
While the outcome of a 23-20 win in Frank Beamer's final Commonwealth Cup was satisfying, I imagine most Hokie fans were incredibly frustrated with the performance of the offense through three quarters. Kwontie Moore and the rest of Virginia's penetrating defensive front provided problems for the Hokies' offensive line all afternoon long. Back-side penetration derailed numerous attempts to get Travon McMillian on the edge. Pass protection continued to be a bugaboo. Michael Brewer took several devastating shots that impacted his accuracy and decision-making in the second and third quarter. The offensive ineptitude took a toll on the defense. After having an outstanding half of stopping UVA's running game, minus some quarterback scrambles, the Hokies' defense started to wear down early in the fourth quarter. A huge run by Albert Reid and a beautiful fade route to Canaan Severin put the Hokies behind on the scoreboard twice in the fourth quarter.
Tech's offense responded in crucial situation down the stretch. It delivered two fourth quarter touchdowns and a game winning field goal. Joey Slye's game winning kick finished a drive that drained 5 minutes off the clock. Isaiah Ford outclassed the Hoos' cornerback tandem of Tim Harris and Darious Latimore. Ryan Malleck had an iconic moment when he ran through blue-chip recruit Quin Blanding, which set up a Sam Rogers touchdown catch. Loeffler's late adjustments were critical to exploiting matchups that set up all three scores.
Curl to the Boundary
In my preview, I noted that UVA used a variety of zone and man coverages that required their corners to play very soft outside. The boundary side was particularly vulnerable to quick curl and out routes. The boundary was also exposed to the outside stretch play, provided the Hokie offensive line use pin and pull blocking to cut off back-side pursuit.
Early in the game this strategy showed promise. On the opening offensive play of the game, Loeffler aligned both his tight ends to the boundary side. Corner Darious Latimore (No. 39) gives seven yards of cushion and retreats at the snap.
Malleck runs a curl route to intentionally pick off the outside linebacker from jumping in front of the quick out. Hodges runs a quick curl. When Hodges curls inside, there is nine yards of separation between him and Latimore. Brewer throws the ball well to the outside. I'm not sure if Hodges was supposed to run an out, or if this is a wildly inaccurate throw. A difficult six yard gain should have been close to a first down with a good throw.
UVA conceded this type of route on both the boundary and field side most of the game. Loeffler refused to attack it, especially on key third downs. There were several examples of the route being open on possession downs, but two in particular stood out.
In the second quarter, Bud Foster's defense set up the Hokies offense around midfield on consecutive drives. On this drive, the offense managed to get into field goal range with a pending 3rd-and-4. Even though UVA again concedes the quick out to the boundary, Brewer's first read is a triple slant to the field side.
The play call itself isn't terrible on a 3rd-and-short. Against man concepts, the inside slant gives the quarterback a quick read. Unfortunately, UVA has inside leverage to take away the quick slant/inside curl patterns that Loeffler loves to call on third downs. Brewer forces a throw to Hodges despite a defender on Hodges' inside shoulder. Fortunately for the Hokies, the defender is face-guarding Hodges and doesn't turn for an easy interception.
Now, watch the clip again and focus on the boundary side. Latimore is playing soft inside leverage and has no help in the short flat. Cam Phillips runs a quick 7 yard out and is wide open. Brewer's first read should have been to the boundary, as this pattern was open almost all game long.
I don't think Loeffler deserves all the vitriol directed his way, yet this is another example of being a bit too smart for his own good. The Hokies have a 3rd-and-2 with Rogers in the backfield. Instead of lining Ford up wide and allowing him to win a matchup, Loeffler uses Ford as a decoy with jet sweep motion.
Off the jet sweep fake, Brewer waggles to his right. His hope is left defensive end Mike Moore (No. 32) crashes hard to chase down the jet sweep from the back-side, leaving Brewer with a run-pass option. If the defender comes forward, throw to Sam Rogers in the flat. If the defender stays back, Brewer can lunge forward for a first down. This is essentially a one-man route. Moore stays at home and pressures Brewer. Linebacker Mark Hall (No. 59) recognizes that Malleck is not a receiving threat on the play and releases him to come up on Rogers' flat route. Brewer has nowhere to go. Misdirection has its place in football. It was necessary when Loeffler arrived in Blacksburg because he didn't have the talent at wide receiver to get players open without misdirection. However, it didn't make sense to me for Loeffler not to exploit a significant favorable matchup — Isaiah Ford and Bucky Hodges aligned against soft coverage on the boundary — in critical moments. With the Hokies' defense was playing well, the offense needed to extend those drives.
Pin and Pull and Counter Sparks a Dormant Running Game
Virginia's defensive line is built around penetration. Their defensive ends wanted to get up field and contain runs back to the inside. The defensive tackles penetrated to cause confusion in opposing blocking schemes. While the defense is vulnerable to runs on the edge, it is challenging to get to the edge with a pure zone scheme because it is so difficult to reach the play-side defensive end and scoop the defensive tackles charging up the field right at the snap.
Yet, Loeffler's offense chose to run the zone stretch at the boundary by zoning it across the board for most of the game. Eric Gallo had a particularly tough time reaching converted defensive tackle Kwontie Moore (No. 34). Moore lined up in a one-technique and was firing straight up field without reading the play at all.
Here is an example. The Hokies run the outside zone to the boundary. Hodges is aligned in the slot, and Malleck motions over to give the Hokies two tight ends to seal the edge. Moore is aligned as a one-technique defensive tackle to the boundary side. The Hokies offensive line zones the play to the right, with Malleck and Hodges tasked to seal the edge.
Gallo has almost an impossible block. Moore is a quick player and Gallo has the added responsibility of snapping with his right hand. As he takes his zone step to the right, he can't bring his hand to Moore's outside shoulder in order to try and turn his pads. To his credit, Gallo does get his head into the proper position. However, Moore is too quick and has too much momentum for Gallo to turn him.
The zone stretch finally popped when the offensive line used a pin and pull blocking scheme, a variant of zone blocking. The play-side guard blocks down on the defensive tackle and "pins" him inside and the center pulls around. This adjustment works against a one-technique DT because the guard is aligned between the DT and the path of the football, instead of the center having to loop completely around and seal the DT inside after the football is snapped. (This exchange isn't exclusive between guard and center, it can happened between other covered and uncovered blockers.)
On the game winning drive, this subtle adjustment paid off. The Hokies run outside zone to the boundary. Jonathan McLaughlin and Ryan Malleck execute a pin and pull on defensive end Trent Corney (No. 43). Malleck cracks down on Corney. McLaughlin takes a bucket step and pulls around Malleck to get to the edge. On the inside, Wyatt Teller blocks down on one-technique DT David Dean (No. 55) and Gallo pulls around the edge.
The down blocks of Teller and Malleck seem to mess up the keys of mike linebacker Micah Kiser (No. 53). Kiser comes up to the inside of the seal blocks, even though Corney also goes inside. To me, this suggests Kiser was reading Malleck's inside step. Kiser got sucked inside just enough for McLaughlin to seal him inside. The Hoos don't have any alley defenders to the outside. McMillian gets to the edge for the best gain on an outside zone all day.
Part of Kiser's hesitancy to get to the corner may be attributed to the very successful counter that Loeffler utilized earlier in the fourth quarter. On the play, Malleck motions over to the boundary, just like the previous play.
At the snap, the offensive linemen (minus Teller and Malleck) all takes a zone step to the left side, just like a zone stretch. Teller pulls to the right and kicks out the defensive end. Malleck pulls back to his right and leads up on the inside linebacker. McMillian takes a lead step left and then a counter step back to the right. To the top of the screen, Hodges runs a bubble screen package that freezes UVA's secondary. McMillian has a huge hole until Blanding comes up to meet him after a 10-yard gain.
Ford Outclasses Soft Corner Coverage
Loeffler also began to attack the soft corners more in the fourth quarter. He didn't just focus to the boundary. He also managed to get Ford loose on the field side with similar route concepts. One of the adjustments Virginia made prior to the game was benching Demetrious Nicholson, moving Tim Harris to field corner, and playing redshirt freshman Darius Lattimore on the boundary. I noted in my preview that Harris had struggled tackling on quick curl routes. Loeffler attacked Harris on this play and Ford handled the rest.
The design is identical to the Hokies' opening pass of the game. Cam Phillips in the slot curls up with the intention of shielding the nickel corner to prevent the nickel from jumping underneath Brewer's throwing lane to Ford. Harris is in soft off-coverage on the outside, even though Blanding is also retreating deep before the ball is snapped. Ford curls at the first down marker. Harris doesn't break down and Ford shrugs off his attempted tackle and turns to the outside to burst out for a 20-yard gain.
While Harris was still playing soft, Lattimore was starting to anticipate the curl on the boundary in the second half. He still played soft, however he was much more aggressive than Harris in terms of committing to plant and charge the curl before the ball had been thrown. Loeffler recognized it and caught Lattimore with a double move.
At nine yards, Ford gives a subtle shoulder turn, indicating that he will break an out route off the Brewer play-action fake. Lattimore bites, and Ford glides past him. Brewer puts the ball on the money. While the Hokies have had plenty of great receivers, I can't recall any former Hokie that had such a knack for using his body to get corners to bite better than Ford. Later on Ford's deep touchdown, Ford was able to sell a deep in (also known as a "dig" route) to Harris despite the Hokies having a third-and-16. Harris bit up, and Ford slide behind him for an improbable wide open touchdown that harken back to Jermaine Holmes game clinching touchdown in Charlottesville back in 1995.
The "Good" Interception?
The low point for the Hokies' offense came in the third quarter. Tech's defense had just forced another punt. With the score tied at 6-6, Loeffler called a play-action pass from the I formation on first down. After faking an inside zone lead, Isaiah Ford ran a deep out pattern, while Bucky Hodges ran a post behind the mike linebacker.
I was infuriated with the play call. At that point, the Hokies only handed the ball off to their running backs twice in the entire third quarter. The play incorporated a deep drop for Brewer, despite the offensive line struggling to protect their QB the entire game. Brewer tracked Ford the entire way. Ford runs a 15 yard deep out pattern to the wide side of the field. Given the 10 yard drop and the throw to the wide side, this throw tested the very limits of Brewer's arm strength. Brewer's follow through was disrupted by pressure in his face and on his blindside. This play was a disaster ready to happen.
Despite the disastrous outcome of the play, Loeffler found a silver lining. Kiser bit up on the run fake, and Bucky Hodges was wide open behind the stout linebacker. Loeffler took note and came back to that route concept after Virginia took a 13-6 lead. This time, he used an ace formation (one tight end, three wide receiver, and single back alignment). Ford runs the deep out. Hodges (in the field side slot) runs a vertical route with an outside release. Brewer fakes the power to Rogers, and Teller pulls to surprise the defensive end.
Loeffler made a critical adjustment. He shortened Brewer's drop to minimize the pass rush threat on his blind side. This time Hall bit on the play fake, and Malleck popped open behind him. UVA did have deep safety help, but Malleck delivered a tremendous individual effort to shake the tackle of Quin Blanding, and Bucky Hodges busted his tail to come across and deliver a block that helped extend the play.
It appears that Loeffler's last game as the offensive coordinator for Virginia Tech will be the impending bowl game. Loeffler's tenure has been divisive. Many are thrilled that he is not being retained (in all likelihood), and I certainly felt that a change was necessary on offense. Much like this game, he often over-complicated his plan of attack and seemed to stubbornly try to deceive defenses instead of sticking with play concepts that were clearly working. He never was able to establish a dominant Virginia Tech rushing attack.
At the same time, Loeffler deserves some credit. He developed terrific game plans and understood how to get matchup advantages for his receivers. With minimal contributions from the running game and a collection of receivers that would be challenged succeeding at FCS schools, Loeffler made the offense effective enough to get 8 wins in his first season. It is important to note that his top two running backs and one of the top three receivers from that group were on the roster this season, yet all have been surpassed on the depth chart. From the ashes of 2012, Loeffler established Isaiah Ford and Bucky Hodges as bona fide NFL draft picks and Travon McMillian looks like a future superstar. Loeffler fully devoted himself through sleepless night to improving Tech's offense. He gave Hokie Nation his best, even though his best ended up not being good enough.

Comments
Anyone else notice that both of Beamer's last two OCs tried to rely too much on tricking the defenses? I wonder if their pitch to CFB was "wouldn't it be cool if we could pull this off a couple times a game?" and Beamer got swept up in the excitement.
Maybe the common thread is Frank Beamer himself. Let's not forget weird trick plays he's called in certain situations. It's totally unlikely Scot Loeffler had full control of the offense and offensive staff. The Run-Run-Pass pattern seen when Tech feels safe is pervasive all through the Beamer years. The only time Scot Loeffler is allowed to make any real calls is when Tech is behind. That's why the road the comebacks look so good but if we don't win prior to a tie it's over. Then we go back to playing it "safe" ala Run-Run-Pass.
Yeah. I am not sure I buy this, especially given that in a tie game, Loeffler only gave his running backs touches on two plays in the 3rd quarter before Brewer threw the interception.
I've always had the impression that the OCs resorted to trickery/misdirection Because they were forced to, due to personnel deficiencies.
That's why I'm so excited for the future. Now that the recruiting anchor of Beamer's impending retirement has been removed, in really looking forward to seeing what a high-powered offense can do in a few years once the recruits are flowing in. I have no expectations of instant success, but I think we'll be rolling along on a few years.
Nicely put. Excited to see how CJF and Foster do next year.
I like Lefty the man; wish things had turned out better for him at VT.
OT: News is slow today.
I concur. I think Lefty has a brilliant offensive mind and his play book can be extremely successful. I also think it's too complex for 18 - 21 year olds and as we've seen, and he's mentioned multiple times, if one player doesn't execute his assignment, then the whole play doesn't work.
I think Lefty either needs to adjust his offense or look for a job in the NFL, where players would be able to fully execute his play book.
Adjust this slightly- over complicated passing game, overly simplistic running game.
It pained me more on the INT that God's Gift was WIDE open.
Oh gosh he had a clear path to the end zone the second he got past the linebacker
I definitely thought of that Jermaine Holmes TD on that play. Same endzone, different corner.
Some announcer said: "Jim Druckenmiller has just engineering the best comeback I've every seen!!!!!"
I've said it before, I'll say it again, that was the best, most fun football game I have ever attended. Druck and Holmes broke their little 'Hoo hearts that day and sent us to the Sugar Bowl for a great game against Texas. Ahhh, here's hoping the good ole days are here again!!
best radio call I ever listened to
I was on the hill for that one with a 750 of Bacardi Limon. It was awesome.
Thankful for the time and commitment Loeffler put into the program. Glad he made the adjustments needed to get such an important win for Beamer. I wish him the best of luck with his next gig, wherever and whatever it may be, and I'm looking forward to Fuente getting to work with the offensive weapons we've got right now.
If the Hokies hadn't brought in Loeffler and Grimes, they're probably home for the Holidays after the 2013 season. His route trees for receivers and tight ends are way better than what we had previously, and he did make Thomas a better QB.
However, between 2013 and today, the Hokies are one freak missed FG from being 0-3 against Duke. They are 0-2 against Duke at home during that span. They lost to Wake Forest 6-3 in their only ACC victory last year.
Those results, (and a few others) rest squarely on the shoulders of the offensive coaching staff. That buck stops with Loeffler. I just can't get over that.
We also sliced up Pitt's defense to the tune of a cool 100 yards this year.
I would note that the offense scored 43 points versus Duke in one of those losses. Again, I think a change was needed, but lets not let a contrived narrative overshadow actual reality.
I think ultimately, Loeffler would be well suited as an NFL quarterback coach. The poor offensive performances this season came with a backup QB. There were some serious situational gaps in the running game, yet in the games Brewer started, the offense was good enough to win every game that Brewer started with the exception of UNC. He upgraded the talent significantly from the 2012 team.
If he is to be damned, it was situational passing game play calling and the complete lack of rhythm with the run game. He needed a strong run game coordinator (I continue to point out that paired with Grimes at Auburn, even with a bad QB they rushed for 6 ypc.)
Grimes was a big loss. He was "Running Game Coordinator," which would have been helpful to have when we had actual RB's.
Didn't we miss an early FG against UNC and then ended up going into OT? So if Slye hits that one we beat UNC so I don't know if the offense didn't do enough to win the game.
True, but we don't go to overtime without some gifts from the defense/Marquise.
Indeed. Wasn't there a questionable two point conversion decision vs. Duke? Let's be honest. Loeffler never had a chance. A lot of fans wanted the spread offense and started complaining started instantly. Without Loeffler we would have had more than one losing season. The previous offensive strategy was run our QB like a chicken with its head cut off on broken plays. Before Loeffler, the last time Tech had anything recognizable as an offensive scheme was in 2001 when Ricky Bustle was OC. Even then it was pretty questionable. I think the damage O'Cain, Stinespring and Newsome did to VT has been grossly underestimated.
Scored 28 points in regulation. 43 was the result of 3 or 4 OTs...
4OTs, but the point still stands. The offense went blow for blow with Duke for 4 straight possessions. You can't discount those points just because they happened in overtime. Would I have preferred them to happen in regulation? Sure, but the overtime points aren't guaranteed (see: UNC vs VT, 2015)
I agree. Our defense should be able to hold Duke to a field goal for at least one of those drive.
The only reason the points don't get discounted is because they get counted. The NCAA could just as easily say that an OT win is counted a 1 pt win and the individual stats in OT don't count.
That they are counted without an asterisk for comparison to other schools' and individuals' stats is silly at best and misleading at worst, IMO.
I think Lefty is very good strategist but a below average tactician. He seems to be a great teacher of quarterbacks though considering what he was dealt.
We had Bucky wide open on one play deep but Brewer overthrew him. Not sure what formation was set up for that play, but too bad we couldn't connect.
There were a couple of deep shots missed- not always inaccurate throws.
The Brewer to Bucky deep connection has been off all year. I don't know if it's Bucky's route running or Brewer's deep ball accuracy, but I am leaning toward Bucky not having a great perception of deep passes and high pointing the ball.
Off topic of the thread, but can we keep those helmets around for a while?
I have been screaming for the white face mask for the last 3 years. I love them.
The white face masks just make for an overall aggressive look - love them too.
The whole uniform was fantastic. It wasn't screaming for attention and when you did notice it, there is nothing not to like. It should be promoted from "throwback" to "normal. This uniform and all maroon would suffice for this hokie...
Completely agree. The stripes on the helmets combined with the white face masks, we're the perfect accent to the white jerseys.
Would be interested to see how they would mesh with our maroon home jerseys.
Team #KEEPWHITEFACEMASKS
I've read French's review of the Hokie Offense rather intently this year. For whatever reason, in my eyes it looks like Loeffler never gelled as the "manager". His play designs, ability to motivate, coach up the quarterback, etc. all seemed to be above average - but it's like there was always a disconnect between the OC and Shane, or Grimes/Searels.
I know this is oversimplification at it's best - but it's like he was so into coaching the quarterbacks and designing the game plan, he forgot to be the boss of the other parts of his offense. There can be coordination, communication, and trust but nothing replaces the fact the "boss" has to be both a manager and a leader for everyone on that side of the ball. I think this shows in the comments from Brewer in the UVA post-game, where he anticipated getting pounded, I heard that and went "whaaaaaaaaa??????????".
I nominate MB to play Rocky in the next 8 films, because he's the epitome of...
I still partially believe Lefty wasn't totally set up to succeed. I think he isn't a fit for Hokie Nation, but I'm sure other coaches are reviewing game film and he will be picked up.
We may not think he is great, but he wasn't fired. So many other schools would be thrilled to have a coach like him.
Based on the talent we have on offense I think the program is better than when he inherited it. That said, while Lefty was book smart about football he lacked something. I know we harp on his play calling but I also think we just executed poorly.
I always loved that we seemed to play above our recruiting stars with coached up talent in the late 90's early 00's. And we've always played that way on defense. Lefty just didn't seem to have that effect on his players. (Imho) After watching the Ole miss/Memphis game and setting aside CJF's offensive play calling, I was most impressed with a team of walk-ons and 2*'s playing way above their pay grade. I think we've really lacked this on offense and I'm excited less about some genius play caller and more about an offensive minded leader who get's the most of his men.
In the mid 90's we executed a pro style I- formation that was simple but accentuated the team's greatest strength. What was that strength you ask? TOUGHNESS! The D knew what they were getting but couldn't stop it unless they were tougher in that play. We won more plays. I do think Lefty has talent but for whatever reason he over thinks the game plan and the play calling imo.
Nothing will shake my opinion that Loefller is a below average OC. Auburn proved that. 3 years at VT proved that. It's not like he hasn't had the firepower either, our offense as a whole has a lot of talent this year (and for that, I do give some of the credit to Lefty).
He's like Shane, a good recruiter and motivator but a poor gametime coordinator. I understand that execution was an issue, especially with inconsistency with Brewer, but some of his decisions are STILL baffling. It was a questionable hire the moment he step foot in Blacksburg and hasn't improved since.
I wish him the best of luck wherever he goes but I won't say I'm sad to see him go.
I've tired of talking about Loeffler, he's on the way out, nothing more to say.
I will be interested to see where he ends up. I don't think he is a P5 OC, but he could be a P5 QB coach.
I doubt he is going to go down to get a job. He is a really good scapegoat
I don't know if it was CSL or CFB, but the videos in French's article illuminate a stubbornness to 'be what we are' rather than 'exploit their weaknesses.' As French observed, UVA's corner play soft. That's a vulnerability. Their DL is strong and penetrates. That's a strength. So we drop back deep and avoid the out routes - which played into UVA's strength for 3 quarters.
I figure there's a reason their corners play soft so if you force them out of their comfort zone by exploiting them early, their adjustment would leave them vulnerable in other areas.
Also, I've noticed that one counter play since around midseason - TM has gotten a lot of yardage out of it, it seems to play to our strengths well and the line definitely likes it.
That play with Malleck's reception truly personified the teamwork coming together. With great blocking to help Brewer's accuracy and then Hodges seemingly coming from out of nowhere to give Malleck some extra running room. Ford and Rogers, of course, were stellar but that play was a shining moment.
I have nothing bad to say about Loeffler. Yeah, at times I popped off frustrated at this or that play call, but you are going to get that with literally any OC.
Yes, he could have done a better job tailoring his offense to what our athletes could do. And I won't apologize for my frustration at seeing the BS deep bomb after a turnover that was simply too predictable to be worth it.
But at the end of the season, there are a ton of points left on the field because of poor throws, or simply missed reads.
If we looked back at all the game film, I'd bet you'd find 2 TDs missed per game.
Not to say Brewer or Motley or the O-Line are bad, just that they all had bad moments that derailed a sure TD play that Loeffler called.
IMO, the real tragedy is that Beamer didn't make the change 2 to 3 years earlier. I think if we had a competent OC before the recruiting misses and injuries started piling on, we would have weathered those injuries better, and maybe not have missed as much on the recruiting trail.
I think Loeffler's offensive strategies could pay off huge at a blue-chip school that regularly pulls in great recruits and is willing to give him a few seasons to get the O going.
Exactly. He has taken a lot of heat for our past failures.
I blame Tyrod for keeping Stiney as OC for so long. It's all Tyrod's fault! Why did he have to make an incompetent offense look so good?
I see a lot of people make that case, but that's really just a further indictment of Loeffler. JustWin Fuente mentioned (in his first day on the job) the importance of tailoring an offense to allow the players that you have to succeed. That's the way a great offensive mind should think/operate.
Seeing as Loeffler is on his way out, I don't want to poo poo him anymore. His offenses have been an improvement over Stinespring's. Plus his Mic'd Up episode was pure gold and gave me a quote that I'll probably have in my signature for a while.
I agree and have said he would be perfect at a place like USC, IMO. I also agree with those think that SL has gotten some undue criticism and that given the pieces he's had to work with, he did a pretty admirable job and got VT in a position where someone like Fuente isn't starting with a bare cupboard..
But still, listen to what Loeffler says after games. When asked about certain plays, it's almost always something like "we had the right play for the defensive alignment". It's rarely, if ever, "we believe X and Y are what we are good at and we were going to establish them until they stopped it". Then listen to Bud Foster. He'll say some of the former (particularly when teams come out w/ different looks early), but in the end his MO is to stop the run. He says that not only after the game, but before it as well. There is no mystery about it. And more times than not, it's successful.
I've said from early on in Loeffler's tenure that he seemed far more interested in the chess match and trying to find the flaw's in the DC's game plan and/or play calling than in developing, refining and doing what VT was good at.
Now I'm not naive enough to think that you can simply do one or two things all game or that you completely ignore what the D is giving you. But it just seemed like his play calling was more counterpunching than leading -- reacting rather than acting, if you will. And it manifested itself in play calls that seemed to interrupt the flow of the offense at just the wrong time when it appeared that the offense was beginning to impose its will or when the dagger could have been put in their heart (think GT in 2014).
All fair critiques IMO.
For all the things that didn't go as well as hoped with Lefty, there are a couple of things that should be recognized. Ford has 10 TD, a new season record which has never been done before. Ford could get 1000 yards receiving, which we have never had. Brewer got better this year. We have continued the bowl streak, which has looked in serious doubt at times. We have a possible future stud at RB in McMillian. Our QB recruiting has improved and is the best it's been since Tyrod. We have TEs who catch passes (remember when that was the norm?).
Fuente and company are getting some good talent to work with on O thanks to Lefty and company. Everyone thought it would take at least 3 years for the O to get better, and it has. Maybe not to the level we all hoped, but Loeffler definitely left the team in a better place than when he got here. For that, I tip my cap to Coach and say thank you.
Agreed. Brewer's improvement, Isiah Ford's emergence, the emergence of #TEU (Kinda joking), and the improvement in QB recruiting are all great thing's Lefty has done. He left our offense in better shape than he found it.
I can go with that sentiment.
Something funny: at the game my dad got so tired of that stupid "another Cavalier FIRST DOWN" that he cleverly started "and that's another Cavalier FOURTH DOWN."
I again appreciate the analysis. I have to wait for some down time to digest them appropriately.
I look forward to a few hours on the weekend with some good food/bevarage, minimal kid/work distractions and a great analysis by French to explain the nuances of the chess match.
Question: The blocking adjustments to the pin and pull that slowed uva's great penetration were likely called by which coach? Is that a position coach adjustment or the coordinator?
So why do all the preventive problems and issues on O suddenly disappear when VT gets down in score and suddenly has to perform to get the score back to tied?
Where do all these "O issues" go all the sudden? hmmm...... No one seems to want to address this. The O breaks down and looks like garbage until they have to score...then all is fine. LOL. Assume no risk on O til you're forced to. Sounds like a bit of a design flaw....Thankfully that's all in the rearview mirror.