Watching Justin Fuente and Bud Foster dismantle ECU like the mid-major they are inspired a whole host of reactions in me. But the best adjective I can probably use to describe the experience was cathartic. The result against the Pirates this past Saturday represented both the most points scored against them and the largest margin of victory over them since the series began way back in 1956. What we did to ECU this past weekend just felt right. And that got me thinking.
We don't admit that the ECU series is a rivalry. Honestly, it probably isn't. But we talk about them, outside of game week. A lot. Usually to joke about how our grandchildren's grandchildren will still have ECU games to dread when they attend VT. But really, should we care? By all metrics, regular games against the Pirates makes sense. They're a geographically proximate lower-tier program with good facilities. Travel to away games costs next to nothing compared to some of the longer trips we have to make.
The reason we hate playing ECU is because we should always beat them, handily, and we haven't. If we had managed the level of success against ECU that we have managed against LOLUVA over the same period, ECU wouldn't merit a blip on our psychological radar. They would be just another soft tune-up for conference play. Instead, our struggles against the Pirates have been indicative of the struggles of our football program as a whole. While it might pain some of you to do it, let's look back at the most recent resurrection of this series.
2007: Four and a half months after the on-campus shootings, VT and Blacksburg were perhaps more ready for football season than ever, desperate for anything to take our minds off our sorrows. ESPN Game Day made a trip to campus for our season opener, and there were whispers that this was the year the Hokies might finally fill the vacant trophy case. And then the game happened. Able to amass only 278 total yards of offense, leading only 10-7 at the half, it took a fourth quarter touchdown pass to TE Sam Wheeler to give the Hokies any separation. Well before the final whistle, the Lane Stadium crowd was openly booing Sean Glennon, and cheers for true freshman five star Tyrod Taylor echoed through the stadium. I know. I was there. As we exited after a most underwhelming performance, I mused to my friend that I had never seen a win feel more like a loss. Someone behind us opined that LSU was going to destroy us the following week, which proved prophetic.
2008: After burning Tyrod's redshirt in the aforementioned LSU game the previous year, Frank Beamer announced his intent to redshirt Tyrod as a sophomore. That lasted exactly one week, as the unthinkable happened in the season opener, and the ECU Pirates defeated VT by the score of 27-22. Hokie Nation was livid. At the time, I was blogging my musings on the team's performance on my MySpace page. (Don't laugh, that was still a thing in 2008.) My review of the ECU game consisted entirely of this video:
The coaching staff circled the wagons and immediately committed to a two QB system, which brought heaps of criticism and questioning about the decision's reactionary nature. On a personal note, it was this game that started me down the path that would eventually lead me to become a contributor, and eventually the head contributor, at a blog dedicated to the termination of Bryan Stinespring as our offensive coordinator.
2009-2013: The Hokies would not lose again the Pirates over the next four games in the series. (No game was played in 2012 due to the Hokies playing in the Chick-fil-a College Kickoff against Alabama.) However, the results were far from dominant. Outside of a decisive 49-27 win during Tyrod Taylor's senior year, the average margin of victory over the Pirates was just over 8 points. The Hokies managed to score an average of 16 points in those games. The Hokies had to lean entirely on their lunchpail defense to secure wins. That would soon become less of an option, as recently hired head coach and alumnus Ruffin McNeill would successfully install the air raid offense, which would prove to give Bud Foster's secondary fits.
2014-2015: Despite the promise of an increased emphasis on offense, Scot Loeffler was unable to put more than 28 points on the board against the Pirates in back to back losses. While an improvement over the recent results of his predecessor, it was too little, too late. In successive years, when the offense was called upon to contribute to a victory, they failed to answer the bell. After the 2015 loss, with Hokie Nation reeling at the broken promise of a return to form, Frank Beamer's classic "exhibition game" misstep in the postgame press conference, which painted the picture that our beloved head coach was woefully out of step with the desires of the fan base, arguably set the wheels in motion for his eventual retirement announcement later in the season.
Looking back over the series, it's plain to me that the angst over the ECU series has nothing to do with a perceived rivalry with ECU, but rather a belief that a program like ECU should never be a rival for us at all. We were vexed by a team we should easily handle. A mid-major program was going toe to toe with us. Our struggles against the Pirates coincided with the hard decline of our offense, and eventually our program as a whole. The series forced us to consider a truth that we ardently wished to avoid: the program had peaked and plateaued, and would eventually regress.
So does Saturday's 54-17 drubbing of ECU indicate a return to form for the VT football program? That remains to be seen. But what's for certain is that the results of the previous two games have felt exactly how Virginia Tech football should feel: like we are unquestionably the better team on the field, whether in terms of talent, attitude or scheme. So much of the anticipation of this season centered around the hope of visible progress toward a return to national prominence. And while beating ECU by five scores in no way signals the Hokies are playoff contenders, the result makes it feel as though that goal might be in sight. If nothing else, it makes Hokie football fun to watch again.
Comments
Which was a really dumb thing to do, considering I believe Mike Glennon was in attendance, and possibly on an official visit. Pretty much immediately burned that bridge before it had a chance.
Yeah but we really only would have benefited from him for one or two seasons, depending on what the staff would have done with him and redshirting. But I'm not sure he would have been an improvement over Logan Thomas anyway. Certainly not Tyrod.
Agreed. It didn't matter what type of recruit we had back then. The play-calling would not have benefitted Mike's abilities. I was happy to see NC State's coaching staff run Russell Wilson out of town in order to start Glennon. That worked out well.
To be honest, how many of us would have made a different choice than Tom O'Brien did? He asked Russell to be there for when the football team actually was practicing together.
I know I would have made the same choice.
Wilson went to NCSU under the condition that he could play both sports. It was wrong of O'Brien alter that condition, so yes, I would have made a different choice, even if I wasn't the person who brought the QB into the school.
there are two things I'd like to point out:
1. Hind site is 20/20, and I can't say I would have made a different decision than O'Cain.
2. My distaste for NC State football is very deep-rooted and stretches back to a series of events that happened between 2006-2011. It pleases me to hear State fans moan about what could have been if Wilson had stayed.
Therefore, my previous post was 50% emotional 50% factual.
Thanks for the article! I remember your site well. It was a staple part of my day prior to stumbling upon TKP.
Same here
Same here, was my number one site for Hokies laughs and info right before I came to TKP! Great article.
I like the fact that the "second string" is able to come in and score. Granted both times the opposing D was beat up.
I like the fact that the "first string" is able to come in and score.
Good article but I for one do not like playing them basically ten years in a row (besides the one year hiatus) and another 10 years in the future. I look to our out-of-conference schedule as a chance to play new teams and test our team. I also felt this has been a lose lose situation for VT. If we win, we are supposed to, if we lose then the fan base is in an uproar. I for one like to travel to see new campuses and see how we can improve our own tailgate situation. To me it is just like playing BC every year. I don't like it. JMO
I agree, I've said this before but there are people who disagree with the ECU situation. I do wish we did have more variety in who we played OOC just to get fresh new looks and what not. Would be more fun imo
Agree. Also ECU has the advantage of familiarity with our personnel, our schemes (at least on D), and Lane Stadium, which is something that rotating OOC opponents do not build. That fact isn't often discussed but it certainly increases their odds and is basically gifted to them for an unknown reason.
At least ODU gives us another way to get recruits to see VT football. So I'd like to see USF/UCF/FIU/anybody from a bigger recruiting pipeline if we have to have a decade long scheduling partner
I couldn't agree more, especially the part about the lose lose. If we lose to them, everyone (rightfully) goes apes as to the state of the program, are we relevant at all? etc. but if we beat them no one bats an eye. Having them on the schedule for this long makes no sense. I would much rather play Ohio State every year, even if that means losing a number of games along the way. At least that game is enjoyable for both fan bases. Does anyone from either ECU or VT even look forward to that game every year?
ECU fans definitely look forward to it. It is there chance to prove that they belong in the P5.
Great post. If the ECU game really is indicative of the 'strength of the program,' then this data point should be pretty reassuring.
for me the ECU scheduling snafu isn't about winning and losing necessarily
I get that it "makes sense" in terms of them being geographically proximate.
But it's boring. Whether we beat them into the ground over and over or have a healthy back and forth where you never really know which team will emerge victorious each year is beside the point to me. Admittedly, I have said that playing them is a lose-lose (or it has been in the past) because beating them does little to move the needle and losing to them can be back breaking for our perception. Perhaps that will change with the thumping we put on them this weekend but I don't know that we can rely on that to be the norm. In any case regardless of the win/lose debate I think the series limits our exposure. We already play a bunch of teams in NC. I would prefer to play interesting new teams from all over the country instead of being stuck with the same-ol'-same-ol' year in and year out.
My gripe with ECU isn't that they beat us when they shouldn't (though, I do hate that)....my gripe isn't even necessarily with them specifically. It's with the fact that we're stuck with the same non-conference team every year for eternity. It would be better in just about every way if we could play different teams year-to-year
So what if we could swing a similar deal with aTm? Get the corps rivalry going and do it every year. Still boring?
not as boring...but I'd still rather play a variety of teams instead of the same ones (non conference, of course) over and over and over. I would be okay with playing aTm (or even ECU, for that matter) ONCE every 4 years so long as there is a healthy mix of other teams sprinkled in during those 3 off years
The two-year Home and Home with Nebraska is a perfect example of what this should be like.
I wish Wisconsin hadn't postponed our series until 2024/2025.
The fact that Wisconsin did postpone the series is a great illustration of why you can't fill out the schedule with home and homes. That stuff happens all the time, and if you have a non-conference schedule full of those games, you can be scrambling at any time to replace a postponed game. The stability of a sustained series is good, even if the opponent gets boring.
Ideally we just need to find another nearby school to rotate with ECU. ODU would be a good fit because it would give is a chance to play in 757 recruits' backyard.
And this instability of home and homes will continue even more if/when the P5 becomes the P4 and the conferences expand again and possibly go to 9 conference games a season.
We have a home and home scheduled with ODU
We have a 2-and-1 deal plus a home and home and home and home with ODU.
We haven't started, and I'm sure we're gonna be tired of that one after year 3.
I actually like playing them every year. For all the crap this series has got, I think people are more upset about us than about who we're playing. From 2013-15 we either lost or almost lost to the Pirates, and the complaining began, but the previous decade we dominated them with few complaints. The difference is when we weren't complaining we were winning ACC championships and competing for BCS bowls, we started complaining only when we started swimming in mediocrity.
The series isn't without its benefits either. Either we get a competitive team to warm us up at home, or we get an actual test in a stadium that seats 50k, pretty huge by G5 standards. Beating them doesn't necessarily move the needle, but they can usually be seen as a quality win, where most other teams would schedule a South Alabama or ODU (ugh). I have no problem with beating ECU on a yearly basis, the only problem comes when we lose.
This is perhaps a better summation of my argument. The series with ECU only became the albatross around our necks that we purport it to be when ECU became competitive in it.
I understand the argument that we'd be better served with a stronger opponent, or the desire for more variety among non-conference foes. But no P5 team team plays all P5 opponents in their non-conference games. You need those tuneups to get right on the field without risking a loss. And from a scheduling standpoint, relying on only home and homes or neutral site one-offs to round out your schedule is a nightmare. You need the stability of long-term series. We had that with the annual LOLUVA game when we were in the Big East. In a lot of ways, the ECU game just replaced that.
Except ECU has actually beaten us in the last 12 years.
I'm gonna say that I hated the series before we started losing. I used to switch out ECU in all my NCAA dynasty's for another opponent because I thought the series was stupid. I griped to my cousin year after year after year about us playing ECU forever. My thoughts are pretty much exactly what VPIhokieME said above, variety is the spice of life.
I see what you're saying that they weren't really a problem for us until we started losing. Every year we just wrote them off as a win, like the typical directional schools and FCS opponents. The problem I have is not that we started losing, its simply that we do play them every year. Even if we won every game, I wouldn't want to play western Michigan every year just because it was a sure win. That just gets old and stale especially when they're not on the same competition level and the game ultimately means nothing besides record. I have to say, if anything the fact that we lost the last two years has made the game more exciting because we can't just sleep walk through, but again, now it is in the lose-lose situation for us. So there's no other choice then to just get rid of them.
Good post, IH. Seems like the ECU games were an indicator of the program
not being where we all wanted it to be. They were always frustrating games and you
felt like we should be doing a lot better than we were. Saturday made up a lot for that.
Don't feel too strongly on this point, but if ECU was more appropriately recognized as a decent team by the national media, then I wouldn't care as much. Teams get knocked off all the time by non-power 5, hell, Wisconsin has two top 10 wins and nearly got platooned by Georgia State week 3.
National media cares about two things, pre-season top 25 and blue-blood programs. For example, if the Utes were just outside the top 25, the USC game recap would still be all over SportCenter, and they are 1-3 and 0-2 in conference! Who cares about ESPN, etc.? I don't, but I do believe that it influences national program perception far more than we would like to think, and has a trickle-down effect on the entire landscape, who is good, what games matter. I can't even catch an honest take from well-respected media on the Hokies outside of Jerod Evan's 55 yard TD run.
So I do believe it is lose-lose with this match-up due to bigger problems than just a trap game on our schedule.
I will not start donating to the Hokie Club until ECU is off the schedule.
Leg for you TM!
So you will be put out to pasture first?
I agree with IH. He just said what (mostly) everybody else was thinking.
This is correct. I don't believe that Glennon was being booed but more the state of the program. IH stated this much more eloquently than I in an earlier post. VT had become stale and time had passed us by. The Bowden Effect was taking place.
This is correct! The media cares only about prominence. That is why you could see golden jesus lose to Duke 4 times in 4 hours and they are not even in the top 25!
How about this? We have a new and upcoming regime with new attitudes. Get out of the ECU deal (it is fucking ludicrous) and schedule low or mid level P5 programs for variety. And, don't go there; you never know who is going to be good or bad. ECU could become Houston for all we know. Bring in Missou or Indiana maybe Iowa State or Kansas. At least that gives you a chance for 20 secs on prime time due to conference affiliations. Ahh scratch Iowa St.!
listen, the great thing about early season is everyone is playing everyone. There is always some bullshit like Lamar knocking off Georgia. All that is great! The redundancy of this ECU series is monotonous and truly a no win for VT. Beamer is gone as well as Weaver and the previous regime. We have a new face and the future looks bright. Set new goals to work the system in place.
I JUST HAVE A GREAT FEELING FOR WHERE WE ARE HEADED.
Then how do you explain the Tyrod chants and subsequent cheering when he got put in the game?
Great piece. Thanks for sharing and couldn't agree more. We're also are showing signs of being able to consistently win the games we should. I think this stems from Fuentes focus on controlling the teams emotions. Being present in a play and not looking too far forward or backwards. Just be present in the moment. Hopefully, we won't be susceptible to the lows like we have in past. (Ie. OSU then ECU)
I didn't realize you authored the aforementioned blog. I loved it prior to TKP. But I'm dying to know something. Have to ask. Once they announced Loeffler I signed on a made my first blog post basically saying I thought it was a lame hire. He didn't have any past successes other than a mid-tier offense at Temple. Pretty sure someone pulled down my comment and always wondered. Did you really think he was a good hire or were you just ready to part with the blog?
Not to congratulate myself, but I also made posts that the Loeffler hire was bad when it occurred, and predicted that it would be an unfortunate end of Beamer's career. Of course, this was met with a lot of white knighting on behalf of Loeffler, which didn't make much sense unless it was just blind optimism. I was much more optimistic with the Fuente hire, and so far the results are already showing tons of improvement even though his system isn't even fully installed yet. It's not only controlling emotions that is a difference between Loeffler and Fuente, but it's also teaching execution and having an accurate quarterback who doesn't sit in the pocket for an eternity on every pass play.
Guilty as charged.
yeah me too...not proud of it but I wasn't ready to railroad Loeffler until after his 3rd year. And then I jumped on board that train towards the end
When you look at the numbers, 2015 was a marked improvement over the first two years of Lefty's tenure at VT. 31.0 points per game,up from 24.1. Yards per play up to 5.33, from 4.93. Lefty did find some measure of success in his last season. But the problem was the lack of consistency. We put up 55 against Tulsa but 13 against Pitt. There was just too much hot and cold. And I think that's just as attributable to the culture of our program in Frank's declining years as it is to Lefty's overly complex and often stubborn offense.
I think you're right, and I'll reiterate what I said on another thread - if Lefty had five years to raise players in his system, I think it would become much less complex. Not because the system wouldn't be complex, but having players learn your system from day 1 makes it much easier to execute when you have four or five years to learn it. I'm wondering if he will ever have the chance to make that happen.
I do believe that Lefty's scheme is one that can only work with the right quarterback. You will need a guy who can make complex reads and deliver the ball in a narrow window (of both time and space) if it is ever to work. I think Brewer had the cerebral ability to learn the scheme but lacked the physical tools. And the demand that offense puts on the QB makes it hard for the backup to be game ready.
I stopped doing anything with the blog as soon as Loeffler was hired. For about the last year, though, I switched over to a comment system that had automod. Considering the blog's topic, as you can imagine, I started to get some real SEC-level deranged bullshit in the comments section, and Blogspot's default comment system was worthless for moderating comments. One of the features of the automod was that reported comments got temporarily removed until I reviewed them. And I stopped reviewing anything after Stiney was demoted and Lefty was hired, because I felt the blog had run its course. You might have been a victim of that.
Mystery solved. Thanks for the response. FWIW, I think it's all about culture and discipline. We beat one of the best teams in history of college football with a Loeffler offense. But that same offense sputtered against way lesser opponents. If you listen closely to Fuente from the summer to now. It's all about one play, one game, and being in control. He said after TN he was worried during the game about the emotional high and inevitable crash. I loved that we let our boys play with so much emotion in previous regime, and it produced some magic, but also inconsistency. It seemed like we were an offense that relied heavily on a few superior athletes to take over games at key moments. When we didn't have those athletes we were in trouble and even more so when we weren't playing high. Fuente is about the system. He's about execution. He doesn't want heroes, he wants consistent plays. Consistent plays that build patterns for the defense to key on. Patterns designed to create some level of hesistation in the defense and allows a 3star player get a step on a 5 star. He doesn't need the homerun hitter to win games, although it won't hurt. I think the team learned this in the TN game and will look back on it as a turning point in the season.
What's funny is, you also just described exactly what Bud Foster does to run a defense. Fuente has brought that mentality to both sides of the ball. I honestly think that's why Foster decided to stay. When he and Fuente had their powwow, Bud had to have heard his own thoughts echoing in Fuente's sentiments.
100%. That and I think that Fuente is just a special coach. Might be jumping the gun, but thoroughly impressed with what he says and how he goes about his business. The little things. The nuances. This dude isn't just a football coach he's a very smart. I think Bud saw a lot with the offense and mentality. And also think he saw a rising star. I keep thinking back to the look on his face against TN and how he showed no emotion. I think some people were upset and I was confused, but now I get it. He was setting an example. Gotta stay even keeled. Dude is legit.
Compare that to the red-faced temper tantrum Butch Jones threw on the sideline at Bristol. Then compare the poise VT has shown series to series this season (outside of Fumbleocalypse) vs Tennessee's streaky nature.
Fuente is imbuing this program with his stone cold killer personality.
Thing is, behind the scenes, as we saw in the pregame speech for ECU, this man has a fire and a passion that I'm not sure the football program has really ever had. That's not a knock on Frank, as he was the perfect man for the job and he brought us to exactly where we needed to be. You watch that video and Fuente has his sights set on the big prize, and he wants it. Not in a put up an empty trophy case and give lip service to the fans that we're going to have it, no, I'm talking preaching every day and making the team and recruits believe that their destiny is to have it, they just have to prove it.
Seriously though, between Buzz and Fuente, we have motivation is spades right now in Merryman.
Well put. You get a glimpse at what drives him in those speeches. He's not just a wallflower on the sideline, he's out for blood. He wants VT to rise again. Look at the VT tweets lately. "bring the tradition back". He's on a warpath internally but laser focused on the little things the team needs to do to get there. He's talking with emotion but saying things like, one play, one game, 1-0, and you control everything.
I'm still being realistic about this season, but the future is bright.
Like everyone else, I hate playing them every year. It is exactly like playing Boston College every year. We are supposed to beat them and for some reason someone wanted to make a rivalry out of it.
BUT I want to play devils advocate here. When Beamer said these OOC games were exhibition/practice, he was not wrong for those seasons. These games only matter if you are gunning for the playoffs. ECU is a talented team for a G5, but if we lose, people should make fun of us and not take us seriously because we shouldn't be taken seriously. We would not deserve a good reputation.
Also, if the stars are aligning and we are in the playoff hunt, we should beat them soundly, and a win versus ECU definitely looks better than a win against South Alabama, or SC State. I also think this is a good tuneup game especially for our defense because they have a talented offense that will move the ball through the air. It is a good test. And their defense is not horrendous either.
Now back to reality, screw ECU and I never want to see them on our schedule more than once in a 8 year span like the teams in the Atlantic division.
This has probably been answered in the past, but can we get out of this series if we wanted to? Is there a contract buyout? I can't imagine we'd cancel without having new contracts lined up.
Don't think I've seen this posted here yet. Sounds go Gameday from ECU. Love the fire at halftime from players and coaches.
Listening to bud and Fuente at halftime made me want head butt my office computer monitor and scream HOKIES at the top of my lungs
Thanks and awesome! A leg!