Growing up, Notre Dame was a big deal in my mother's house. Her father was the quintessential Irish Catholic, the son of immigrant parents raised in the shadow of New York City. When I was a kid, we watched a lot of Irish football games and I admittedly had Rudy memorized weeks after it came out on VHS.
So forgive me for getting a little sentimental here, but seeing the team I love take the field at Notre Dame was an emotional experience for me. In many ways, it was a more personal version of the Battle at Bristol; a matchup and setting I had waited decades for and never thought would happen was finally a reality.
But no sooner did the game kickoff had the reverie vanished from my consciousness. In its place were equal parts frustration and despair as the listless and mistake-prone Hokies dug themselves a deep hole for the second consecutive week.
Ten minutes into the first quarter, everything felt eerily similar to each of the Hokies' three losses this season. A dual-threat quarterback had ripped apart a porous Hokies secondary. The Hokies' front seven once again struggled with the read option. Foolish penalties erased momentum-changing plays. And poor exchanges and bad snaps kept the Tech offense in neutral.
Down 17-0 to the Irish 7 seconds into the second quarter, the Hokies had gained a grand total of one first down and four yards of offense on 7 plays. They looked cold, out of sync and completely overcome by the moment. It was as though Touchdown Jesus had paralyzed Virginia Tech with his blank, knowing stare like Vigo in Ghostbusters 2.
I would be lying if I didn't acknowledge that sometime during the first half I worried the Hokies were in the midst of an epic death spiral. Superstition dug its claws deep into my psyche. Maybe I should change my seat? Has the jersey I'm wearing ever brought me good luck? Was a second consecutive gameday spread including pizza bagels a bad decision after last week's debacle?
Tech needed a solid offensive drive, and they got it largely from their ground game. Tech efficiently ripped off a scoring drive behind the unlikely running of fullback Steven Peoples, the former Galax High School star who entered Saturday's game with two career carries. Peoples churned out 13 yards on three carries before Jerod Evans broke free for a 23-yard touchdown run.
That drive didn't mark the start of a clinical dissection of the Notre Dame defense, but it did kickstart an offense that had shown absolutely no signs of life in the first quarter.
After the Irish extended their lead back to 17 points, the Hokies were in dire need of a score heading into halftime and they once again rose to the occasion. Jerod Evans put the Hokies on his back and led the offense to touchdown drives at the end of the first half and start of the third quarter, seizing all momentum from the Irish.
After 25 minutes of frustratingly uneven play, Tech found a way to bounce back on the road in challenging conditions. Heading into halftime with confidence and knowing that they started with the football had to have had a profound impact on their mindset.
After six uncharacteristic quarters of play, Justin Fuente's team started the second half looking like themselves again. They were decisive on offense and confident on defense. That swagger that we have grown to love so much? It was back.
"I don't think there was any great revelation at halftime," Fuente noted. "It was just we had to play better. We were out there dropping the ball on the ground, giving up big plays — just not playing Virginia Tech football. I think guys settled down and got their feet underneath them. I felt that if they'd just execute, they'd have a chance to have success and that's what they did."
Honestly, I think Fuente's halftime speech went something like this:
Virginia Tech exited the locker room a completely different team than the timid group that started the game. Jerod Evans was locked in and Tech's three-headed monster at receiver looked completely unstoppable.
Yes, the Irish had a 67-yard Josh Adams touchdown run off read option that made Vinny Mihota look like a participant in a Mannequin Challenge. But aside from that one bust, the Tech defense was punishingly incisive after the break. They limited DeShone Kizer to 36 yards passing in the second half. And after Adams' touchdown run put the Irish up 31-21, Tech forced three consecutive 3-and-outs en route to a 34-31 lead that proved to be the difference.
So what should fans make of Saturday's performance? Tech proved that they can be a second half team, especially on the road. They showed that they can shrug off turnovers and bad breaks, taking the game one play at a time. The long runs and coverage breakdowns that regularly undid past Tech teams were not going to define this year's squad.
But they also sleepwalked through the first quarter-and-a-half of play. They looked undisciplined and unfocused for periods. Coming on the heels of a frustrating home loss to Georgia Tech, the Hokies' start was gruesome. But their recovery was inspiring.
Ultimately, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Whereas Virginia Tech fans thought the Hokies looked like shells of themselves in the first half, Notre Dame fans surely believed their team was finally playing up to expectations. In the second half, it was a complete role reversal.
In truth, Virginia Tech was the better team heading into this week's matchup in South Bend. Forget about recruiting rankings and preseason punditry. Notre Dame had struggled with consistency all season, regularly dropping close games and failing to live up to their preseason Top 10 ranking. The Irish were 4-6 and playing for their seniors, pride and a bowl berth.
Sure, they had four straight Top-15 recruiting classes (the senior class was ranked #5 in the nation according to 247sports). But if you watched the entire game, the Hokies looked like were the more talented team.
Former 3-star wideouts Isaiah Ford and Cam Phillips dominated their counterparts, making catches in traffic and breaking ankles in space. Former walk-on CJ Carroll had arguably the biggest play of the afternoon, outrunning the Notre Dame secondary for a 62-yard gain on Tech's opening second half drive. 4-star QB recruit Bucky Hodges used his enormous frame to haul in a game-tying touchdown midway through the fourth quarter. Oh, and the leader of the Tech offense, Jerod Evans? He was an unrated quarterback who signed at Air Force before transferring to Junior College.
Against the Irish, Virginia Tech proved that recruiting rankings only mean so much. It isn't about accumulating potential. The challenge is fitting that talent together to create a formidable collective and utilizing a system that puts those players in the best position to succeed. It's about development and mentoring. To take it a step further, intangibles matter; resilience, heart, determination and intestinal fortitude don't show up in star rankings.
On a cold, windy night in Indiana, the Hokies woke up from their late season nightmare before it was too late. In the process, they gave themselves a much needed confidence boost as they look to clinch the ACC Coastal against UVa.
Comments
Terrible start, but the team showed a lot of heart (which had been missing in previous situations with adversity) and closed it out. Think we got a bit conservative in the end and RZ play calling was still abysmal, but great win over a highly visible program regardless of their current W-L record.
Bit of a forced narrative. The team showed heart against adversity against Pitt and Duke, and really hasn't folded on an opponent since Bristol. We were trying to claw back against both GT and Syracuse, we just couldn't.
The team's had heart all season.
Even Bristol had a feeling of a comeback before yet again Cam fumbled a ball fighting for yardage on a good drive. If this team can stay out of it's own way, heart isn't a problem.
Yeah, I have never gotten a sense of quit from this team. All our struggles - and all three of our losses - have been issues with fundamentals or execution.
yet we even have announcers saying it's like a funeral on our sideline when we get down early. Maybe heart isn't the right word, but there is no vocal leader trying to motivate the team to get back in it.
Heard other people completely refuting the statements by the announcers, too. They were so ND biased that I wouldn't believe anything they said.
Why does the leader need to be vocal and flamboyant? From players I've heard, most people tune out that guy that is constantly "pumped up" but with nothing to say. That's not to mean great leaders can't be vocal and high energy, it's just not the only way to success. Whatever the mood, the team clearly kept their composure and came back to win the ballgame.
WADR you aren't being much of a vocal leader if you are just pumped and but with "nothing to say"....
Loud & Proud ... Good article.
via GIPHY
"Flipping the bird at recruiting rankings" .................. annnnnnnd ND !
It took me a while to realize NBC is the ND network. Doug Flutie was supposed to be a commentator, but was a fan rooting for ND. He was true to himself, always rooting against Tech. I dislike him, A LOT!
He played for a snooty private school who has a history of playing another snooty private school. They think we are unworthy of playing them. Plus he was probably pissed we handed BC their ass this year.
I've noticed a lot of commentators who attended supposedly big time schools rooting against us while calling our games.
There are two in the club! I can't believe it!
Seriously, people on here acted like I was an idiot because I didn't realize they had this contract and I was wondering why highlights weren't available on the major sites. Bunch of tools calling the game, for sure.
Yeah, I hate so much on NBC for that bullshit TV contract they have with the somewhat-defamatory-statement-against-people-of-Irish-decent-for-a-mascot school... and then I hate so much on Notre Dame, partly because it's Notre Dame and the other partly for the aforementioned TV contract.
More capitulation; the game broadcast is finishing up, and the commentator is doing his plugs and what-not and the whole montage in the background is every. single. Notre Dame. highlight. of the game... and then the final score. You'd think it was closed-circuit from the campus TV station ran by the media department.
F them in the A. Hella glad the lunchpail took grass from South Bend back home to Blacksburg.
At the same time however, I thought the production quality was very good. The camera work was A+. They got in replays even when the teams were in tempo, (Raycom and ESPN suck at that.) the sideline reporting wasn't too corny, and they took some creative angles at the start of a few plays.
I came away pleasantly surprised. Sure, Flutie was a fanboy, but he knows his audience.
I mean really... who else besides die hard Irish dudes are watching this year on a consistent basis?
Its strange to me that Flutie is such a fanboy. I get who signs his checks, but why anyone from BC would love ND all that much is odd...
Agree completely. Their production quality was the best I've seen all year. And I watch a lot of college football.
Great writeup.
I missed this team.
Felt like all of our demons came to a head in the first quarter. Fumbled mesh points, absurd snaps(all game), fumbles, Teller penalty, defensive confusion, and zebras trolling us with an unsportsmanlike on Fuente after Narduzzi went balistic for 4 quarters. I almost went unsportmanslike on my TV.
But we overcame all of it.
Teller's "penalty" was a work of fiction.
Fuente absolutely lost his schitt on that one.
Which I'm perfectly ok with. Like a baseball manager hustling out to the umpire. The difference between Fuente and Nard's (besides Nard's baffling lack of a penalty) is that this is the ONLY time this season we've seen this from CJF, and it was the only time during the game that he acted like that.
I hope that crew spent Sunday getting their collective ass chewed.
You're right - it wasn't on Teller. It was on the Center (Gallo?).
Saw the replay and TSL folks were talking about it. There was a very subtle small jerk by the C that got the ND DL offsides. Ref just messed it up by calling it on Teller.
I'm 99% sure Fuente just watches Teller on every offensive snap, to make sure he's not laying any more illegal blocks.
So when Teller gets called for that penalty that Fuente KNOWS he did not commit, he goes ballistic.
An interesting note on official's consistency of calls: Did anyone notice that later in the first half, this exact situation happened again, w/ND's D-line jumping into the neutral zone and Tech's O-line reacting exactly the same, and the penalty was called on ND that time?
Yeah, the second time was the correct call for sure. If a wide 9 jumps across the line a step and then gets back onsides it's okay, but you can't cross the line inside to influence a false start. Otherwise teams would lunge their DT's forward on every play to try to force a false start.
It is within the rules that you can move laterally as much as you want (like our D-line's sudden shifting) but you can't encroach the neutral zone to cause the O-line to flinch. Our O-line guys reaching out to hit an encroaching lineman is some gamesmanship to draw the penalty, which is great to me, but you're relying on an official not having his head up his ass and messing up the call.
Yep, when you respond to movement with movement you risk a judgement call based on what the official saw and he might have missed the first movement. And yes I've commented on the lateral shifts late to confuse keys and draw false starts. Clemson does it a lot as well, especially at home.
... and Teller immediately jumped up with both hands raised, and you could almost hear him yelling, "it wasn't me that time!" Both calls should have gone against the defensive tackle(s).
The ghost of Narduzzi past.
I didn't get to see the game. Was Fuente's outburst worse than what Narduzzi was doing? I mean as a single event, discounting that Narduzzi was acting like a child repeatedly.
IMO, no. Fuente was screaming. And that's about it. No jumping, no throwing things. And the crazy thing is, best as I could tell, he wasn't even in a ref's face when the flag was thrown.
Must've hit a (ref's) nerve, then.
I think he asked the ref a fairly simple and straightforward question..."WTF kind of a call was that?" or words to that effect
I thought it was a legit question, given the refs spent an hour ordering pizza trying to come up with a reason not to call ND for jumping into the neutral zone...which ND did another 20 times or so despite that reprieve.
Actually, it reminded me of the commercial where the refs huddle and leave the mic on.
From the stands it looked like on one play the ND player jumped across and touched a Tech player on the helmet but nothing was called.
Watching it on TV it was a terrible call. ND should have been called for offsides. I have no idea what the refs were watching, and I have no problem with Fuente asking WTF they were calling. Me and my friend LOVED his fire. No where close to Nardouche's level.
I commented above, but the big difference to me was that is was the ONLY blow up Fuente had all game, as opposed to every play like Nard.
My lip reading saw/heard "What the F$&% was that bulls$%&?".
You are correct.
That's what I saw myself. Those words were pretty easy to lip-read...
Especially when you're saying the same thing.
Would love a gif of this.
No, it wasn't. There was no stomping or throwing headsets. Just a good old fashioned tongue lashing
He threw his headset.
My mistake, I didn't see that. But did he break it?
No it didn't hit ground because it was attached to his pants.
Why does this make me laugh. Especially taken out of context.
So, based on the replies it appears that if you are a consistent d-bag, you can rant all day about nothing and never draw a flag. But if you are normally calm, and have one out burst you get flagged. Or, maybe it's just if you do anything that could conceivably draw a flag while playing ND, it's going to get called.
So you're saying the ref's expect more of Fuente than they do the Nard?
I think it's more like an R-rating on a movie: drop the F-bomb, get a flag. Throw a tantrum and say "frigging" and you get a warning.
I'm guessing the ref's for Pitt took a lot well deserved ribbing for putting up with his widely publicized tantrum and not throwing the flag, so the ND ref's were over sensitive to being made fun of on a national level and were looking for a chance to throw the flag before the game started.
I'm sure it has been said on other threads, but I love how our win sealed in a losing season for Notre Dame and guaranteed bowl ineligibility for the Irish, after finishing 11th in the final 2015-2016 AP Top 25 last year.
Not so fast my friend. 5-7 teams have gone bowling. And you can bet your sweet ass that if bowls are short on teams a 5-7 irish team will be the first ones to get a phone call.
I'm 100% #TeamFewerBowls
I know we've benefited from lower requirements for going bowling (remember when you had to have 7 wins to go to a bowl?) but I think bowl season has jumped the shark and it needs to be rolled back a little to restore relevancy.
Even with all the bowls plenty of teams fail to make one. I'm looking at you LOLUVA and Arizona.
I don't mind, just because it is more football games to watch. Also, it shortens the disparity between good teams and bad teams since you get more time to practice with your players, which I would assume contributes to a lot of the #teamchaos appearances in CFB.
Also, I don't believe it is all that easy to make a bowl seeing as a true blueblood program like ND is likely going to be sitting at home this year. I still brag about the streak VT holds. If it were so easy to make the bowls, VT wouldn't be one of the only schools with a 20+ year streak.
I love watching all the bowl games. Mainly because you get matchups you would never see in the regular season and some really exciting games (sometimes). Plus Im in a bowl game pool so all of them are important.
At face value, I don't think a team with a losing record should go bowling. It just seems wrong but I understand why, with the number of bowls out there, it has to happen some times. That being said, I'm also a fan of anything that extends football season just a liiiiiittle longer and it's fun to watch teams that wouldn't normally face off against each other do just that.
And I mean in terms of competitiveness there's little difference between most 5-7 and most 6-6 teams. Heck, last year there were three 5-7 teams that went bowling (Nebraska, Minnesota, and San Jose St.) and they all won.
I just don't see them beating USC this weekend. That being said, if they did, and ended up 5-7, I just cannot see how they would get a bid. They have wins against Nevada, Army, Syracuse, and Miami - not the best wins. however, I fully understand the $$ side of the conversation with a bowl wanting them to participate because of ND having a national fan base.
If there aren't enough 6-6 teams to fill bowl slots 5-7 teams are looked at by their academics instead of sos
ND has turned down bowls in the past, I can't remember if it was 5-7 or 6-6, but they have said no before. They do things differently (many of the "seniors" honored actually have another year of eligibility remaining but have finished their degrees). I don't expect ND will be in a bowl game even if they were to shock USC to get to 5-7. Their bowl game is in LA this weekend.
"Their bowl game is in LA this weekend"...is that like UVa's bowl game is in Blacksburg this weekend? Yet again?
And does it get any better than knowing neither ND nor UVa will get the extra practice for their perpetually young, inexperienced rosters?
Barring a loss to USC, they'll get a bowl.
5-7 teams are selected based on APR
Notre Dame has an APR of 975. They are currently ranked 8th on the APR list of teams who might need APR to get in.
64 teams have secured spots (6 wins) with 18 remaining slots. Duke gets a spot with a win. Northwestern, Vandy, North Texas, BC, Indiana, and Maryland will all be eligible through APR.
They might get an invite, but I think ND has too much pride to go bowling with a losing record.
On the 67 yd run by ND, Mahota was in a no win situation. I believe his assignment is containment which he did, but it then points all fingers at Matu for crowding the line and getting caught up in traffic. (He has a habit of doing).
Games where he stays back and reads the play, he'said a beast! But not when he runs into a crowd.
I'm with you on Moto/Vinny. I'll wait for French's review. But to me it looked like Vinny had contain and was forced to hesitate to ensure the QB didnt pull it out and roll around the edge. Meanwhile, Moto ran right into the pile (where the ball carrier wasn't). Not only blocking himself/taking him out of the play, but did his hopscotch step and turned his back to the pile (wtf!).
don't know what happened up front but Terrell bit way too quick.
The DBs were biting hard all night. At least a few of ND's biggest plays featured a DB biting or taking a horrible angle and letting them get a whole lot more out of a play than they should have. Not playing the blame game, but it's not just Motu that made that mistake in that game.
MIhota has the outside on that alignment. Tremaine did his job on his side... Motu leaned in towards Tremaine's side a bit to much as his eyes were on the RB (so it appeared), thus leaving his gap unaccounted for. It was simply poor technique/bad angle. And as we've seen over the past two seasons, it doesn't take much to get him out of the way.
If I'm wrong here, I have full confidence French will point out (properly) what happened on this play in his review.
I was at the game, so I haven't seen it other than in real-time. But it just looked like a CF to me in real-time.
For what it's worth, I believe Bud Foster said post-game it was multiple mistakes, not just one.
So you were raised wrong (sportswise) but have seen the light, good on ya man!
My favorite Slept On It this season, I think. Not a head scratching loss, not a blowout win, not an ugly "W" deserving more criticism than praise. Just a hard fought, comeback, close out victory, showing the best of this team in all phases when it mattered.
I would give this one leg for the sentiment, and another for the Ghostbusters 2 reference.
He is Vigo!
You are like the buzzing of flies to him!
via GIPHY
Good write up across the board.
Statement: Nice to see CJF show some fire (stones) on the sideline. I think helped the team get fired up.
Observation: Is Travon hurt? Wow, hardly used. Do we worry about an off season transfer?
Pride: Really enjoyed CJF comments after the game re: the Hokie Nation!!
Health: I damn near had a freaking heart attack!!
If he does maybe we should switch Lawson to running back /s
No we don't worry about an offseason transfer
My personal opinion is that Travon hasn't been our best or even second best runner for a few weeks now. And I don't know if he's still having trouble in pass protection, but that could very well be another factor in taking away his snaps.
I think he has run really hard in a few recent games such as Miami and Duke. Can't do much when you run into nothing but bodies at the line of scrimmage most plays. Our offense has been at it's best when we have utilized our weapons effectively. McMillian has provided some big plays and a return to some of his work in the passing game could pay dividends in the RZ. Our creativity in the RZ has dropped dramatically the last few weeks. It's pretty much Evans up the middle, back up the middle, or fades.
To be honest folks, there were gusts of cold wind at that game that made me totally forget my own name. I think it took a while for our team to get over the sheer shock of the weather. Evans said as much at the end of the game, he couldn't understand why he couldn't hold onto the ball no matter how hard he tried. The shivering and teeth chattering was a cheer in itself and the stadium was designed in a way that there was no place you could go to get out of the wind and warm up. That said, being there was worth it.
On the upper concourse there were ND fans hiding in the bathrooms by the space heaters.
According to the talking heads, it was actually colder on the ND bench than the visitors' bench. If true, that seems like a bad idea that someone could correct. (Unless there was something unusual about the weather Saturday that caused this.)
That's okay, our players were standing on the sidelines and cheering on their teammates and not really sitting that much.
I call BS on that. If it was a sunny day, perhaps. But it wasn't. It's a completely symmetrical stadium. I can't think of a reason one side would be colder than the other.
Plus they've only been playing there for almost 90 yrs. You'd think by now they would have figured it out by now - unless it's an advantage in Sept and Oct when it's warmer (in which case, stop crying because you can't have it both ways).
If wind is blowing in from one side, you could get a lee on one side that was more or less shielded due to eddy currents and the other side could be fully exposed. If wind is blowing from an endzone, then they'd be equally affected.
The wind was mostly blowing from the north/northwest...if anything the ND sideline (the west side) was somewhat protected from the wind.
Again, I call BS on this. And I'll eat my hat the first time the NBC folks mention that the visitors sideline is hotter on a hot September afternoon.
I think biggest thing I'm taking away from this team at this point is that they can take a punch and find a way to get back up. There is some serious character being shown by this team that I don't think have been seen in Hokie teams the last few years. I admit I thought we were done for in this game and actually turned the game off for most of the second quarter because I didn't want to get as worked up and disappointed as I did after GT. The team didn't quit and that second half play was fun to watch. This group of Hokies have never been part of a 10 win, championship kind of season and as much as I as a fan would happy to be back in those situations; I'm happy for the players. They deserve to be in this position: one game against your biggest rival for the chance to play for your conference championship.
Is it Saturday yet?
I'll just say this... Yes, Fuente lost his shit at the refs this weekend, and it was absolutely the right thing to do at the right time in the game. He pulled a baseball manager's meltdown on the team and it worked to perfection. The team was flat right up until that moment, and the second that penalty happened, it was as if the lightbulb went off in the entire team and we essentially steamrolled the Domers the rest of the way. Sometimes as a coach you just have to know when and how to flip the switch on the team, and that's what happened. Worked beautifully.
And for the people accurately pointing out the differences between this and Narduzzi, there are certain things you just cannot say to a ref, and it certainly seems like Fuente crossed that line on Saturday. However, considering how the rest of the game played out, and seeing as how this was called correctly later in the game, perhaps that was by intent.
Nonsense.
It was absolutely the wrong thing to do at the wrong time. It did nothing to inspire the team. The team already had some momentum - having scored on the previous possession and then holding ND to a 3 & out after the score.
All it did was make a bad situation worse - going from a manageable 3rd & 9 to 3rd & 24, causing VT to have to punt into a 30mph wind from even further back in its own territory to give ND excellent field position. And the defense promptly allowed ND to drive 60 yards in 2 min for a TD to put them up 24-7 (and potentially take that lead into the locker room at the half - effectively sealing the game). Not exactly a lightbulb going off and certainly nothing beautiful about it.
I don't believe for a second it was anything more than Fuente losing his shit and going temporarily insane. And I don't believe for a second the thought ever crossed his mind that a tantrum right then and there could have any sort of positive impact.
VT won the game because the coaches "calmly" made adjustments and both sides of the ball began executing. I wouldn't be surprised if Fuente apologized to the team yesterday.
huh, silly me... And I thought the 27-7 swing in points was indicative of a strategy that worked to the benefit of the team, but yeah, you're right, he totally screwed the pooch with that one
correlation is not causation...
And coincidence is not causation either.
I agree with Marc above, but was still glad to see some emotion out of Fuente. The zebras huddled for so long, they made it obvious they were arguing in their own huddle and then I think what really pissed off Fuente was that they seemed to not want to explain their call.
I don't blame him for blowing up there and I was glad to see it, but I agree with you that it wasn't what caused the team to rebound. I also don't think for a second it was Fuente trying to light a fire under his team, it was just a bad call that pissed him off.
It was so unbelievable that he sort of lost it.
Fully agree. Fuente preaches coolness and control, as well as some of the points you make, as summarized in Andy Bitter's second of his Five Thoughts column
Yep, it was Fuente's apology for it that made it clear it wasn't his intent. He was embarrassed by it. I know the feeling, my kids have been on the wrong side of those explosions before.
I much prefer the even keeled Fuente. It wasn't a good look on TV and it didn't have an impact on the game other than causing an immediate draw play --> punt into wind --> ND score.
That said, it was a huge call to not get those 5 yards on 3rd and 4. Down 10, we had some momentum and could have really changed the complexion of that game much quicker. Same thing with the tipped interception. We were really close to winning that game 44-24.
Fuente even admitted in his post game press conference that it was a bad penalty to take and set a poor example for the players.
That would be the correct thing to say in either event. Just sayin'.
Do Fuente and Bud need to hold some sort of intervention with Terrell? I thought the hit at dook was definitely debatable and gave him the benefit of the doubt. The two (uncalled) hits at ND looked worse to me. The announcers didn't harp on it but my memory is it was him on both of them. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
It was him on both.
Admittedly, my only view was from Section 117 and there was no replay available in the stands, but the one hit looked like a true accident as the QB slid WAY late and basically lowered his helmet into the range for targeting. I think that was a good no call.
Didn't see the other in enough detail to comment.
I'd agree, and it always looks worse in slo-mo. But another issue was Kizer was lowering his shoulder to great effect all through the first half and I think in the second, the db's were trying to be more assertive. That said Edmunds is lucky he wasn't called on at least one of them.
Yeah I'm very surprised neither of them was reviewed. I don't necessarily think they were bad no-calls, but I do think they looked a lot worse on slow-mo. Still though, the way the targeting rule has been enforced this year, while inconsistent, I was fully expecting at least one review on those.
And yeah, with the way he had been trying to truck our guys earlier in the game (and being praised for it plenty by the commentators I'll add) I wasn't a bit surprised to see our guys going in for harder hits later on.
I want to know what he said to Mook as he was leaving the game and why. jreynolds' post on Instagram making fun of Kizer was hilarious.
He said "I am Batman"
As he walking away from talking to Mook, they had a close-up of his face and he clearly said, "F*ck that b*tch!"
He was not lowering his shoulder. He was lowering his head and leading with the crown of his helmet with his face down. I agree Edmunds could have been called, but if Kizer keeps that up he will not be around for an NFL career. The most dangerous part of the plays was on his part for ducking his head into contact and not just lowering his shoulder.
I don't believe the Duke hit was targeting, but I understand the reason they made the call. I do believe his first hit against Kizer was textbook targeting and the second one (forearm) could easily have been called that way as well.
What is worrying is that every debatable call has involved Terrell. I don't want to believe it's intentional, but it also can't be the technique they are teaching because he is the only one of the bunch making those types of plays. I'm going to assume he has just had an unfortunate series of plays where he was trying to assert himself, but if this trend continues I think he should sit before he seriously hurts someone or himself.
Part of the reason it seems like it is always Terrel is that he is the #1/2 playmaker in the secondary. Faycson has not been looking very good the last 3 weeks.
That was what I was getting at, if he could be getting a reputation to where he would be more likely to be called for it.
Despite ND's record I feel like they're a solid team that for whatever reason
hasn't done well this season. Feel like it's a nice win for our program, especially
battling back like that.
This.
Even though ND has underachieved (to put is nicely) this season, still a really good win for VT. National audience, even against a 4-6 team, these are the games the Hokies MUST win consistently, even more so than the national games against really good teams.
In a few years nobody will remember or care about the respective records, but CJF and his guys will be able to sell the 'We went into ND and won in the first year, imagine what we will be doing down the road". And tis particular ND team still has a QB that will probably be a Top 10 pick next spring in the NFL, and a lot of talent. Seems to be a coaching or motivation problem for them now.
Yes, agreed. I thought Dook was in a similar boat, in that their record isn't good but their team is actually pretty good. When I talk about Dook to Big Ten folks, they say the same thing about Indiana this year. Pretty good team without the record to show for it.
SIAP but was that Casey Harman playing TE? If so, what's the scoop there?
Colt Pettit to add some blocking. Had to wear #80 to be eligible. One of the beat writers (Sean Labar, Aaron McFarling or Andy Bitter) mentioned it in a post-game writeup, don't remember which.
Thanks!
Bitter mentioned this in one of his postgames
Can we make sure Henri Murphy gets to touch the ball in some way shape or form from now on? That kid was dynamic and so close to breaking one on kickoff return.
Anybody have footage of the Fuente personal foul penalty?