear down your D so by the 4th we should be add an insurance TD to ice the game. I could be wrong, it has happened before...
I'm very conflicted on the outlook for our team this year. Look, with all this talk of championships and such and such watch lists, you're likely to hang 80 on us by half time. It might be true a few individuals have done some things to merit keeping tabs on, but this 2015 team has earned nothing yet. We can hope for a better season than last but at this point that's all. As for our secondary's main four (and I might be wrong), basically only one player will be back who played a substantial role over the entirety of last season so saying they are good in my opinion is not yet true until they prove they are good. Our linebacking crew will be two of three fresh faces, and the D-line which I think will be our strength will be anchored in the middle by two guys who also did not get in a whole season. In my opinion, our O is where you will see some surprises, but even there a few new faces will need to earn their reputations in a new year. But Bosa must be licking his chops knowing he's going up against a D-III walkon who at the beginning of last season was a defensive lineman. But I'm betting that Bosa might not have the night he thinks he's going to have. But we'll see.
Donovan Riley returns at the very least and I would have a hard time not listing Chuck Clark as a returning starter...
The challenge is if you key on Bosa you're risking letting Washington and Lewis run wild in your backfield. Washington has moved back to DT which is probably his best position.
This is exactly what Virginia Tech won't do. Some surprises are coming September 7th. That's all I'm going to say.
I actually kind of agree. I'm doing my best not to get my hopes up. i could easily see OSU pulling an LSU on us. its an absolutle crap shoot to how we will play imo
We had a new FS in that game as well. But we have a senior second year starting qb. I really think the only area they grossly outmatch us is special teams. The are loaded with athletes. Beyond that I think we got them!
also helps when you can finish out the recruiting and your HC can win the big boy battles.
yes.. shots fired.
VT currently +13000 to win the national championship...brb going to vegas
We have half a national title contender.
I'm all about optimism, but just remember that this screen grab is only 8 months old.
So, like last season, we will make history again this season?
Im glad we can laugh at that now. That is quite a funny picture
...it is funny, but it's overuse on r/cfb is just ridiculous
At first I loved see it on CFB because it was funny and made us relevant, in a weird way, but now I'm just indifferent. It is always so obvious when someone links it, so I just skip over it.
And it is rumored that the hokies lost to Temple in 1998.... I will maintain that the rumors are scurrilous lies, but you get the point. Last year is last year and may have no bearing on how we perform in 2015.
Why are you bringing up that game... I was physically sick for days
What game??? Never happened. Total fabrication by the media to prop up an eastern market team. It was only the rumor that I brought up.
This pic will never get old. Those that forget history are doomed to repeat it.
God I love this game. I'm now replaying it for the 5th time.
Our front 4 this year will be some of the best we have ever had! The question will be rest of the defense and the offense! Shai should be good to go "hopefully with a knee brace" come October! I surely hope that Trey's experience against Bama will help us out! Anyways in my best case scenario I think we have a chance at the playoff, worse case being that we have a 10 win season!
No mention of JCC, smh. I'm back on his wagon, he showed that he can run the ball against good defenses, Wake and UVA. I think he will finally seize the starting role for the entire season.
I drank the kool aid and just puked. ACC championship maybe.
The article basically says that we will probably contend for an ACC title and by default that makes us a NC dark horse.
RIP Satoru Iwata
Also, no.
Just to temper things a bit...I see VT associated with dark horse candidate, and I remember how Logan Thomas was a dark horse candidate for Heisman and first round draft pick in 2012.
If we beat tOSU and if, if, if, if, if the offense comes together we have a shot at this. The defense is shaping up to be nasty and if the offense can be above average or at least efficient it increases the odds especially with 4 teams getting in. Our schedule is favorable and I doubt a case could be made to leave a undefeated Power 5 out of the playoffs and depending on upsets even a 1 loss one.
Not saying our odds are great but dark horse isn't really too far fetched given experience and flashes of excellence last year. Is that what I expect, no. But would I be blown away if it occurred? Not really, I'd just be stupid excited.
Besides this comes up every year basically. Phil Steele really likes us and his analysis is basically the same: Top tier defense and if the offense gets its shit together, they could be great.
That analysis isn't wrong. Our offense has been horrible. What would our record have been if we had even an average offense?
1 more touchdown in every game last year would have made us 10-2 or 11-1.
Heck, just a FG in each game would have gotten us to 8 or 9 regular season wins. (GT would have forced OT, and I'm working on the plan that WF would not score in regulation regardless of what we did.)
And on the opposite side of the ball, if our defense was a touch more elite and allowed 1 less TD we would have been at least 9-3 in the regular season with a possibility for 10-2 after OT against ECU. Oh and we still would have lost to WF, but that's neither here nor there. To me, that's indicative of how close the games were and how really, we were just an average team last year. 7 games were 1 score games. We were just on the losing end of 5 of them.
Actually, losing that many games would suggest we're better than our record. Over the long run, winning percentage in close games hovers around .500, and having a losing record in those games in one year is one of the better predictors for a team improving in the next. We may be inching towards respectability just by reverting to the mean (not to mention all the other fun stuff like actually improving).
So same defense as last year, maybe a little better plus at least an average offense makes this kind of hypetrain darkhorse on a treadmill talk not that far fetched.
So....math.
I don't think you have to beat us. If you lose it will be treated as the expected outcome and if it is close, as I expect, you will be the beneficiary of the "they hung with the defending champs" story one and it will be deservedly viewed as a good lose, if there is such a thing. In addition, I suspect there won't be any undefeated teams, although our schedule is favorable for us to do so, so 1 loss will be the norm. The key will be to look good winning. Foster needs to hang points on, like we did when we could, to continue to build support for you guys as the season progresses so you become the team that got better story, much as we did last year.
Wouldn't a NCG rematch be fun?
I like this guy
As long as you guys don't embarass us in the game I think we'll be ok. If it ends up being like the last time we played LSU then it will be bad. 10-14 point loss though not bad in my opinion. Although a win would be better.
Here's what I think about the matter, and I might be in a minority.
I used to look at our schedule before the season started and say "this could our year! Our defense will be good like usual, and maybe, just maybe, our offense will come together."
And yes it's a possibility... Our defense IS really good this year. And hey maybe our offense does come together. But, we're coming off a 7-6 season. Let's take it one week at a time. Start with tOSU and move from there. Take the result of that game and make a plan for the next game. Repeat that 12 times and see where that gets us
I looked it up over the last nine years, to see if there was any precedence for a 7-6 team to get into the national title picture: http://cfarena.blogspot.com/2015/07/national-champions-how-they-fared.html
We had Auburn and Notre Dame go from 8-5 to playing for a title. But that Auburn jump was Cam Newton. There was also Auburn going from 3-9 to 12-2, but that was Malzahn putting out a heck of a dumpster fire.
Granted, I didn't take a look at the likely #3 and 4 teams from 2006-2013, which might give us a clearer idea. Although, I was really hoping to see some other teams with drastic improvement show up in the list.
2012 Michigan State went 7-6 while 2013 Michigan State went 13-1 and was ranked # 4 at the end of the regular season. That's the most recent example I can find.
I just update the blog link and added BCS #3 and 4 for those other years. 2011-2012 Florida was a 7-6 to 11-2 turnaround. 2007-2008 Alabama was 7-6 to 12-2.
Michigan State went 7-6 in 2012 and then was #4 in the BCS in 2013. They had a bad offense, elite defense, and tough schedule in 2012 but the offensive line and QB play improved a little (basically once Cook became the starter) and they played a very easy schedule in 2013 up until the conference championship.
Florida went 7-6 in 2011 and then was #3 in the BCS in 2012. They were poor on offense and excellent on defense (though not quite elite) in 2011 but the offense became fairly good and the defense became elite.
Stanford went 8-5 in 2009 and then was #4 in the BCS in 2010. Elite on offense, bad on defense in 2009 and then they improved really, really dramatically on defense in 2010.
Alabama went 7-6 in 2007 and then was #4 in the polls before the bowl game in 2008. They were poor on offense and only good on defense in 2007 before suddenly being great on offense and elite on defense in 2008.
Georgia went 9-4 in 2006 (ugh) and then was #4 in the polls in 2007. They were decent on offense and excellent on defense in 2006 and then were very good on both offense and defense in 2007.
Michigan went 7-5 in 2005 before being #4 in the polls in 2006. They were very good on offense and defense in 2005 but played a very difficult schedule (played 3 top 10 teams and two other ranked teams) and then were excellent on offense and elite on defense in 2006.
Texas A&M also had a big jump in record when Manziel became the starter, as they were an unlucky 7-6 the year before.
Also, even though the results were different, the 2009 VT team was much better than the 2008 team. We went from being terrible on offense to being very good/excellent with roughly the same group of players.
Basically, the playoff system opens the door way wider for dark horse teams. It actually happens about 2/3 of the time it seems. Most of these results were from young talent developing, with the exception of Cam Newton going to Auburn.
An update because of something I had forgotten.
Those Alabama, Stanford, Michigan State, Texas A&M, Michigan, Ohio State in 2011 (I didn't mention them, they won 5 more games in 2012 than in 2011 but most of the losses/wins were put on the coaching change) and to some extent those Georgia and Florida teams all lost several close games the year before. The first group all lost at least 5 games by 10 points or less (usually within one score) while the second group lost at least three. Sound familiar?
VT certainly seems to fit the mold, although obviously there are no guarantees. Here's the article from ESPN's David Hale that reminded me of these similarities. http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/80197/by-the-numbers-turning-close...
We (tOSU) might have been in the picture in 2012 when we went 12-0 after a 6-6 season; but we were banned from a bowl game due to NCAA violations. Had our AD done a voluntary 2 year ban, instead of a 1 year one we may have been bowl eligible and undefeated along with ND which probably would have vaulted us over UA into the NC game.
Woulda, shoulda, coulda....
That garbage ECU article that GobblerCountry ran last year and then sanctimoniously defended while insulting everyone that criticized it soured me on the whole site entirely. I haven't been back since.
I think there was some serious staff turn-over after that. At least that's what I heard. Don't go there myself, either.
Yeah... SB Nation essentially went in and cleaned house with their writers and editors after that. Pissed off the powers that be that the owners of the site would allow something that ridiculous to run, and it took them a few months to find someone else to run it. It might still be called Gobbler Country, but it isn't the same as it used to be.
Which ECU article? I'm curious.
No. Just no. Let's shoot for 10 wins. That would be in the "great improvement" division of the Dewey Decimal System that is VT football. One game at a time and go from there. I'm all for hype, and for some reason I bite on it every year, but thanks to Bama, ECU, JMU, Wake, Boise, Michigan, LSU, Stanford, Kansas, Cal, FSU, etc. etc. etc. I will now focus on our who's on the schedule next. And currently that is OFFSEASON, who has not been kind.
Wouldn't this make us DarkHorseOnATreadmill? Not the horse we deserve but the horse that we need.
I thought I on the Hype train, just like every year, but the ACC championship was the last stop I saw before a winnable consolation bowl.
I want to be wrong, but I'm not getting on this train.
I'm concerned about the offensive line and Brewer's health/consistency.
I'm not totally sure we're going to be ok without Shai and Marshawn.
Defensive End depth worries me, and the loss of Revis is huge.
Yeah, I don't see this happening one bit. Not after a 7-6 season. Even if we beat Ohio State, we all know what happened last year after we beat them. If the team hadn't gotten so many injuries, they would have beaten Boston College and Wake Forest, but I still don't see a team who goes 9-4 or 8-5 winning a National Championship the next season.
Disclaimer: in deeming it highly unlikely for the Hokies to win a National Championship, I hope that I jinx that theory and we do make it.
Aside from the Bama NC wins, and their defense and RB's are usually in a class of their own, no recent NC hasn't had a complete stud at QB. I just don't know if having a "game manager" type guy like Brewer can get us to a NC unless our backs and D are on Bama's level.
Our D is at Bama level...
I think it's safe to say AJ McCarron was a "game manager". But yes, they had the backs to pound it up the field. If our offense can at least move the chains every series then who knows what our ceiling is.
15-0!