I'm not saying that to be negative against Beamer and his staff. I am just stating that without the new look offense, we would have been embarrassed on national TV once again.
We have a complete team, where the offense can win a game if needed and the defense can as well. It's just nice to see all around.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Last year's coaching did lose to Pitt. Many times. Times changed and we are finally ahead of the curve again.
That's not a knock against Beamer, it's just life.
Yep.
Last year's staff would have continued to try and establish the run throughout the second half. Might have picked up 1 or 2 first downs in that second half and would have gotten embarrassed on the scoreboard because of how tired our defense would have been at the end.
Yeah, I'm very glad we have a coaching staff who is more than willing to put their gameplan aside if the situation dictates it, and just pound their weakness once its detected.
The thing is....our offense, I dont think, is even playing close to what this offense wants to play at.
Jerod Evans is playing lights out, and the WR's are playing lights out, and there are still 3 or 4 throws a game, that I think they would want back.
The run offense leaves much to be desired minus the Miami game. If we can get more consistent running the ball, Look out America.
We still ran for 150 yards last night. Last year, we had 100 yards. Total.
In related news the Tennessee & Syracuse games never happened! Coaching it'll get after ya!
I believe those were...the preseason games.
Kidding aside, am truly glad that VT made out better than any other coaching hire last year. Haven't had this level of excitement and confidence in a long time.
I doubt we'd be above .500 right now with last year's coaching staff.
Fuente plays to win, Beamer played not to lose.
This, 1000%
Beamer did come here to play school though
Exactly!
The Syracuse game being a perfect example...of Syracuse playing to win.
Let's not really make this thread a thing. Let bygones be bygones. Enjoy the win but not at the expense of others (Hokies at least).
Yes and no... We can't keep harping on the past, but at the same time, down the road its worth remembering where we came from to keep perspective when people are freaking out when we're only winning games by 5-10 points against teams we would have easily lost to in the past.
"Remembering where we came" from isn't the same as calling the previous staff out on a new thread. Nothing good is learned / remembered by crapping on them.
I really don't think this thread was meant to be that way. I think the point of the thread is to realize the progress that has been made in the program. I don't think a single person on this site doesn't respect the old coaching staff esp. Beamer for what they did for this football program. Look at our losses last year all except for 2 were by a TD or less. I did a quick stat check and Fuente's Memphis Tigers were averaging 9+ more points a game than our offense last year. (Tigers: 40.2 PTS/G; Hokies: 31.0 PTS/G) Very simplistic but if you add 9 points to our score in our games last year and we would have gone 11-2, not 7-6. I think it's meant to realize what a game changer Fuente has been for this program, specifically the offense.
OP can say what his/her intention, was but the title of this thread is:
"Last year's coaching would have lost to Pitt"
and the next few words in an incredibly short and non-productive post is
"...we would have been embarrassed on national TV once again."
Seems incredibly inflammatory to me. I get that we should be grateful for where we are, but I don't think that's what it comes out as even if that was the intention of OP.
I really don't think it's as much a knock on Beamer's staff as it is a compliment for what Fuentes has done to turn around the attitude and energy of the team in a short period of time. But, not to be a Debbie Downer, Beamer and his staff were making a lot of bad decisions in the prior 2-3 years, much of which could have been alleviated by hiring a competent O-coordinator. To this day, I still don't understand why Beamer didn't bring in his good buddy, Ralph Friedgen, to make things better offensively. I think if that ever happened, Beamer would have had much more success, and probably would our HFCS. But then, we would have missed out getting CJF when we did, so it's all good. Just saying...
amen. some things better left unsaid
stay classy, folks
Fuente did a great job of managing the clock on the last drive. There are so many coaches who would mess that up. Great coaching in a tough situation.
Absolutely.... still would have preferred a QB knee on that last play, though... lets not make a habit out of that, because it could blow up in our faces FAST
I was so nervous that ball would come loose
We would have had to punt had we taken knees at the end. I like that he trusted our senior QB Motley to chew up a few seconds each down and cover the ball.
There was 1:12 after the 2nd down play, so less than 80 seconds. He should have taken a knee on 3rd down.
ETA: 1:54 after the 1st down play. So he could have take a knee on 2nd down as well. He really only needed burn about 10 seconds off the clock with ball actually in play to make sure he didn't have to punt. He probably could have done it with delayed knees on each play vs having Motley run in the gut.
He did, though I still wish he ran the ball more on their next to last drive.
agreed 100000% on the 2nd to last drive. We wouldn't have stressed over that last drive and getting that last first down if he would have just ran on 1st and 2nd down. At worst, you burn 1:20 at least OR make them burn 2 timeouts that. I get the passing is what was moving our offense, but up 10 with 2.5 minutes left, you need to run the ball, even if it is for zero yards.
Alllll I wants to know is would Fuente had beaten Florida St in 00?
Since Murray St. didn't play Florida St. that year it probably would have been extremely difficult /s
he also would have been around 23 years old?
Half as old as chris weinke
He might have still had eligibility, in that case.
Let's be honest, early on in the game we were bitching about these coaches running up the middle continually as well. Not to mention every third down in the red zone was a QB keeper that just didn't work.
I was bitching about it too. Then, I thought it might be the case that Pitt didn't want to give up the middle of the field, but in order to keep them in that defense we had to sacrifice a play or two here or there.
Wait, were you not a fan of the shuffle pass into the 12 person mob?
In seriousness, Fuente adjusted. Props to him, that's what good coaches do.
I didn't see any shuffle passes, but we definitely tried shovel passes 3 times to no avail.
At the Manhattan Hokies game watch we were all complaining about this as well. Then saw this tweet from Pete on the field and it made more sense. Frustrating, but helps explain why they might've been hesitant to throw a fade in the endzone.
I feel validated...its like, weather impacts football games or something
I'm going to go ahead and state my opinion that there at the end, we didn't take any knees as a big FU to Nardz.
I agree. That and I think Fuente felt that Mot had earned it, and wanted to reward him.
I wouldn't consider running into the teeth of Pitt's front 7 a reward, but to each their own.
Yeah, he got "the reward".
But what's important is that Pitt didn't get one more second of offense.
I would think a better reward would have been running a hook route that stops right in front of Narduzzi, then Motley "misses" the throw to nail Nardouche right in the face.
I would have laughed.
Maybe. Probably. But it also allowed us to use an extra 5 seconds or so of clock on each play. And if somehow we wouldn't have used all the clock, the punt was likely to be into the end zone so that their returner would have no chance.
Last year's Michigan State-Michigan game is a good reason to do everything in your power to not have to punt at the end of a game
I think it was because Fuente didn't want to punt it back, even with a few seconds left on the clock. Kinda kept the game in our hands that way.
He took the element of chance right out of it.
Pitt would have had absolutely nothing to lose if they got the ball back.
That chance will get after ya'
Nah. Our QB's just don't get under center very often and Motley probably does it a lot less than Evans as the year has gone on. I took it as this was the play Motley was most versed in and had the least chance to turn it over.
How many plays has VT been under center this year? A dozen, maybe? (I didn't see much of the UNC game)
I just don't see how speculating on this could possibly be accurate, or necessary.
One of Bitter's articles on the Pitt game has a stat that pretty much sums this up.
Ya know, Leoffler may have been an upgrade to OcainSpring but he was the main reason our last few seasons went downhill. If Beamer had hired a real OC who was cunning and humble enough to use what he had the Beams would be on season 30 right now. I'm just sayin, ya know.
You gotta TKP harder.
I would not agree that SL was the main reason we went downhill. We continued to play a conservative style of football that created a smaller and smaller margin of error. It eventually caught up with us.
Not saying SL was awesome, because I don't think he was, but he did help put us in the position we are now.
I'm TKP'n as hard as I can bro! I'm just not very good at it.
Well stop waiting for the Ghost and take that nice girl you've been chatting up out for a nice seafood dinner!
And then call her the next day!
Why bring up the old coaching staff and what may or may not have happened if they were coaching during that game? It is irrelevant to the actual outcome. It's a waste to compare the two when you can just enjoy what our team is accomplishing.
Agreed. This discussion just doesn't feel right at all.
I put this comment right on par with the whole one game at a time for fans. We are allowed to speculate and discuss what ifs.
The OP also noted it was not a knock on previous staff. IMO, we would have lost that game 99% of the time previously.
And the title of the OP was....
Goes right along with:
"It's not about the money...."
"No offense but..."
"Don't take this the wrong way, but ... "
"Really, its me not you..."
Qualifying an insult by saying the exact opposite of what you mean is a cheap rhetorical devise. Providing the caveat doesn't take you off the hook for what you just said.
Again I think we should be able to celebrate success without ripping the previous coaching staffs and teams.
Not that I am criticizing your comment.....
I don't get the attitude that this thread is insulting or egregious. It is absolutely natural to judge where the program is now vs where it has been the last few seasons, and an obvious way to do that is to look at a game and say, "I think this result would have been different under the old staff." That's literally all this is. If you feel this is somehow disrespectful to Beamer, please articulate how.
This also isn't the first time we've debated on this topic. There have been comments made that Beamer and Loeffler might well have won the Battle at Bristol, given the nature of how we lost that game.
I think it is absolutely fair game to say a Scot Loeffler offense would not have been able to keep up in this game to eek out a win. There is nothing inherently damning in that statement. If we're saying three years from now that Beamer would have dropped a game Fuente won, then it's overkill. Evaluating whether the old regime would have turned in the same result during year one is fair game.
For those saying we shouldn't have this conversation, feel free not to participate in it.
I think the issue is that, in general, there are some many more factors to consider that there is no way to conclude the OPs statement. Loeffler's issue was consistency. The old coaching staff beat OSU and lost to Wake. Who knows what games we would have or wouldn't have won with the old coaching staff this year. It just seems a bit too much of comparing your ex to your current as a means of justifying why your current is better. You only do that when you have some sort of animosity towards the former. I just don't see the need or the reason for it. Live in the current. We have an excellent HC and a revitalized Bud. Personally, I'm just having fun watching this team play and not worrying about what happened last year.
The only problem I see is that a Loeffler offense may not have won the time possession
It's just worthless conjecture. Talking about the improvements that have been made in the last season is one thing. It is a completely different thing to talk about how the other staff would have done in this game.
This is a football fan forum. Worthless conjecture is kind of what pays the bills.
Scot Loeffler's offense put up 20 against Cuse.....just sayin....
Sigh.
I believe that last year's skill level in general would have lost to Pitt this year, coaching or not. Motley was very bad as a quarterback last year, despite what he did this year. Without Jerod Evans last night we wouldn't have won, and without our coaches last night, we wouldn't have won (despite Cornelson's very very very bad play calling at times)
Your judgement of Motley is just way off base.
Pull Lawson's redshirt!
I do miss Beamer on the sideline. Seven games in, its still wierd. Fuente is growing on me the, and his nonsensical, to the point attitude is very welcome.
To your point I like the fact that he acts like a coach. He doesn't sit there and yell and scream on the field like a lot of other coaches nowadays. (Ex: Narduzzi vs. Fuente) He is very stoic and acts like a coach. Off the field or in the locker room he knows how to act there too. He gets them fired up but he never embarrasses his other coaches or players on the field in-game. (Ex: Saban yelling at his OC while they're up by more than 3 TDs with a 1:30 to go in the game)
To Loeffler, his recruiting certainly helped us over the last couple of years.
Absofuckinglutely.
Including this year.
I don't remember Jerod Evans playing for the previous staff. Nearly every great playmaker they had are also a year older and more mature. It's just not apples to apples.
I wonder if CJF would have won the 238 games CFB won at VT. I wonder if CJF would have been able to win 10 games 8 years in a row. Maybe, maybe not. Fact is we had a great coach and now we have a good coach with a chance at becoming great. Let's leave it at that.
Without our last coach there's a great chance we wouldn't be playing that game. Without our run between 93 and 03 do you think we would've gotten an invitation to the ACC? There's a decent chance that we'd be sitting in the AAC or C-USA talking about trying to lure some old man like Mack Brown out of retirement to finish out his career in front of an empty Lane Stadium.
I love Justin Fuente. He was the right hire at the right time but let's let him finish at least a full season before we start making too many Fuente vs Frank comparisons. After all he just needs 200 plus wins and 23 more bowl seasons to match him.
I feel you and I agree with you for the most part. I think the point of the thread was to highlight how great it is to have a working offense this year in comparison to the sputtering offense we had last year.
Without getting to much into it, Loeffler's main fault was that his offense was to complex and all the false starts would drive me nuts. Remember all the players subbing in and out play after play, geez, still gives me nightmares.
Loeffler also deserves credit for improving the offense and introducing the fundamentals of the fast tempo, no huddle offense. Even if he couldn't put it all together.
I get it and I understand. The only knock I have is on the tone of it. It's almost a "Glad we got this, Glad we don't have that." vibe.
I understand. I miss seeing Coach Beamer too.
This year's players would have beaten Pitt last year.
The only thing that worried me was that they still ran the draw on the last possession. I figured if Motley took the snap and held the ball for a sec or two we could have still ran it out. I was really worried about the possibility of fumbles.
Seeing Phillips get the final yard on 3rd and 1 was great.
I'm 100% okay with this thread, because it's how some of us choose to provide an outlet for our fandom when there isn't a game happening. We're better this year than we were last year, and a lot of that is down to coaching. There's no reason we shouldn't say it out loud.
I wasn't thrilled with people in the most recent game thread calling the game done and dusted the first time we lost the lead, so I just left. People can fan how they want, and nobody else is forced to participate.