Among all the complaints HokieNation made last season, one prevalent gripe was a lament every time Michael Holmes returned a punt. "Where's Jarrett?!" many exclaimed. Each time I heard it, I shook my head. It will happen again this season, and I again expect HokieNation to express frustration.
There are two reasons why Kyshoen Jarrett should never be utilized as the punt returner. First and foremost, Jarrett is possibly the most irreplaceable player on Bud Foster's defense. As previously discussed, the rover has multiple responsibilities: drawing the primary coverage responsibility on slot receivers in base defenses; run force responsibility from both the edge and backer alignments in base defenses; and traditional two-deep zone run support and pass coverage responsibilities. Jarrett is a unique hybrid player perfectly suited for the multiple responsibilities. He was a highly rated cornerback coming out of high school, and his experience at the position allows him to be comfortable in both zone and man coverage. Attrition at the cornerback position also means that a premium will be placed on Jarrett to cover secondary receivers and occasionally double elite talents like Amari Cooper. In 2009, the Hokies had a great deal of success bracketing Julio Jones with a deep safety and an underneath corner. I'd expect to see the Hokies deploy similar tactics with two freshmen getting work at the field corner position.
As he demonstrated last season, Jarrett is also an exceptional run defender who seems to be much more comfortable playing inside the box. He has a unique ability to avoid blockers and fill assigned gaps, and he is a sure tackler who can deliver helmet rattling hits. Alabama has a talented, but inexperienced offensive line. The Hokies scheme will attempt to confuse Alabama's offensive line with stunts and slants, leaving Jack Tyler, Tariq Edwards, and Jarrett one on one with the tailback. Jarrett is athletic enough to get T.J. Yeldon in the backfield before he gets momentum up field.
From the base 4-4 alignment, I anticipate that Bud Foster will try to use Jarrett as a robber from his position inside the box to trick quarterbacks into quick underneath throws leaving Jarrett to jump the route. If you thought Jarrett's punt returns were electric, imagine him running back a couple of interceptions this season.
Backup rover Desmond Frye is more of a 4-2-5 rover, with nice size and solid run support skills, but he isn't as comfortable playing close to the line of scrimmage or in man coverage. Zack Snell is a former linebacker who was involved in numerous tackles during fall scrimmages, but isn't as comfortable in coverage and has had difficulty staying healthy. Anthony Shegog is a promising freshman, but inexperienced. Attrition has sapped the depth at other secondary positions. Jarrett is the only player on the roster with the skill set at rover to allow Foster to run his old system against pro-set offenses that can move back to safety against spread formations.
Second, as Frank Beamer has often stated, the punt return game has changed significantly over the last decade. In response to innovative punt block schemes, teams have resorted to different strategies to prevent blocked kicks. Some of those new techniques include rugby style kicks, spread out kicking formations, and the use of shorter alignments and one-step punting. Each strategy has resulted in fewer blocked kicks, not only for the Hokies, but across the college football landscape. It also means that kick distance and hang time has decreased significantly. In order to take advantage of shorter kicks and better field position, Beamer resorted to utilizing two punt returners. Last season, Beamer placed Jarrett and Holmes as his returners, and teams kicked to Holmes as the lesser of two evils. Holmes may not have been as dynamic as Jarrett, but he consistently improved field position.
In spring, Jarrett again got work as a one of two returners, but with Holmes departed, we don't have a clear picture of who will be back returning with him. Teams will probably continue to kick away from Jarrett. Whoever ends up with the job must catch the football. It seems so simple, but allowing the punt to bounce often results additional yardage for the kicking team with no opportunity for a return. Dynamic returns are an added bonus, but short kicks place more of an emphasis on catching the ball and getting up field quickly. The use of quick rugby style kicks also means returners must often try to catch the ball on the bounce, which leaves them open to big hits. I don't think it is worth it to have Jarrett out there when his value on defense is so high. As long as they can field kicks properly, I would like to see the Hokies use one of the many explosive young players that excel in space in Jarrett's spot.
What are your thoughts? Would you risk Jarrett as a punt returner, and if so, who would make a viable replacement at rover if he is lost to injury? If not, who do you expect to return punts? I expect that Beamer will again use two returners to prevent the opposition from kicking away. Could this be a role where they can get the ball in Joel Caleb's hands?
Comments
I've always thought to use mangus. Maybe he will get a shot in fall camp?
Yea, I always thought him and Tookes would end up being these guys. With Tookes gone, I'd have to say Der'woune.
My thought exactly.
Simple solution. Jarrett goes untouched every kick he receives and runs it back for a TD.
I've still got 4 years of eligibility left....if I wasnt awkward and didnt run a 6.5 40, I bet CFB would take me on in a heartbeat to return punts
agree 100%. there are plenty of other athletes on the team
Great stuff as usual, French. I'd say some combination of Magnus/Caleb/Parker could produce good results, assuming they feel comfortable back there (see Williams in 09 vs Bama).
That's a good group....Add Newsome.
Caleb, Mangus, Parker to name a few. Everything I've read has said basically the same thing about these 3, they all are playmakers with the ball in their hands. Give them the ball and see what they can do.
i agree with everything you just said french. im just looking for someone as dynamic as eddie royal was on punt returns. he was such a game changer that you could always count on and we just need that on special teams, i dont really care who it comes from i just want someone to step up
I don't foresee Parker back there returning kicks this year. Loeffler seems really high on him as a playmaker at wide receiver, however he's also noted he needs to continue to get better at running routes, and catching the ball. I think they want him on the field contributing against Alabama, and for that to happen he'll need to focus on getting better at receiver.
Of all the new faces, Kendall in my opinion is the most likely to shag punts.
yeah I think it goes to Kendall. Beamer even said in the spring that Fuller will get a shot at punt returner.
The only reason I didn't say Kendall would be back there is because of how thin we are at corner right now. After Manning left we are left with only 4 corners that are ready to play, two of those being true Freshman (Fuller, Fuller, Facyson, Riley).
I agree, don't trust Parker yet. Maybe get him some PR's as the year goes on, if he proves himself reliable as a WR first.
I'm not sure we can spare Kendall either. I'd go Mangus and Byrn. It may not be sexy, but as French said, just catch those low punts and don't fumble it, Willie Byrn.
I agree to the extent that we REALLY need to keep our secondary healthy. But, we can probably expect our offense (at least at the beginning of the season, and against Alabama) to probably be flat once again - struggling with the running game, receivers dropping passes, etc. If that's the case, our offense will need all the help it can get scoring points and will need momentum changing plays (i.e. great punt returns). This team will need the "big play" ability throughout the season and will desperately need it in the first game of the season. I say keep Jarrett out there and let him return as many punts as he can get his hands on.
I wouldn't risk him. Not at all. I got to talk to him during Media Day however, and he said unequivocally that he wants to be, and is going to be back there returning. That was before the news about the transfers broke, but he's going to have to be "dragged off the field" to not return punts. Obviously there's some posturing in this, but he really wants to be back there. Let's see if the coaches relent.
I don't think Caleb is really the guy to have returning punts. While Caleb is a very dynamic athlete, he isn't the shifty speedster you'd like to see back there. IMO I think the job goes to either Mangus, Der'Woune, or possibly JC (Deon Newsome and David Prince will also be in the running if they don't red-shirt).
Darn.....I guess we'll just have to go back to blocking punts!
No return men.....just put all of our best blockers 2 deep and release hell.
(One of the many examples of why I am not a football coach.)
I agree with your comment 100%. If you need an assistant for your football team. I can send you a resume.
Ha ha....application accepted.
You can help out as I call hail Mary's on every offensive play, and blitz all of the linebackers on every defensive series....
We need to play each other for money one day...
I'll coach defense. I have this one play where everybody digs a hole in the field and hides, then pop out surprising the offense Red Dawn style. Like this...
the old one is so. . . so much better
For said Hail Mary's, will the QB run backwards ala Tecmo Bowl and throw that ball 100yds for a surefire touchdown. If not I think your offense game plan might be flawed.
OK, I confess. I was one of the people last year saying "Where is Jarrett?" because there was such a drop-off with Holmes. And you make a good argument here. I am inclined to agree with you and say, "Let's see what these other kids can do." But with that said, if and when there comes a point in time when we NEED a good return, then I still say put in Jarrett. See Gio Bernard vs NCSU in 2012.
My vote goes to Carlis Parker and Mangus if they can show reliable hands. Realize that is somewhat opposite of French's advice, but I love the idea of having true threats back there (so long as they aren't irreplaceable elsewhere as is the case with Jarret). Without having seen either ever catch punts, which is admittedly a bit of an art that takes more than just athelticism, I think they would by far be our two best open field threats.
Would also have no problem with JC Coleman or Donovan Riley if we wanted to be a touch more conservative depending on game situation. Sounds like Caleb has bad hands so he would seem to be out.
I wouldn't mind seeing JC back there. He is quick and shifty. Last year I wanted Jarrett back there but with the lack of depth in the secondary I am for not having a DB back there. If parker can catch it, put him back there or Mangus or Newsome. Someone that can make a play but will catch the ball first.
could end up being newsome
One word...Karma.
Just as soon as they announce that they are going to protect Jarrett by not having him return punts, he'll slip in a puddle of Gatorade on the sideline and break a bone.
If he is the best option, he needs to be out there. This team doesn't have enough hole cards to be holding back. Guns need to be blazin' from 60:00 to 0:00.
I'd agree but it would be a long season if something happened to Jarrett. Imagine Bonner being the leader in the secondary...
It all comes down to the last 2 minutes of the game. You need your secondary to still have some afterburner left. When you return a punt, you're running as hard as you can. I more worried about fatigue than risk of injury.
Best punt returner in my lifetime was Brian Mitchell, and there was nothing shifty about him. Give me a guy who doesn't let those directional kicks hit the turf, and then gets up the field. Having the instinct to get to where the punt is going is so critical. If the choice can catch the punt, then being a game breaking threat is icing on the cake.
I have made no secret that I think David Prince will do exciting things at VT. Perhaps this is an area where he can make an impact.
I think Jarrett is a linchpin player like you described. In a way he reminds me of DJ Parker... not because of his skill set but because of how important he is to this D, how effective he is at his position, and how under appreciated he is vs the other guys that get a lot of the press (2007: Adibi, Hall, Macho, Ellis, Flowers 2013: Gayle, Tyler, Fullers, Hopkins, Maddy, Exum).
So if there are serviceable guys that can return punts instead of him and that protects him, great. But I also think he is a dynamic PR guy and that's good for VT. Good for KJ too as that makes NFL scouts perk up if they can draft a guy that might contribute in multiple ways. So part of me wants to see him get some action there, even if he isn't the primary guy. I also like having starters who play special teams... it's just old school Beamerball and also I think those guys are more confident players on ST. But if it exposes KJ to potential injury more than it should, I think the primary objective is keeping KJ the Rover healthy and productive at Rover.
So... I hope we can make Newsome or Magnus or maybe even JC our PR guy if need be. I'd like to see someone who is a playmaker there but he also has to be someone your trust to not make mistakes in terms of fielding the ball or fumbling it.
A punt return for a TD or large gain can be a game changer so I would like to see KJ back there returning punts in some situations, especially against Bama since he's the most experienced and proven that he can take it to the house. Perhaps we can bring some of the other guys along prior to ACC play to give them reps, but not against Bama.
that might be the best bet... take a little risk with him early but start phasing other guys in as the season goes along. i agree with you he can be a game changer there. But if he gets hurt there that can be a season changer. The risk/reward seems a bit asymmetric to me
What about Knowles? He is one of the fastest Hokies. I guess this is kind of similar to Jarrett though, since he holds a starting spot.
I wouldn't mind seeing what Fuller can do back there.
Joe Caleb on punt returns
I'm all for finding a suitable replacement as valuable as Jarrett is, but I say leave him for the Alabama game. No matter who else you put back there, they'll be inexperienced and that is too much pressure on front stage against Bama. That game is not one where we can play "not to lose" much less have any muffed kicks...we have to play to win and Jarrett gives us a threat that could break something at any time. In a game where we need everything we got, I say risk it, then start easing someone else in to replace.
A la Ryan Williams vs Bama in 09. Good point. At least for Bama it should be Jarrett. But I do think we have several other proven athletes with the ball in their hands that we could work in there after week 1; Mangus, Caleb, and Newsome.
I definitely agree on the Alabama game. I want as much experience on the field at all times, we don't want special teams mistakes. Even players who go on to contribute to the team in great ways are susceptible to mistakes their first time on a big stage.
Example 1 has already been mentioned:
Example 2 from last year:
Neither mistake made the difference in the game, but they were both big momentum swings that led to points for the other team.
I'm fine with us bringing in some younger, less vital guys to return punts, but I'd prefer to have experienced guys like Jarrett against Alabama and then have the younger guys get some reps against Western Carolina where mistakes won't be as critical.
As an aside.....nice contrast between Brent 'I am a tool' Musburger and Sean McDonough.
I disagree. Jarrett is dynamic enough as a kick returner that his game-breaking runs are an asset best served on the field. The risk vs reward ratio is worth the improved field position and chance of special teams points. I think we'll see this season we will need all the non-offensive TD's we can get. Would last years PITT game be nearly as close if it weren't for his 80-yard scamper? And the highlight that one game produced has become a season favorite to view. Jarrett needs to be returning kicks...as much as possible. He has the "it" factor that D. Hall possessed years ago. As far as a replacement? You've mentioned them all, and I believe Bud has backup plans in place if said player or players go down. We need playmakers. Nothing can turn a game like a kick return TD. (See D. Wilson vs GT in 2010). Fuller the younger is going to get exponential playing time as the season wears on. We have the horses in the stable, I say use Jarrett and let the kid make plays.
Risk vs Reward
Reward first. Maybe, maybe, he returns 3 or 4 in the season. Hopefully one in a big game that turns the momentum and seals a win.
Risk. He goes down with an injury and we have no captain in our backfield. Our thin depth at this position and corner mean Gray needs to do some serious shuffling to move someone more experienced in this position. Kyle Fuller perhaps gets moved and we are playing with possibility of two true freshman at corner. The secondary gets slashed and burned in a bend but not break game plan that we've seen before and loathe to return again. And things like the FSU game winning drive happens over and over.
No. I definitely would prefer someone else take punts. We have enough athletes for a star to emerge other than someone named Jarrett.
Agree, thus my comment above. The risk/reward profile is asymmetric here. A PR to to the house is potentially game changing, an injury is potentially season changing. Way more risk that then reward.
However, you do have to account for the potential game changing thing so maybe you use him only when that chance is high (late in a game or your see a weakness in the punting team). Or as nother poster said, perhaps you start the year with him there vs Bama but bring other guys along against WCU, Marshall, ECU
This argument is flawed. You are comparing 1 punt return to an injury. What if he returns 6 punts for touchdows, 15 punts for touchdowns... Every punt for a touchdown? What if he doesn't get injured?
You can't just make that argument without taking more into consideration imo.
you need to check your facts
NCAA Record. Most Punt Returns for Touchdown in Season. 5 touchdowns, Chad Owens, Hawaii 2004
That's 5, NOT 6 bro
You have a lot of IF's but none of them are realistic. So back to making arguments with taking more into consideration.... you were saying?
Not sure if srs
I guess I was just pointing out the whole argument of getting hurt is based on ifs..
We have a known commodity in Kyshoen. If no one bests him in practice, i would play him.
yah look, I get what you're saying. But flip it around and look at it as if you had neither.
If you take Jarrett out of both positions Punt Returner and Safety, which is the greater unknown? It may take us a week or two to find a replacement for him to return punts, but there are plenty of playmakers with potential to do so. (magnus, parker, knowles, caleb, etc)
But take him out of safety and we have untested players commanding our entire secondary. That something that could kill us all season.
ThatEscalatedQuickly.jpg
In all seriousness, you are right that is is unlikely that KJ takes 6 or even 5 back for a TD. But you may be focusing on the huge plays too much while neglecting how important consistent, 10-20 yard returns are. We have already pointed out that this season, particularly early on, will feature offensive struggles. In those situations, a decent return could mean points on special teams, not to mention giving our offense some breathing room. I think this team will need all the help it can get and will ultimately have to succeed in the turnover and field position battle to win games.
I don't think anyone is discounting the importance of 10 - 20 yard returns, especially if consistent. However, the argument is still whether it's easier to replace him at punt returner or safety. Without a doubt we have other options at punt return but are incredibly thin in the secondary with no proven replacements. No one (on this side of the debate) is saying you shouldn't have a star player back there, rather that Jarrett is too important to our defense to be punt returner.
Not flawed at all. It's how much risk I perceive vs how much reward I perceive in a situation where noone knows the real possibility of the key variables (chance of injury or # of PRs returned that impact the game.) In my opinion, I would think a loss of him for a year would be huge. So from a gain perspective, I'll say the equivalent "gain" would means he needs to return 4+ PRs for a TD this year in games where it would matter. That's 10 games in my opinion as I take out WCU and Marshall where I don't think we'll need big plays. I think the chances of injury are higher than the chances of 4+ TDs in 10 games against Bama, ACC foes, and ECU. Thus, I think the risk/reward profile is skewed such that the risk outweighs the reward.
You may have a different perspective on the value of TDs vs loss of value for an injury (maybe only 3 TDs is worth the risk to you.) Or view the probabilities of those as different (maybe you think he'll easily return a punt for a TD every other game.) So you may come to a different outcome. Which would not be flawed, it would simply mean your assumptions on unknown variables are different than mine.
But in my opinion, you play him in critical games/situations as PR when his impact would be most valuable but you minimize the risk of injury by working in other guys in low impact games/situations.
When's the last time we had a notable injury from a punt returner returning a punt? I can't really think of any, or for that matter remember any in any type of football.
Having said that, I failed to read your last point in your first comment. I wouldn't mind subbing him against "less" competition. My argument was based on the fact that a punt return for a touchdown could change our entire season if it led to a win against Alabama.
Dyrell Roberts-2011.
He had a broken arm on his return and was done for the season (and never played like he did pre-injury when he returned, in my opinion. He was always tentative from then on.)
Wasn't that a kickoff return?
Yes, but still a similar situation with players running opposite direction at full speed. He also got the injury that caused compartment syndrome the year before on a kickoff return.
I understand, but it seems to me that injuries happen much more often on kickoffs than punts. There may be some reason for that.
That's why they moved kickoffs 5 yards closer to the endzone. This brought about more touchbacks and gave less room for the defenders to gain speed and cause career ending collisions.
are there stats on this sort of thing? i know there's increased risk in return situations just because of all the momentum flowing down the field, but many times when someone's hurt on a kick or punt return it's not necessarily the return man. has it been proven if returning kicks or punts is statistically more likely to result in injury than playing a particular position, especially a position like safety where big collisions happen all the time in that part of the field?
Because on every kickoff return the returner gets to full speed
A large percentage of punt returns have a tackle well before the returner gets his engine into 6th gear.
Also, every kick-off coverage man (excluding the kicker) is a tackling specialist.
Many punt-coverage men are actually responsible for blocking duties, which mean they are less likely to have the skill set to deliver a harsh tackle.
My bad, you are correct.
I hear you, and I agree with you that this is alll based on "ifs". My "if analysis" is different than yours based on my perceived values of and probability of and outcomes.
Good stuff here Jhalf... neither of us are wrong, just valuing events differently and perceiving likelihood of those events differently.
I'm late to this discussion, but I believe we're not using the word Risk correctly:
Wikipedia Definition:
In all the analysis I see of risk, no one has included the probability of injury. My question is, what are the numbers? How many punt returners are lost for a season/game/quarter? How many get nagging injuries do punt returners get that lead to ineffective performance? Until these numbers are calculated, all Risk/Reward inquiries are based on dataless opinion.
I personally think, that having Jarrett as a punt returner is worth the risk. I don't think injuries to punt returners are very high, but again, that's just my hearsay.
Edit: corrected spelling of word
this was my whole point, multiplied by 3rdand31's sentiments below.
Ok I still think you're missing the point. The argument is more about the severity of impact to our defense if Jarrett is lost to injury vs the severity of impact to our punt return if he is injured. The definition of Risk therefore is the severity of negative impact that would have on the secondary without Jarrett as opposed to the severity of negative impact if he did not play on punt return. Safe to say the defense would suffer greater loss.
BUT... I have found what appear to be the only injury numbers from ncaa online.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/health+and+safety/sports...
Rate of Injury: 8.1 athletes per 1000
Reported Amount between 2004 to 2009: 41,000
7 times more likely to be injured during game than practice
Concussion: 7.4%
Upper Limb: 16.9%
Lower Limb: 50.4%
Injuries on Special Teams: 13.6% of all injuries
So you see, the potential of injury is in fact, as you and others have said, low. But would still be higher than if only playing safety. Playing on punt return will increase the likelihood of injury however small. At the moment he has x percentage of likelihood for injury, however if playing at punt return he has x + y likelihood. However low, it is still aggregated to be more than if he did not play punt return.
But again the point is not about his potential for injury being low or high on punt return, rather on the severity of impact of his loss if injured.
The impact to our defense will be detrimental for the entire season. Impact on Punt Return will be detrimental for maybe a week or two maximum until the next athlete is chosen. This is done whenever returners graduate so should not be an issue to do now as well.
As reported by InEnemyTerritory in Bama thread. Amari Cooper caught 4 passes for 182 yards and 3 touchdowns in Alabama's first scrimmage.
We need an experienced play maker and captain in our secondary more than we need that same person to return punts. Plain and Simple
I completely get your point. Severity is included risk, as stated in the definition "probability or threat of quantifiable damage." Damage, in this scenario, being the loss of experience in the secondary. So, you're arguing no risk should be taken, which is fine. But you can't convince me no risk should be taken without the data proving that the risk is in fact significant.
I think French's point in his article is a little bit different. I think he's saying the risk is maybe low, but the reward is no longer worth it, so it doesn't matter cause no returns are going to be good. I disagree with that and I believe punt returns can still change field position and momentum. Even if the average return is low, the sole exceptional return that changes the game is worth the gamble.
i gotta learn to read a whole thread before i post, my question was already answered down here. good stuff chazz and fernley.
Punt returns notwithstanding, maybe Dyrell Roberts can come back for one game of eligibility in the opener and house a kickoff return for old times sake?
Walk the dog down the sidelines.
FWIW Jarrett, Newsome, and Byrn (in that order) got all of the reps at PR last Saturday.
I just have to disagree here. You put the best players in. Being cautious does not win championships and its not how you play Hokie football.
yah, I don't think anyone disagrees with putting real play makers on special teams and that is, as you say, Hokie football. But it's a slippery slope.
For example, QB1 is the size of a linebacker with great speed, vision and long arms. You could argue he would be great on punt block rushing up the middle, but you just wouldn't do that because of the team's greater need for him. That's what the argument for keeping Jarrett off Punt Return is. His value as our secondary captain is greater than Punt Return, especially since we have so many great athletes on the field that could be equally as boss returning the rock.
I like the comparison but the only thing is that Jarrett has actually proven himself to be a great returner. Maybe its just BillDozers preview video making me believe in him so much haha.
Put Wyatt Teller and Sam Rodgers back there and have them bulldoze their way for a couple of extra yards
500 lbs of wide eyed crazy running at your with no intent on juking or cutting
I'd imagine it'd be something akin to this:
I think we need a receiver to step-up at this role.
I agree with all of French's points, but the glory days of Beamer Ball was when guys like Lee Suggs and Andre Davis were in on the punt block/return teams. Putting your best athletes in the best positions is what changes games, as seen in the return game by Jayron Hosley, Eddie Royal, and Macho Harris. It is certainly a huge risk in which the coaches have to decide how much they value the return game in regards to Jarrett's health, but I think we're a better team with him returning punts.
If we had real depth in the secondary I don't think anyone, including French, would say differently
I understand and appreciate the thought behind the argument, and if a suitable alternative is available, by all means use him. As much as we all clamor for a return of BeamerBall, the reality of the philosophy was just as stated above...use the best athletes to create game change. If we want a true return of that, then Jarratt's the man. But I agree, some thought has to be put into preservation of the secondary, given the lack of depth we have at the moment. A reliable, good (not superb) returner has some distinct positives with regard to the health of our starters.
Mangus, Deon Newsome, or Kendall Fuller
I think French is absolutely correct about Jarrett's importance to the defense. Whip and Rover are the two most important play-making positions for this defense, and with Jarrett and RVD/Kendall manning those two positions Foster has a chance to field a dangerous unit.
But.
I think Jarrett should absolutely be returning punts against Alabama, and probably the rest of the year too. He is definitely the most dangerous punt returner on the team, anyone else back there returning kicks would be a noticeable drop-off. Punt returns are a huge opportunity for a team to change the game. Against Alabama, Tech isn't going to get very many chances to hit big plays and swing the momentum in their favor. Bama doesn't throw many interceptions. Long kick returns will be necessary to defeat them.
I also think that the risk to a punt returner is a little overestimated. Especially if Beamer sticks with his two returner plan, as Jarrett would be seeing even fewer return opportunities then he normally would. Think back on the past couple years of punt returns for Tech. How many returner actually suffered a moderate to severe injury during a punt? (Yes Roberts ended a season on a kick return injury, but kick off and punt returns are two totally different animals. Jarrett should not be returning kick offs)
I agree that having Jarrett return punts is a risk, but I wouldn't call it a huge risk. And I do think that the risk is justified, at least vs Alabama. A win vs Bama would be one of the biggest victories for the program over the past few years. It would help the program in so many ways (including recruiting). Tech needs to win the game vs Bama, and to do so it needs all hands on deck.
waiting for an epic french vs 3rdand31 showdown on this one...
I agree. I probably should have read your post before my post above. Essentially, until someone proves to me the risk of injury returning punts, I will always believe you always put your best returner back there.
I think against Western Carolina or some other sister's of the poor team...Jarrett returning punts isn't so critical. Maybe let him field one or two in a game against opponents like that.
Against 'Bama, I think put him back there every time. Reason is that you need your best playmakers to get their hands on the ball as much as possible against #1. If you're this year's VT team, you don't beat #1 by being conservative. Ever hear of the British SAS (their version of the SEALS) motto? Who dares wins. I'm not saying to take lots of stupid risks, but instead to be aggressive and attack. Gotta do that with your most dangerous players.
Whatever happened to using our best players on special teams? This is how Beamer Ball got its reputation. Granted it's from TSL, take note at 0:40
not to get off topic, but special teams question:
I know kick formations have changed, etc, but I never see any movement pre-punt like in the above clip. Why don't we ever do that? Even if we don't block a punt, surely it rattles the punter a little bit?
I totally disagree with the title of this column.
(I do however agree with the premise that KJ is the leader and one of our most talented d-backs)
The video that dcarney0711 linked illustrates this point and is a great counter.
The special teams (Beamer Ball) has been no better than our average opponent's special teams in the last five or so years. Beamer Ball in its heyday had the best players/athletes on the field. Starters on O and D wanted and were encouraged to be part of the "pride and joy". That was our edge that separated us from everyone else. Beamer has fallen back from this approach and no longer uses his best players on punt blocks/returns (not sure what caused this change)
I miss the golden days of a lee suggs or a vincent fuller/macho harris being involved in a punt block - 7 point swing.
There is significantly less risk in being injured on a punt return than a kickoff return. I can't recall the last time we had a player badly injured in a punt return situation.
The reward of Jarrett returning punts over an unproven commodity can mean the difference between a 8-4 season and a 10-2 season + I feel like he is more likely to hurt himself against a Western Carolina, coming up in run support than returning punts vs Bama or Miami.
Let teams kick away from Jarrett, but put another player back there that will make them think twice about it (Caleb?)
This team just isn't good enough to get back to a BCS game without living a little on the edge.
just my take...
Is anyone else afraid that new punt returner might drop/fumble/muff the return? That is also a huge risk to consider.
https://twitter.com/andybittervt/status/367430782962245632
The group that has been getting reps in practice. Per Bitter
The suggestion of Joel Caleb getting playing time there would be a good one, but for the fact that he's suspended for Alabama game isn't he?
Based on Andy Bitter's tweet it looks like the number of contenders is getting smaller. Beamer will likely put Jarrett as a punt returner, which means opponents will kick away from him. Expect whoever is in the other spot to get a ton of returns, as Beamer will continue to use two deep returners.
Thank you to everyone for all the great comments. I love the debate. A couple of responses to your questions or comments:
1) "Explosive" is a luxury as a punt returner. The most critical skill set for an effective punt return man is the ability to field the punt. Other than muffing the punt, the thing that drives coaches nuts in the return game is a punt returner who lets the ball bounce, even on short kicks. More field position is acquired by the threat of a block coupled with catching the punt than on actual returns. Jarrett continues to be an option, which tells me that Beamer is not confident in the other contenders ability to make good judgements on fielding punts and then catching the ball. It is certainly scary to imagine Kyle Fuller needing to return punts given his responsibility as a man corner on the boundary. (Note, I expect that Kyle is fielding punts because he will be on the field on 4th and short when the D stays on the field in Punt Safe.)
2) Without exception, the best punt returners break returns by getting upfield quickly after the catch. The mechanics almost mirror a quick fullback trap. The outside defenders get caught upfield and you only need a small seem to burst through. Brian Mitchell was terrific at hitting that seam. It may not be as exciting as the Darnell Jefferson cutback 50 yards across the field return, but it leads to more touchdowns and consistent 10-15 yard net gains in field position. The small quick guys are not always going to be the best fit, but the guys who are fearless and get up the field will always be effective.
3) As important as special teams are, and knowing how critical a big return can be in turning around a game, I think that the use of Jarrett in the kicking game could damage his effectiveness on defense, and the Hokies can not afford him to play at anything other than an elite level. Against Alabama it will be very difficult for the VT offense to sustain drives. The defense is going to be taxed. While the Hokies have defensive line depth, the linebackers are going to be pushed to the limit of their physical endurance in the 3rd and 4th quarter, and Jarrett is a linebacker with the added responsibility of deep coverage. He doesn't have experienced depth behind him and Foster can't replicate his skill set. If, and it is a big if, Beamer can identify someone with some explosiveness in the return game who also won't hurt you with muffed kicks or failure to field kicks, I would rather see that person getting the return and Jarrett getting fluids so he can rock TJ Yeldon on the next series.
I totally agree with all your reasoning, but how devastating would an early muffed or fumbled punt be against Alabama? (Not saying that couldn't happen to Jarrett, but certainly less likely with him) Then you have 11 tired guys coming back on the field instead of just one and in even worse field position. Sure, they can catch in practice, but that changes big time when they're back there for the first time on a national stage against the number one team in the country. We cannot afford to give up any easy points if we want to win. So along with that my point is, as I mentioned above, if we want to beat a team as good as Alabama, we can not hold anything back. We need him out there to avoid a crucial mess up and be a legitimate scoring threat (TD to the house or long enough return for good field position). Just what I think would be better though. I totally get your argument. I would just rather wait until after the Bama game.
Oh I don't know.. let me check the tape from 2009 when we were leading 7-6 and forced Alabama to punt...
any turnover against them is a killer, especially one where they gain 40 yards of field position...
both. I just thought it was kind of ironic you mentioned fielding kicks cleanly but didn't mention the 2009 game, because RMFW gift-wrapped a FG for Alabama with a muffed punt last time around and Davon Morgan did the same by fumbling a kickoff return. Both turnovers only resulted in FG's but they contributed to the defense getting worn down in the 4th quarter. (especially Morgan's fumble).
I think we lose to Alabama playing conservative in any aspect on the field, whether that be offense, defense, or special teams. I would say not putting arguably your best and most experienced punt returner out there to field punts out fear of injury is conservative. We will have a hard enough task beating Bama if we play our best and play aggressively. In my opinion, you are risking more by putting someone else out there to field punts that is less experienced than KJ since Alabama will 1) most likely be kicking to that person if it isn't KJ and 2) being less experienced, on a big stage, against the Tide, that lesser amount of experience is probably going to garner a higher probability of a muffed punt - higher than the probability of KJ getting hurt on a punt return. Plus, as you said, they probably are not going to kick it to KJ when he is out there. Tech will need a boost somewhere to win against Bama and I think we all know it probably won't be coming from the offense - so that leaves the defense or special teams. We will probably need one from both in order to win.
What about Sam DRAGO Rodgers?
Explosive - Check!
Talented - Check!
Willing to put it all on the line for the team - Check!
The kid did it all in high school and played multiple sports.
French, I agree on the fact that getting upfield quickly on punts tends to increase the possibility of a long return...however, what seems to happen frequently is that a return right or left is called, with a wall setting up for the return, and then the punt goes to the opposite side. This creates an exposed return specialist with a long way to go to get to his protection scheme. I know what our returners in h.s. were told to do (fair catch as first choice, catch and out of bounds if close to the sideline, do your best otherwise), but what is the generally accepted way of handling that for returners at this level? I know too often you have guys trying to get to the protection wall, losing yardage after the catch, and leaving the fans generally unhappy. Is this a time for improvisation by the returner? Fair catch only?
Im sorry French but...
I am ok with being wrong if what I am wrong about results in wins.
French wrong? Banish the thought! London will win the ACC before that happens.
Wasn't KJ in the top 10 nationally for return yardage.....? Isn't that a good enough reason to put him in? Or am I confused with past years...?
However:
Beamerball = starters on special teams. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Gotta gamble a bit to #BeatBama
Correction. BeamerBall = Winning more with less by having a blue collar work ethic and highly aggressive, risk taking defensive play balanced with hard nosed power running offense.
Most people associate special teams play as Beamerball but that was only because we blocked more kicks than other teams. Beamerball was an ATTITUDE. A defense that flew around on the edge of recklessness with hard nose kids with chips on their shoulders to beat the bigger guy. (eg. Cornell Brown v Texas, Sugar Bowl '95)
We get that back, even we don't block kicks like we used to, we will win more games and win big games.
News on the punt coverage team for a second. I read that Dadi Nicholas was getting reps as a gunner...
from here?
Andy Bitter tweet. I can't really post the tweet from work though.
What happened to "Beamer Ball" putting the best athletes on special teams--don't I remember Lee Suggs blocking punts?!
Plain and simple, Tech is going to have to play Beamerball to win this game. Special team play is going to be huge. I say Jarrett starts at PR for Alabama, and when we play smaller teams (i.e. the rest of our non-conference schedule) Jarrett does not return punts.