The Virginia Tech football staff has 12 days, just 12 days to get their team ready to beat the top football program in the country. Keep in mind, most of Virginia Tech's players were part of a team which had to scratch and claw its way to a 7-6 season in 2012. A team which finished fourth in its division of the ACC, a conference many consider to be just the fifth best in the nation.
The football team last year was not good. The moves that Frank Beamer, a man who publicly admits to hating change, proves that last season was a disappointment. There were a lot of reasons why the Hokies struggled last year (down year in talent, poor offensive scheme, lack of senior leadership), and there's been a lot of talk this offseason about how those issues have been addressed. Loeffler and Grimes have been hired to fix Beamer's annual offensive woes, Edmunds is supposed to be the next-big-thing at tailback, and Logan Thomas claims to be much more involved with maintaining the high standards necessary to win championships. Hokie fans hope that the offense will improve enough to allow their team to beat Alabama's juggernaut. Well, the scrimmage on saturday showed me that the offense has a long way to go in 12 days to be good enough to #BEATBAMA.
This latest scrimmage was incredibly disappointing for the offense. Reading the quotes from the offensive staff about the scrimmage, I am surprised with how...positive they seem. I am starting to have some serious concerns about both passing game as well as the rushing attack. As I've said since Loeffler got hired, I believe his offensive system is a well rounded one. One that's good enough to beat any defense when implemented and executed correctly. It is a flexible scheme which allows an offensive coordinator to pick which matchups he wants to attack, and Loeffler showed a couple of times during the scrimmage that he knows how to isolate his playmakers in one-on-one coverage. Yet, the offense just wasn't able to execute the plays often enough. The whole offensive unit needs to improve their play, starting today, if they intend on beating Bama.
Rushing Attack Improves... Slightly
Last scrimmage I was upset with the lack of variety in the running scheme. Outside zone stretch seemed to be the play called time after time. On Saturday, those in attendance still got their daily dose of outside zone run (which was ineffective) but this time around the inside zone was featured more heavily. Edmunds hardly got any snaps (can't fault the coaches there, ain't nobody got time to risk an injury to our starting tailback), but I was pleasantly surprised at how Chris Mangus ran the inside zone. He is limited in between the tackles, dude just doesn't have enough size to move the pile. However, he was decisive with his cuts and wasn't afraid to stick his nose in there to get what yardage he could. The difference in being a bad zone rush team and a good zone rush team is the willingness of the tailback to pick up 4 yards instead of trying (and failing) for 20. Hokie running backs showed yesterday that they were willing to put their head down and get what they could. If Edmunds has the same mentality, then Tech should be ok against Bama. He has more power than any of the other tailbacks, so a 3 yard gain for Mangus could turn into a 5 yard gain for Edmunds. Second-and-seven is a whole lot worse than 2-and-5.
I was really impressed with Maurice Taylor's day. I'm not going to predict that he'll ever get serious playing time at Tech, but he looked very comfortable in Grimes' zone attack. Taylor has that fatal RB disease; he lacks both great size and great speed. If you don't have one or the other, it's tough to be an exceptional rusher (unless you have elite vision, shout out to Lil Sweetness). Again, if Edmunds can show the same decision making skills as Taylor did, then the rushing attack is on it's way to being successful. Not there yet, but on its way.
The lack of man blocking schemes is still disappointing. I didn't see any offensive linemen pulling around the edge or coming across the face of the formation for a trap block. Those are vital blocking varieties needed to combat a defense which will flow quickly to the ball, as Alabama is sure to do. In my opinion, the perfect compliment to an outside zone run is a cutback rush where a linemen either traps a defensive tackle or leads the tailback into a hole and mauls a linebacker. I didn't see a single hint of one of those plays. Grimes is sure to have those in the playbook before Tech plays Bama, but that game is only 12 days away. I hoped by now those plays would have been installed, and they would be working on perfecting them.
An Offensive Passing Attack
No one has been a bigger Logan Thomas supporter over the past few years then me. Even when he was struggling the most, I always thought that he had it in him to be an elite QB. The past two scrimmages has made me wonder if my feelings were correct.
Thomas still throws a brilliant deep ball. The Stanford touchdown Thomas threw yesterday was a beauty. Logan can push the ball down the field and stretch a defense vertically as well as anyone in the country. However, for Tech to beat Bama, or even compete for an ACC division title, Thomas must improve his short-yardage accuracy. Thomas not only needs to get better at getting the ball to his open underneath receivers, he needs to improve at spotting which guys are actually open and which guys aren't. The frequency with which he makes the wrong read in short-yardage throwing situations is beginning to worry me, especially down near the goal line. Hopefully this is something which will fix itself as Thomas and the WR's become more familiar with each other and Loeffler's schemes.
Despite his struggles, Thomas should still be one of the top QBs in the ACC. The no-contact rule really limits what he does best. At one point Thomas rolled out on a bootleg and made a good decision to tuck it and run. He did a great job at putting his foot in the ground and turning up field, and if not for his yellow jersey some poor secondary member would have had the pleasure of tasting Logan's shoulder pads. Thomas may struggle throwing the ball for short yardage, but he excels at rushing for short yardage. Loeffler had better have an extensive package highlighting that skill, or he won't be getting the most out of his senior QB.
Mark Leal is the anti-Logan in my mind. He's played well when asked to make short throws. Whereas Logan is a lumbering giant who smashes his way to the first down line, Leal is much quicker and elusive. Leal still doesn't have a great arm for pushing the ball down the field, something that Loeffler wants to do. I'm not sure Leal will ever be able to put the ball wherever he wants to on the football field, but he is a gamer who should have success when his time comes, especially if he has a strong rushing attack to compliment his short throwing game. Leal could lead one heck of a first-down offense. Leal also looks far more comfortable running the bootleg. The flat-sideline-middle of the field reads that go with the bootleg come naturally to him, and at least once during the scrimmage Leal found a man open about 15 yards down the field. Leal does struggle in the pocket though. He's not as tall as Logan so that may play a part in it, but his o-line also didn't give him as much time as Logan had either.
Brenden Motley surprised me with his arm strength. He may end up surprising me with how much playing time he gets before his career at Tech is over. Motley has some good quickness and is a decisive scrambling QB. When he decides to take off, he takes off. Motley is another QB who will improve once the yellow jersey is removed. Motley made one throw that got me out of my seat. It was about a 10 yard out route. When he decided to throw the ball, I thought it was a sure pick-six. Kendall Fuller was in a position to make a break on a bad throw but Motley threw it to the correct shoulder and he got it there with enough zip on it that the WR was able to catch it and run with it.
00:00:19–00:00:27
The kid can play.
Bucky Hodges looked like a very raw prospect. He has good size and he can move around well, but he isn't anywhere close to being ready to play a college football game. Thomas was clearly taking an active role in mentoring him though, as Thomas was out on the field when Hodges was. Thomas was practically in the huddle with Hodges. At one point, as Hodges was in shotgun and making his cadence, Thomas walked out and said something to Hodges before Bucky finally snapped the ball. Speaking of snapping the ball, Bucky had some bad luck with shotgun snaps. He dropped about 3 of them. On one of those drops, Hodges was able to pick the ball up and scramble to keep the play alive before nearly killing a WR with an ill-advised pass. It was completed for a decent gain, but he wasn't doing his teammate any favors by lofting it out to him like he did.
That Moorehead, He'll Get After Ya
Without a doubt, my favorite moment of the scrimmage was when Coach Moorehead very publicly addressed his wide receivers. I'm not sure if he was aware at how far his voice would carry, but I was sitting fairly high up on the West Stands and heard every rated-R word. In short, he wanted his receivers to look in the stands, see how many people were there to watch them drop balls and not make plays, and that they needed to step up. Oh, and he wanted them to catch the dang ball. Coach Beamer probably would have choose some more Disney-level words, but I think the pep talk had the intended effect. The WR's were plagued by poor routes and late breaks on the ball (as well as a number of drops) but after Moorehead discussed things over with his crew they started looking a little better. At one point Knowles looked very aggressive coming back on a late throw and taking an interception literally out of Facyson's hands. He stood up and pointed at Moorehead in acknowledgment of his coach. Moorehead simply clapped.
Stanford still looks like the best playmaker of the group, but Knowles had his moments as well. The secondary they were lined up against Saturday, should be the best secondary they face all year, so it's good to know that they are capable of making plays against top competition. However, the receivers need to step up. Loeffler's game plan allows them to work against isolated CB's and against soft cover-4 and cover-3 deep shells. Thomas has the arm to get them the ball, they just have to get out of their breaks sharply enough and attack the ball aggressively enough to make plays.
After the last scrimmage, I was raving about Parker's physical skill set to anyone who would listen. Parker still showed flashes of his great physical gifts, but this time around I wanted to focus on his receiving skills. The young man has a lot of work to put in, which isn't unexpected considering he has never played WR before. While I was surprised, I was disappointed. Parker doesn't look quite natural when following a ball that's in the air. If a ball is thrown directly to him and he can come back for it (like on a curl route) he looks much stronger than if he has to go chase a lofted ball down. He had an embarrassing moment in the scrimmage where he beat his man deep, but looked like a fish out of water (or like a QB trying to play WR) when trying to get in position to make a play. He has four years of eligibility left, I'm sure we'll see him make plenty of plays before it's all said and done. Not very many of those plays will happen this year, unfortunately.
The Big Picture
The Offense isn't good enough. Not yet. There were some flashes and I was very encouraged by the amount of 3-6 yard gains by the rushing attack. The outside zone was completely ineffective, but against Bud's 4-2-5 scheme that is to be expected. The inside zone run was very positive, something that Grimes and the rest of the o-line can build off of. If the o-line can continue to improve zone blocking, and if Grimes implements some good counter plays, and if Edmunds is as good as we all hope he is, and if Loeffler is able to get Logan going up the middle... then Tech should have some success rushing against Bama. That's a lot of ifs, but there are even more ifs about the passing game. The short yardage attack simply isn't effective. I hope that Loeffler is working with this QB and WR's to install some more short yardage concepts (Triangles!!!) to attack Bama with. Logan is a smart guy who can see over the o-line and has a big enough arm to zip the ball into any window. The passing game shouldn't be this far behind and I expect it will improve. It has to.
Comments
i got a bad feeling on this one sarge
I'll be honest, I don't expect to #beatbama...but I don't expect to be #beatendownbybama either. The defense will hold their place and the offense will be shockingly anemic and we'll lose something like 24-3. Maybe we'll get lucky and lose 17-3 or may be the defense scores and it's only a one score game. But this summer's camp has just killed almost all hope that the offense has enough cohesion to put up points against Bama.
But......I expect this team will fade away for a few weeks and get better...week after week. We'll beat GT rather handedly (because of Bud) and actually get to the UNC game feeling pretty good about ourselves. I think this team can get better and better as the OL gels (they will be so much better w/out Newsome...) and Edmunds gets into a rhythm and some of these young receivers get more experience. We need to keep Coles healthy and our CB's healthy and this will be a good year.
But this summer's camp has been some cold water on the fire of Loeffler's offense. I think you illustrated the issues well.
I have a soft spot for Paul Johnson's offense, because I think he is a true football genius. There have been reports that he is moving in the direction of a more shot-gun oriented triple option game (something that Nevada had some success with, although they were never as committed to the true triple options principles that PJ is). He could have a lot of success with this look, especially with the talent he has at QB (Vad Lee is the real deal and could definitely be better then Nesbitt ever was. Same goes for their freshmen back-up, he might be even more explosive).
My point is this, don't sleep on that Georgia Tech game. Bud has had success against them in the past because he too is one of the best in the business. I think the Hokies have a good shot at winning that game, but until I see what the Hokies look like on the field I won't be chalking that match-up as anything but a 50/50 dog fight.
You sound like Mama Giraffe dude... Point of fact. Paul Johnson is an asshole. A friend of mine played for him at Navy and absolutely hates him, and yes he was a starter there for 3 years. While his type of offense is fun, the manner in which he predicates its success whereby he coaches borderline (and legit) chop blocks, is something I despise. If he wants to be labeled a genius by succeeding with the triple option then he should do it without coaching kids to legally hurt other kids.
I am with Mason on this one. He may be a jerk, but he is a brilliant coach. Give another coach the talent he has at Georgia Tech and a normal pro-style offense, and they won't win a game. Fundamentals can still win football games, and no matter how many times the Hokies beat GT, they are always worse for wear coming out of that game.
Not arguing that. But I can't get behind a coach that teaches players how to get away with chop blocking other kids. This is what he taught at Navy and my friend is 100% positive it's what he continues to teach. No matter how brilliant he is at succeeding with the limited talent he has, I wouldn't give him any recognition for it.
I'd give Jeff Grimes a bonus if the Hokies chop blocked on every single play. That is the way football was meant to be played. Not playing paddycake and dancing in place like guys block now.
Agree to disagree. I'm all for rough play. I think the new targeting rule is bullshit and that NCAA has watered down the game way too much. However, I also believe that chop blocking is something that should have protection. It can end someone's career in an instant. If it were legal this year our OL would be destroyed with just one or two injuries.
Maybe the rules need to change on cut blocks, but I don't think trying to injure players is Paul Johnson's goal. Instead the purpose is slowing them because they're having to focus more attention on protecting themselves and can't focus exclusively on getting to their gap and/or getting into the backfield. We hear from our coaches all the time about players' heads tying up their feet, and more than anything else I think that's what GTs offense strives for: give the defensive players a lot to worry about-am I about to get cut? does the QB still have the ball? does my teammate have a good enough angle on the pitchman for me to go ahead and commit to going at the QB?-so that they're thinking about what they should do and aren't reacting.
It is guys beating bigger, stronger, and faster guys with technique. Low man wins. That is the essence of the sport. Watch any 1960 Packers film. Watch the Sooners run the wishbone in the 70's. on the back side of plays, you cut block if you can't scoop your assignment. I oppose high-low blocks, but chop blocks are a sound fundamental part of blocking.
I was a 185 lb kid playing TE in high school. I cut the mess out of fools. Coach loved me.
THIS.
As a 220-pound guard in high school, I made a living off of pulling around and blocking linebackers on power, and cutting the shit out of DTs whenever I had a man over my head. High-low blocks are dangerous and illegal, cut blocks are legal and as dangerous as any other football play. They're part of the game, and any good defensive line coach is going to teach his guys how to beat them. I can't find the link, but I remember Wiles talking about this when asked about the progression of the backup DTs.
Cut blocking goes bad when you try to cut a smart, superior athlete on every play. If I had the film of a DT just jumping over me in a state playoff game, I'd post it for everyone to see what I was talking about, and get a laugh.
Yah, just to be clear. I have absolutely nothing against cut blocks. I am talking about illegal chop blocks. The targeting of knees kind of block that can result in career ending injury.
this is why Chop Block Gate happened in 2009:
http://hamptonroads.com/2009/10/chop-blocks-have-hokies-yellow-jackets-h...
It's illegal for a very good reason. Johnson doesn't care. In fact he coaches kids on how to get away with it. I stand by my hatred of him and that he should not be labelled a genius because of it.
Asshole or not, the dude IS a football genius.
Was Thomas Jefferson not a genius simply because he built UVA?
haha... you are seriously comparing PJ to TJ? Come one man... that's just. No.... not even remotely close.
Every genius has their hiccups. Their Achilles' heel, if you will.
CPJ's up until last season was winning bowl games.
To me, it is a terminology difference. A cut or chop block is the same thing. A high/low is the illegal block.
A cut block and a chop block are not the same thing.
cut block = going for the legs
chop block = combination blocking someone low & high at the same time
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_blocking
Technically correct (the best kind of correct).
But many, many people (even football people) use the two terms interchangeably, but when speaking about the illegal chop block refer to it as a "high/low block".
DBU is promoted a level as a bureaucrat!
Somewhere there is a video of a Fork Union defensive tackle jumping me on a cut block. Kid I believe ended up at South Carolina.
On a related note, if anyone has a copy of the 1998 Fork Union Prep Team roster, I would greatly appreciate it.
FTFY.
I think it's over the top to say that Paul Johnson teaches kids to legally hurt other kids.
And I don't think Paul Johnson teaches his players to chop block. I just think it's going to happen more often with the frequency with which they cut block then with other offenses. Often times, the chop block occurs because DLinemen A hits Olinemen A, while Olinemen B cut blocks DLinemen A. It's such a gray area because Olinemen A might not even be attempting to touch the chopped player, but in the tackle box sometimes you get engaged with people you don't intend to.
I understand what your saying, but I don't fault Paul Johnson for teaching his kids to cut block. And I don't think that there is any evidence that he intentionally teaches his players to hurt others, that's a little much.
You've got a guy here passing on inside direct experience from a friend who played for Johnson and was a 3 year starter for him at Navy; and you're completely disregarding it. Johnson is an asshole who has no regard for player safety. He coaches his linemen on how to make illegal chop blocks look accidental or incidental.
I understand, everything on the internet isn't true. But come on man.
I don't know if there is a college coach who doesn't teach the players to get away with a little dirty play. The game today is so closely matched that any advantage you can get is important.
Now, I certainly HOPE that our guys don't do anything like that.
This is a very serious accusation that I would have to have a significant amount of evidence to believe. You're talking about the a man who was the head coach of a service academy for many years. If he was TRULY teaching his players to hurt others, he would have been called out in public by now.
Does he teach his players to cut block on practically every play? Abso-freaking-lutely. Does that mean that his players will be in a position to chop block far more then other teams? Abso-freaking-lutely.
There is a difference between teaching your players how to hurt others, and asking your players to perform a technically difficult task which they will occasionally fail at.
Let's be honest though. If Tech hadn't been beaten by Paul Johnson in the past, the amount of hate he gets in Tech circles would be far less. Seems like a lot of sour grapes to me.
They've beaten us once in the 5 years that Johnson has been their coach. And they resorted to illegal crack back blocks on our safeties to do it. Sure the games are close but how much is that our offense wasting downs against a ball-control offense, and how much of it is shady blocking up front?
They've caused far greater damage to our DL's health than anything else.
Chopgate?
Didn't Beamer publicly apologize for his comments and admit he was wrong...?
http://hamptonroads.com/2009/10/chop-blocks-have-hokies-yellow-jackets-h...
Yeah, but after this Beamer apologized, unless I'm mistaken.
Plus, just because some WR doesn't want to square up Kam Chancellor in a fair fight doesn't mean that PJ personally instructed him to dive at his knees. Just sayin :)
Beamer is a stand up guy. He NEVER speaks bad about anyone. He barely even showed how pissed he was about Danny Coale's touchdown ripping the Sugar Bowl from his hands. And THIS he did get upset about and said something publicly. Beamer only apologized because he stepped out of his normal keeping his cool zone. No no, don't mistake his apology as him being wrong. He only apologized because he let negative comments go which he does not normally do.
Well, I think he wasn't acting pissed about the Danny Coale catch because he was too busy throwing Coale under the bus for the fake punt call to cover his own ass. Lowest point in the Beamer reign after the "Marcus Vick reinstatement" announcement.
Definitely agree there. That was bad.
Yah as I said, I only know this because a very good friend played for him at Navy. I just did a cursory google of "Paul Johnson Navy football team" and my friend comes up in the pictures. I'm not going to call my friend out but I 100% believe what he says. If he says Johnson coached kids how to get away with chop blocks then I am certain he did, but take it with whatever grain of salt you want. I believe in my friend and I believe Chop Gate happened for a reason.
Ok, so I emailed my friend and asked if he had any additional insight to provide. He calmly replied just google, so I did. What I found was that Paul Johnson has a history of chop blocking from his first HC position at Georgia Southern. Chop Gate 2009 with the Hokies was not the only time this has come up. In fact, illegal chop blocking is something he has been known for during his entire coaching career, and in the case of Navy a legacy he left to the new coach.
While at Georgia Southern
http://onlineathens.com/sports/college-sports/2012-11-13/georgia-souther...
http://blogs.ajc.com/uga-sports-blog/2012/11/13/georgia-southerns-cut-bl...
Navy
http://irish.nbcsports.com/2010/11/18/irish-need-to-battle-the-chop-blocks/
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4646241
http://www.ourhonordefend.com/2009/09/previewin-navy.php
http://www.theclevelandfan.com/ohio-state-buckeyes/3-buckeye-archive/504...
http://irish.nbcsports.com/2009/11/12/brown-takes-issue-with-navy-coachs...
GT
http://247sports.com/Board/30/Georgia-Tech-chop-block-14289915/1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ojR6qo-RY8
http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20121001/PC20/121009902/1038/georg...
http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/caneswatch/2010/11/10/paul-johnson-to-ran...
http://hamptonroads.com/2009/10/chop-blocks-have-hokies-yellow-jackets-h...
http://www.secrant.com/rant/p/37919479/Illegal-Chop-Block-Just-Took-Out-...
http://boards.atlantafalcons.com/topic/3814950-how-uga-deals-with-georgi...
I don't know of ANY other coach that has this type of specific complaint from fans, coaches and conferences as Paul Johnson. Nothing here is definitive I know, but this is only 10 minutes on the google machine, and usually where there is
there is
and a duck is always a
A lot of conflating cut blocking and chop blocking in those links.
Basically cut blocking is legal but it's unpopular with defenders. Chop blocking happens much more frequently in GT's offense because the way they try to have the C or OG run past the DT toward the LB's, while an OT or the other OG does a cut block into the side of the DT's leg. Paul Johnson coaches his OL to execute that block regardless of whether the DT is engaging the man across from him, resulting in many more chop blocks than any other team.
What they are doing is dirty on several levels, not just the crap on the line but the clipping they try to get away with by sending their WR's and A-Backs outside-in to cut block safeties or LB's from the side/behind while they're flowing to the ball carrier.
It's an offense built around pushing the edge of legal blocking techniques and it frequently succeeds only because they cross the line into illegal blocking and get away with it because the play is hard to discerne from the legal, but borderline plays before and after.
Amen.
And agreed on links. As i said nothing definitive, just lots of complaining. But when the same shit has been following one coach for so long, over 3 separate coaching jobs, then the non-definitive starts to become something more. It becomes a pattern and anyone who has gone to VT and had to take statistics know what a pattern means.
Exactly this.
For what it's worth, I don't think it's flirty with the line of dirty at all. The defense doesn't get to dictate to the offense what blocking techniques they can deploy. If an olinemen has no intendtion to engage with a defender, but the defender hits him anyways, how is it the offenses fault when the defender gets cut block by a olinemen? The cutter knows his assignment pre-snap, and has to cut block the defender as quickly as possible. He simply doesn't have time to assess whether or not the defender is engaged with anyone else.
As far as clipping goes, I don't think they teach their smaller athletes to illegally clip defender. I think that it's just a statistically inevitability that it'll happen more frequently when you ask your players to do it on basically every play.
I see why someone would consider Paul Johnson's tactics dirty, but I don't. If his players executed his game plan perfectly, then they'd never have any chop blocks on them. Of course, no team executes 100 percent perfectly, and when they screw it up they should be adequately punished.
No worries man. I respect your opinion and respectfully disagree. I certainly understand all your points and agree with most.
It was a good convo though and lots of great points back and forth. Turkey leg for you good sir.
Well, I think the offense also doesn't get to dictate who the defense blocks either - if you are doing something that could be illegal based upon what the defender does, and you do it every play regardless of what the defender does, then you're expecting to chop block at some point during the game. The onus to follow the rules is on the player that the rules apply to. It isn't on the defender to not get dangerously chop blocked. It's on the offense not to do it. Paul Johnson disregards this, and plows ahead anyway, knowing that they don't get called reliably anyhow, and that makes him dirty.
I agree 100%... it's like... we're
It's a pretty simple rule. Don't cut block from outside the tackle box back towards the center of the field and don't cut block people from behind in any situation. The fact that these guys keep doing it is an indication that CPJ is teaching them to do it and instructing them to do it.
Here's a perfect example of illegal outside-in cut block from the 2009 game. At 2:53 watch #24 come outside-in and cut block Kam Chancellor to spring Nesbitt for a long run. This same gain could have been realized if Dwyer had blocked Chancellor straight up and #24 and straight up blocked the guy that Dwyer ends up screening out of the play.
www.youtube.com/embed/yLzYtczNfKY?t=2m53s
At 3:13 in the same video, you see a perfectly legal crack back where the WR comes in and blocks Chancellor high instead of illegally cut blocking him outside-in. Result? Another big gain (+TD) for Nesbitt. No illegal blocking needed.
The point is that CPJ teaches his players to play dirty and to break the rules and execute dangerous blocks when they don't have to in order to get in the head of defenders and make them hesitant - and/or injure key defenders to get them off the field.
If you can't win by playing within the rules you're a failure. If you break the rules in a way that causes repeated injuries to 18-22 year olds, putting their careers at risk, you're an asshole. Fuck Paul Johnson
At least we got them back in 2010 with a 90-yard KO return. David Wilson untouched to the end zone followed by Sandman on repeat.
Back to semantics about "chop" vs "cut." My head coach in college won 11 conference championships, and more times than I could count he screamed "DAMN IT FRENCH. QUIT CHOP BLOCKING MY LINEBACKERS" when I was on scout O. I never high-lowed a guy. Add that our scout O coach was a starting linebacker on the 1981 Clemson national championship game and always called any block from the knees down as a "chop block," and that is what I will call it.
Regarding Johnson's technique, the defenders have to be good enough to beat it. NFL guys make the same complaints about Alex Gibbs. http://smartfootball.com/run-game/a-very-simple-explanation-of-the-zone-... News flash guys. Players NEVER complain about guys who are poorly coached.
wow, this won't end.
The problem with your argument is that you are still talking about legal CUT blocks, which no one is arguing against.
What we are talking about are these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ojR6qo-RY8
Illegal blocking techniques that:
a) PJ has been accused of his ENTIRE coaching career.
b) Are extremely dangerous with the potential to end someone's career immediately
c) I have been told by a former player of his, he specifically coaches on how to get away with
And, d) As DBU illustrated dangerous and illegal crack backs
No one is arguing the semantics of the fact that CUT blocks used to be called Chop blocks. My coach used to say CHOP as well when it was a CUT block. The terminology was changed in the rule books to classify a CUT as legal and a CHOP as illegal. So when myself, and I am going to go ahead and assume DBU and Hokieshibe, say CHOP what we mean is the later, illegal classification of the two blocks.
If Paul Johnson's teams ONLY ever used CUT blocks then he would be a genius. The fact is that they do not and he coaches his kids to use illegal CHOP blocks. They rely on dirty and illegal blocking to succeed. That makes him a loser NOT a winner, and definitively not a genius.
I think French fully comprehends what the discussion is about. He (and I) just disagree with the idea that a D linemen is allowed to dictate how an offensive linemen is allowed to block him.
Let's take a look.
Basic blocking on a triple option play here. Most of the chop blocks which take place in the tackle box happen on the backside where the Defensive Tackle (labeled DT1) tries to prevent the Center from advancing to the next level and picking off a Safety. At the snap, the backside guard (labeled G1) knows that the Center's responsibility is on the next level and that his responsibility is to cut block DT1. G1 also knows that DT1 is not lined up directly over his head, so he has to cut block him.
Now here is where almost all of the chop blocks GT gets called for occur. At the snap, DT1 fires off and hits C up high. Simultaneously, G1 fires off at the snap and goes to cut block DT1. This results in a "High/low" block even though the C never had any intention of engaging DT1 to begin with.
Now hopefully you can see why French and I think it's ridiculous to say that Paul Johnson wants to hurt other players and get away with it. He DOESN'T teach his players to chop block. However, because he DOES teach them to cut block so often, it is inevitable that chop blocks will happen with more frequency in his offense then in others.
Are defensive coordinators responsible for when their secondary players target defenseless receivers? Are special team coaches responsible for when their gunners plaster a punt returner before he catches the ball? Of course not. Players are going to play with imperfect technique, that's the nature of the game.
There is a difference in teaching your players to hurt others and asking them to perform a technically difficult task which, if they fail to perform correctly, can lead to chop blocks
Edit: Oh, and whether you want to call Paul Johnson a genius or not doesn't matter. Fact is, that for almost a decade now he has consistently put out a product which leads the nation in rushing and is towards the top in overall offense despite a hilarious lack of top notch talent. All while running an offense he basically created on his own. I call that type of output genius, you're free to use your own vernacular.
Either way, PJ is one of the top 3 offensive coordinators in the country. And with BCS talent would put an unstoppable offense on the field.
Mason nailed it. The technique he teaches is fundamentally sound. It is no different than how teams like Oklahoma and Alabama ran the wishbone in the 1970's. Sometimes, guys are engaged at game speed and things happen, but it only stands out as different and "special" because so few programs use the flexbone offense, and only one uses it in a BCS conference.
Ok, let's take away the argument of whether he is or is not teaching how to get away with illegal chop blocks. I believe he is based on my friend's first hand account and PJ having a history following him throughout his coaching career. You believe he doesn't.
What you and Mason are saying above is that due to his offensive scheme there is a natural byproduct of illegal chop blocks. As you say with the debate of whether he teaches kids to get away with said illegal blocking, you don't believe he does so. I say that I just do not believe that illegal chop blocking is a natural and unavoidable byproduct of his offensive scheme.
If you say that this is where the vast majority of illegal chop (high/low) blocks occur then you as a coach need to teach your players how to block legally in these circumstances. You are paid millions of dollars not to just say "oh well, that's just going to happen naturally" and let kids potentially end other kids career.
Again I am all for playing mean, aggressive football. But I am not for any type of play that may result in the ending of other kids career. There is a professional integrity you should have as a coach.
In an Era of Cut/Chop Blocking Redskins former coach, Joe Bugel, of the famed Hogs agrees:
http://www.chron.com/sports/solomon/article/Solomon-Cut-blocking-is-lega...
I believe you can win without doing something highly dangerous to individual players and I believe you as a coach should have the integrity to not forgive such highly dangerous, illegal blocking just because it's a byproduct of your system. This is what defines a coach as legendary, Joe Bugel to a coach that should be forgotten, Paul Johnshon.
Interesting you can see former Hokie Duane Brown in that same article saying "We aren't the only team to do it." That gives me the sads.
Except that is a completely unrealistic and unfair thing to demand of a coach. You could say the exact same thing about a coach "failing to teach" his quarterback to not throw interceptions. Or failing to teach his Linebackers to not miss tackles. Or failing to teach his Wide Receivers to catch a ball.
A coach isn't a magic maker. He comes up with the schemes and teaches his players what to do. The players are going to make mistakes, that's the very nature of sports. That's why I watch. To put the blame of a missed assignment on the offensive line squarely on the head coach (who isn't even the Oline position coach!) is just wrong.
Oh, but I know what you'll say... if it's not possible to perfectly coach PJ's scheme then he shouldn't use it because it's dangerous... I say that's Bologna. If the rules allow it, then it's fair game. Period. End of sentence. Paul Johnson is not the only coach to teach cut blocking and if you think everyone who does is an asshole, well you better start pointing that finger towards Tech's sideline as well.
Now if you take issue with cut-blocking in general, well fine. Let's have that discussion. We can talk about banning cut blocking and any blocking below the knees... but there's a reason I don't watch flag football on Saturdays. This is big time, big man football. Everyone who plays knows the consequences. Everyone who plays knows the rules. If they don't want to get a free education and potentially millions of dollars from going pro because a few 280 pound men will be diving at their knees... DON'T PLAY THE GAME.
Let me ask you a hypothetical. If I'm a pitching coach in baseball, and I tell my pitcher that he needs to throw the ball inside... Am I an asshole if my player screws up and hits the batter? Am I "putting players careers in danger" because I didn't teach my player how to not hit someone?
haha... Man, I feel this could go on forever.. I'm not sure if I don't want that either. This is really great stuff and keeping me both entertained and distracted in this final week before kick off. And I love how both sides are taking it non-personal. If you and French ever decide to make it over to my side of the world in China, please let me know and I will HOOK YOU UP.
All that being said, let's get into round 12.
If you are a QB coach who's Qb's throw a lot of interceptions, you will get fired.
If you are a LB coach who's LB's cannot make proper tackles and stop the run, you will be fired.
If you are a WR coach who's WR's cannot catch a football, you will be fired. (yeah, I'm talking about you Sherman)
And again, I personally don't have anything against cut blocks. I just used the reference of Bugel to illustrate the point that not everyone in OL coaching believes it's an acceptable practice. I personally feel cut blocking is a sound blocking technique.
However, I also personally believe that illegal chop blocking is something that can be avoided. I realize accidents happen and I know that Hokie lineman have most likely done some illegal chop blocking by accident or otherwise in their history. But the fact of the matter is PJ has had a history of complaints against him for this one specific issue. Not just the annoyance of legal cut blocking but the danger of illegal Chop blocking that have the possibility to seriously hurt people. He and his teams are known for it infamously. There is a reason for complaints on this one issue over 3 HC positions and it's not because it's simply an unavoidable byproduct his offensive scheme.
I think your hypothetical is more related to whether or not PJ actually coaches this, which I concede is hard to accept just because someone says he has "a friend" who says so. But i would say that you as the coach of that pitcher who hit someone in the face would not then afterwards say that the other team "just got out-schemed" and therefore a problem with the batter who got hit. You would concede that it was something that should not happen and the pitch got a away from the pitcher. It was not intentional but accidents do happen. PJ does not do this and will never do this. It's an matter of integrity which he lacks.
This discussion has literally been one of the most fun things I've done on this website BTW.
Agreed. Best pure football discussion so far for me as well.
Player safety... I hope you never find out what goes on under a pile.
aww man, pinched nipples, crushed balls, icy hot rubbed in eyes, them boys get downright nasty under there.
Just ask Jake Grove.
Pro tip: Don't EVER get in a scrum with Jake Grove...unless you are Sam Rogers
I've heard of guys 'shooting them like marbles'
I hate "Chopping" in all its ugly forms
I too have a soft spot for PJ and I'm a Vad Lee believer. But two things regarding my prediction:
1. I think they will move to at least a more pass-intensive offensive with Lee, and that will take some time. They also lost their only good WR. It may be more shot-gun running or passing, but either way, it will be a change from what we've seen and it will take a while for them to be fully proficient.
2. It seems to me that their defense did a lot to keep the last few years games close, and our mistakes on offense.
That said, I did forget that this game is a short week for us. Just going to Atlanta on a short week is tough, but playing PJ on a short week makes it that much worse. I think you're right, this will be a toss up game.
I think that we'll come out of the short week better off than GT since they have 4 days between UNC and VT while we're playing Marshal the week before.
I've always felt that if GT had a top 15-20 defense, they could be a 10 win, top 10 team year in and year out. Having trouble finding the stats, but last year their defense was scoring 65th best. I'm no coach, but I believe a run heavy offense that bleeds the clock works better when your defense is effective.
I'm not sure if "works better" is the right phrase, but going on the same principle that says that Oregon's defense is better than its 44th place ranking last year because their up-tempo offense left more time for the opponent, you could argue that GT's defense is a good bit worse than 43rd, which is what NCAA.com says. The 65th place figure might have been before the bowl game or last couple games or whatever, because they actually put down a few decent efforts towards the end.
I think this article details the issues very well and I, as well, find it hard to believe we will beat Alabama. I think we can, but it will be extremely difficult and unexpected. That being said, in these scrimmages, Loeffler isn't going to throw the kitchen sink at the defense. The best thing we have going for us against Alabama is the element of surprise.
The one thing I find refreshing about this coaching staff is that I don't think they had this scrimmage to show off to the fans, if they wanted to do that I am sure they would have. I think they held this scrimmage to address some of the problem areas and get some film on it. Year in and year out I have seen scrimmages that have me scratching my head, and after years of that I have just decided to take it for what it is worth and wait until game time to see what the team is made of.
Turns out you were right, as seen in the video posted below with Shane Beamer.
The coaches held a colossal amount of the playbook out of the scrimmage. I may disagree with the decision, but I understand it.
I does make me feel a lot better about the state of the offense though. The team should be in a much better position vs Alabama with the whole playbook then it looked in the scrimmage without it.
The offense is just putting on a good poker face. The offense isn't using the third and Logan card yet. Come out swinging with some designed runs by Logan, and then the receivers will get opportunities to get open that bud isn't allowing with a 4-2-5 scheme.
I like the way you think.
Cannot express how much I'm loving Coach Moorehead. I played receiver and after last year when Sherman basically said nothing, did nothing, proved nothing about Marcus Davis and his style of I'm-not-playing playing, not to mention #allthedroppedballs!! I was calling for him to go mid-season. I could not be more pleased with his replacement.
The number 1 rule of being a receiver is to RECEIVE the football. When the ball is thrown to you, you catch it. That's it. Then you get coached the rest.
My coach had a rule about catching the football. If you can touch it, you can catch it. If your hands get on it, even just a finger, you can catch that ball. (shout out to Danny Coale)
I have it in my mind that Coach Moorehead has very much the same thinking.
I agree completely. I think Moorehead will become a star coach, I hope that he has the opportunity to do that at Virginia Tech and not somewhere else. At the very least, I'm excited to see what he's going to turn these young studs he's got at Wide Receiver (Stanford, Knowles and Carlis Parker) into over the next few years.
I just hope he can get these guys to block like Boykin and Coale did in 2010-2011. Watching highlights of Evans, Williams and Wilson and it's amazing how many times they gain an extra 10+ yards thanks to a block from Coale, Boykin or Coles.
After #pg-13languagegate, I doubt that Moorehead will remain quiet after his WR's miss a block. Dude is a monster, and expects his players to exhibit the same emotions that he has. Love that Tech has him.
I'm really not too surprised with the reports of our offensive performance (or lack thereof) so far, in training. We knew this would be a very raw unit. What I do hope is that we're better able to run the ball, during games.
However, I'm real encouraged by hearing and seeing what the freshmen DBs are doing in practice. It's not at all unreasonable to expect this defense to play better than last year. The defense needs to force mistakes on the opposing offense, and intimidate them. Indeed, I expect more than a few games to be won on the shoulders of the defense and special teams. If the offense can run the ball better than last year, that already helps the team out immeasurably.
I really can't wait to see Facyson make someone pay for picking on him.
I don't understand the "beating Alabama" premise of the article. I don't think anyone realistically believes we will beat Bama...it will be tough for us to even compete....so why take that approach to the analysis? The goal is for the team to develop a foundation of toughness and efficiency from which they can build....progressively getting better is what I would like to see, and is something that we have missed the last several years. Do we even have enough pieces to get better? With the shortage of 1. playmakers at WR, 2. bodies at RB, 3. effective OL, and 4. Logan's accuracy problems, I think the BEST we can hope for this year is an average offense that resembles the 2004 team
Whatever....I would rather read about tangible growth as opposed to pipe dreams
It looks like somebody's got a case of the Mondays.......
You go right ahead then. The rest of us, writers and readers alike, will continue to have hope to win. Even if the odds are against us.
Leave the "no chance at all of a victory, so why even write about it" sentiments for the Savannah State blogs.
Send my regards to the BaconLeague
Over 1/2 your turkey legs on two posts. Well done, sir.
*takes a bow*
I absolutely could have chosen to write about the positives of this team, but I didn't want to. It's boring to write article after article about how great an athlete X is, and how good the footwork new freshmen Y has, and how interesting those route combinations that new coach Z put into place... It's boring to write the same thing over and over and I KNOW it's just as boring to read about them because I've read those articles every off season on other websites.
This gets back to what I want to contribute to The Key Play community. I would rather say what I really felt (the offense, as usual, is far behind where the defense is and needs to step their game up), and take a risk at being wrong then to just coast along and write nothing but positive sunshiny pieces.
Why only focus on the positives? I'd rather embrace a program for what it is, flaws and all, then try and only think about the good bits of the program. I think we all agree that its far more rewarding to see a team succeed when you know its had to fight tooth and nail to achieve its goals despite it's shortcomings. But how can we appreciate how hard the student-athletes are working if no one ever writes about how bad they look at times?
Who wants to cheer for a team that steps onto a field and is perfect from day one? Not me. I want to see a team struggle, fall flat on it's face in a public scrimmage, then pick itself back up again and dust itself off and show some character by pushing through that adversity.
That's why I wrote the piece with the "beam bama" perspective to it, even if it meant that the article wouldn't be as uplifting as it could have been. Now, when Virginia Tech goes out against Bama and DOES have a successful drive and DOES get a touchdown, everyone who read my piece will know how truly impressive an accomplishment it was and how hard the student-athletes actually had to work in the off season to make their dreams happen.
All fan blogs could use more people like you 3rdand31 BRAVO!!
Sums up my views perfectly. That's what makes a team sport great, not the overall dominance of a season, but their grueling path to get there. Hence great sports movies being journeys and the trials that lead to a championship, not just rollovers upon rollovers.
jeremiah johnson will always get turkey legs as long as i'm around
Hey, I am moderate in my expectations of this season, but I am excited about the changes that were finally made.
AND, if the team pulls off a great season, then I will believe that it will be directly due to the coaching staff and Beamer.........
i believe we can win. the impossible is possible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwpTj_Z9v-c&feature=player_embedded
Your post inspired me to post these words from Rhino. I don't know that truer words have ever been spoken.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYzVL0vI-kI&t=1m8s
Your new avatar is glorious.
That 2004 team was a quarter away from beating another juggernaut if u recall. Games aren't played on paper. And speak for yourself when u say we don't have a chance against bama not the fan base as a whole. We will #BEATBAMA
And we were a dropped 2-point conversion pass away from taking one of the greatest teams in college football history to OT, a game that I believe we entered at 8-3.
Did you expect App State to beat Michigan? Neither did I. And that was only the first of many that would occur during the 2007 season. If you still don't understand, take a look through this list.
Also, did you expect our JMU game to get rained out in 2010? Neither did I, but THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED.
I seem to only remember us winning every ACC game that year
Indeed, I seem to recall our first game was against East Carolina on September 18th. Odd, seems like a late start to a season. One loss all year though, only to Stanford in the Orange Bowl.
I feel ill now.
I had posted a while ago about managing expectations.
That maybe while you see obvious concerns during the scrimmage, the coaching staff is satisfied with how things are progressing-they understand that our offense should be judged on the end, not the beginning of this season; heck, maybe not even until next season.
If you look at the season without the opening game vs Alabama....I like our chances.
But, I do like the fact that we open with them; who knows?, but I am am loving the return of intensity I see.
That is the biggest plus I see, and my personal favorite: The intensity is back. Not to take away from 10-win seasons but I have felt like some of our recent 10 win seasons have felt a bit flimsy...as if the season really could have gone either way in a few games. Now 10 wins, is 10 wins, but I felt like each season we were coming closer to collapse. I kept hoping it wouldn't happen but there seemed to be a loss in energy and intensity. Well, it seems to be back!
I completely agree about the intensity being back. The new coaches have definitely brought new life to the program and the kids seem to be embracing the culture of toughness that Beamer and Co are preaching. Sometimes, change is good for it's own sake. New people come into town and they bring a certain energy with them simply because they are new.
A lot has been said about the positives of the staff stability Beamer has worked for over the years, and I'm not saying it's a bad thing that he is so loyal to his assistants. I just think that the Hokies did miss the "new blood" energy over the years, and we are starting to see the benefits of the new coaches in that regard.
This is a great read! Thanks for keeping those of us not in Blacksburg informed. Multiple people have said it already but I'll reiterate. Bama is a far better football team than us at this second..........BUT.....
We have a chance in Atlanta. A lot of things need to go our way, yes, I know. It can happen, I have faith it can happen and it just takes the right set of circumstances. We have the ability to do it.
I'm not trying to be a homer here, I know what we're up against, but let's stop acting like they are miles and miles out of our grasp, I thought that's what the whole #BEATBAMA rally cry was about. A dose of reality never hurt anybody and is occassionally needed but let's calm down on the doom and gloom a little bit guys.
We can still do this and even if we don't win, we have a manageable schedule and a renewed since of intensity by the coaches. I like where we're at!
More reality:
Alabama was one blown coverage away from being 3rd in the SEC West last season.
I respect what Alabama has done, but ESPN, CBS, and EA Sports are unable to convince me that they're invincible. Hence, the hope I have.
aTm also has convinced me that Bama is not invincible, even in a very pro-Bama environment.
Yeah, them too. I keep thinking about the vaunted LSU defense being unable to tackle at a very crucial moment in their game...
I'm never quite sure what to take away from scrimmages....I know coaches look at them very differently than the fans do. It's an evaluation, testing environment, and above all, practice. Repetition. A way to get better. We as fan look at it and are thinking, "We're doomed!!". I've read a few other evaluations of other program's fall scrimmages so far this year, and you see similar questions for other teams. USCe had a scrimmage this past weekend, and their offense supposedly looked pedestrian. Of course, there's the Clowney factor, but this apparently went beyond his many talents. We know they're not that bad an offense. We had very little 1 v 1's, and when we did, we apparently weren't using our full compliment of 1's. We're still installing playbook. We're on the learning curve. Deep breath. We'll get there.
BRAVO....thanks for saying this.
In the interview with Shane posted by 247 Sports (start at the 4:00 minute mark), he says what they showed in the scrimmage was the "first five minutes of what we put in our first meeting in August," so I wouldn't be too concerned about the lack of variety and play design. We've been practicing other things, just haven't shown them to the public yet.
wow, thats actually promising! Thanks
#BEATBAMA
That's what I am saying...scrimmages are fun, but the coaches are using it strictly for the team and the learning process. not to show fans their actual progress.
I was asked by a fan yesterday on Twitter, who asked a lot of great questions, if I believe this offfense could score on Alabama. I honestly said yes they could.
What I saw on Saturday offered a faint glimmer of hoope that, maybe, just maybe, this offense will be all right.
Yeah, 2013 might not see the return to 10-wins (it could happen), but I do expect to see a steady progress of improvement. I think if the team can stay at 0.500 or better, I would consider it an achievement. Winning the ACCCG would be icing on the cake. Winning a pretigious bowl game would blow out the candles. Winning the National Championship, however remote it seem, would be like a stripper popping out of a cake.
Yes, I had one on my last birthday.
This is getting ridiculous
Getting!?
I just rolled on the floor. God I love this site!!
You keep me in stitches Horse, more oatmeal-covered turkey legs for you equine sir.
That's funny. +1
Can we get a guy who has a personality complex about being a Hokie Bird? I think we could get some mileage out of that one.
What about a thugged out Ibis, or an illegally chopping yellow jacket? The possibilities are far reaching...
Or a coked out tiger. BEST MASCOT MOCK EVER
LOVE. COCAINE. Man that was the best group of ACC pussy touchdowns of all time. Great stuff by billdozer and atlhokie with the meme
http://www.thekeyplay.com/content/2013/february/14/happy-valentines-day - for those who don't remember the thread.
HokieBirdOnATreadmill....anyone?
^ This is a great idea. I'd be happy to create a whole bunch of accounts, but I'm not sure I'll have time for all that lunacy after starting school on Monday.
I'm disappointed in your dedication to the cause. You've been galloping away with the Horse bit but want to keep the bird bit grounded? You really should spread your wings and fly with the HokieBirdOnATreadmill
No, I meant just the opposite. I want to see the HokieBird persona on here as well. I was saying that I'd be willing to do all of them (HokieBird, DrunkYellowJacket, ThugIbis, ClumsyCavman, what have you), but I don't think I'd have that much time to post as all of them throughout the year. So in other words, GoGoGoGoGo! Someone be these things!
Oh, I misunderstood. My bad. Either way you should just do it anyway and you can have conversations with yourself on here. Eventually you will be sitting in a dark basement somewhere playing with Horses, Hokie Birds, etc puppets on treadmills.
On second thought it is better that you don't.
I can't help but think about the credits scene of blades of glory with him playing with the dolls after reading that
Something like this:
Plus 1 for any Firefly clip
+1 for the Firefly clip. Never got into his other stuff, but Joss Wheadon (sp) got me with that show and its subsequent movie!
I highly suggest Dr. Horrible's Sing-A-Long Blog. It's hilarious, on Netflix, and less than an hour long (Three 10-20 minute acts). Neil Patrick Harris portrays the title character, an aspiring super villain who is unsuccessfully trying to joing the "Evil League of Evil." Nathan Fillion plays his arch-rival, a pompous, narcissistic, d-bag super hero named Captain Hammer. Felicia Day plays Dr. Horrible's crush, an activist for the local homeless shelter named Penny. There's a notable cameo role played by Simon Helberg (Walowitz from Big Bang Theory) as Dr. Horrible's henchman buddy, "Moist."
One more important thing to note considering that discussion about Horse on a Treadmill started us on this tangent: The leader of the Evil Leage of Evil, Bad Horse, rules the ELE with an Iron Hoof!
Love Dr. Horrible! -Especially the singing of Bad Horse memorandums.
That is quite possibly one of the funniest responses I've ever seen on this site. Wish I could do multiple turkey legs.
The hardest I've laughed at anything was that picture of Darth Vader filling up a bottle from a Brita in the surf. I also love this site.
Made my day, thanks Horse!
Mason, was Logan's short throw misses from him arm balling those throws? Or is that purely from the confusion on who is open? Your thoughts? And thanks for the detailed write up - for us fans who couldn't make it to the Burg and don't have your football acumen. Really enjoyed it.
He sailed high throws on a seam route to DPM towards the north end zone, and then missed DPM high and wide left (lead him too much) on the throw following the "INT" by Williams on the goal line.
Logan straight up missed a few throws, more then I'd like.
What was way more frustrating was the overall lack of open targets. I'm going to go ahead and chalk this up to Loeffler not wanting to show off to many of his concepts in a public scrimmage, but Tech will have to do a much better job at getting guys open vs Bama then they did in that saturday scrimmage.
But...
Yeah, our defense will really need to play hard like this.
I like to think that it was a pass-heavy scrimmage, and the 46 yards came on just a handful of runs.
Maybe not
Thanks... just, thanks...
Without knowing who was playing who, what type of rushing plays, what the scenarios that they worked on were, if they were working on a QB rushing package but the qb was wearing a yellow jersey...
It's literally impossible to tell what's going on with those numbers.
I'm hoping that they were working a lot on red zone/goal line offense with those kind of stats
TKP needs more rap references
No. Just no.
+1 Arrested Development