You know the drill by now. Each offseason, Athlon asks coaches to give their unfiltered, anonymous opinions about their conference foes. Well, today is the day that survey was released for 2017.
ACC Coaches Talk Anonymously About Conference Foes for 2017
First of all, lets get the highlights out of the way on what they said about the Hokies:
Virginia Tech
"(Justin) Fuente has a really diverse offense that is very hard to defend. They'll throw more formations, more plays at you than you see against most teams, and they'll try to do things that people did to you on film that they thought worked and you haven't prepared for. He has that ability to put in new stuff every week to keep you off-balance."
"They lose most of their high-end skill guys, so we'll see. I hope it takes them a year or two to reload. I know they signed a junior college quarterback for this year and a high school guy that enrolled mid-year, so I'm sure he's going to have a similar plan and try to keep the QB run game involved."
"They have a great atmosphere there. I've coached in a lot of leagues, and they probably have as good a home-field advantage as you'll find just about anywhere outside the SEC."
Oh yeah, they're totally scared of the future of VT football under Justin Fuente. Gotta love that, and you have to love the fact that they're willing to admit just how difficult our offense is to play against when in the past, all you ever heard was how hard the defense was. And the defense never changed. So yeah, good times in the future.
As for the rest of the conference...
Clemson
"Now they'll steal your signals. People don't want to talk about it, but the teams that gave them fits were NC State and Pitt because they huddled.
Georgia Tech
"Offensively, they're trying to use an ability to hurt your defensive linemen, secondary, everybody, with their scheme and the way they block. They really push the edge of the rules. They figure you can't call a high-low block every play, so they'll do it 60 times. That's the first thing you have to fight against, and they have a great plan and you have to just try to stay one step ahead of the plan until the end of the game."
North Carolina
"I think you look at what they were defensively before Coach (Gene) Chizik and how much they improved when he was there, I would have some concerns about him leaving."
Pittsburgh
"With Pitt in the ACC, it's a quarterback-driven league. You've got corners they're putting on an island. He will pressure, but their corners are matched up outside and the safeties are extra hitters in the box. They're sort of getting nine in the box at all times. If their corners improve and they can get away with it, they'll be fine. At Michigan State, those corners were getting drafted, and it's cold and windy in the Big Ten in a league that runs the ball. This league isn't like that."
Virginia
"They're not particularly fast."
"The best player on the team was the tailback (Smoke Mizzell), and he's gone, so how do they adapt what they were doing?"
"The coaches there have won a lot of games over the years and they know what they're doing, but they need to adapt what they do to the kids on their team."
Good luck with that, Hoos.
Comments
They must have been talking anonymously, there is a lot of smack talk there.
Spot on with Duke. Just another reason the hating on thread for Cutcliffe is so difficult. Also, I love how someone came for the jugular when describing GT.
Yeah, it was a pretty Narduzzi thing to say about GT...
I'd put my money on Cutcliffe making those GT comments. Guy hates him some chop blocks, probably more than Beamer did.
I love how they said that Miami's defense was purely gimmicky in why its good.
I think it's my favorite quote in the whole thing.
"They'll throw more formations, more plays at you than you see against most teams"
Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't one of CJF's and CBC's trademark philiosophies to utilize as many plays as possible out of the same formation in order to disguise new plays to look like something else?? If so, IT'S WORKING!
I thought the same thing.
If that's what the coaches think...
I can't believe you didn't highlight Narduzzi's comments on Clemson:
Would've thought that would be his quote for us. But definitely him.
Narduzzi likes to complain about pushing off, too.
Frankly, he just likes to complain and re-negotiate calls with the refs, but only if they're not to his advantage.
This is super hypocritical but it isn't wrong. Clemson's corners are, and have been, extremely handsy for years. Tankersley was particularly prone to jersey pulling, especially when he got beat, but ACC refs looked the other way. There were so many uncalled PI's in the NC State and Louisville games that should have hurt Clemson.
Shouldn't it be easy to figure out who said this?
The obvious answer is Jimbo for me, but I also think he's a candidate for throwing the shade about stealing plays... so I'm on the fence.
Sounds almost like Bobby Bowden...
Obviously this guy!
There's an outside shot that this is actually Dabo.
I'd call it about 50/50.
I've been thinking this (i.e. have absolutely no source or proof whatsoever) since the ACCCG. It seemed like they knew what our plays were going to be many, many times.
I thought this in 2011, when Clemson handily beat VT twice during the same year VT was winning against everyone else.
Clemson was able to anticipate every offensive play that year, in two different games.
They weren't stealing signals. It came out that they figured out our tight end that year (#86) altered his stance slightly depending on whether the play was run or pass. They keyed on how he lined up. So they did have an advantage, albeit from good scouting and not stealing.
So they've got someone who looks at every player on the team to determine if there are any "tells"?
That's certainly an interesting theory. Do they do this for every team? It's a good thing to know about.
It was obvious that they were able to anticipate the plays.
It could have been someone noticed a trend in film review. I think I remember someone saying that Bud noticed a WVU player lined up differently depending on the play call back in 2004 or 2005.
To me, them noticing a tell by a TE makes total sense and doesn't seem like something that would be that difficult to notice to a trained eye. The TE is such a fluid position in both the run and pass game that if that particular TE changes a stance pattern based on run, pass, or possible direction of a play, whatever coach tasked with surveying the opposing O-Line would likely pick it out pretty quickly, then assess trends based on his stance and other personnel in similar situations. (Probably mostly done during week-of film study and then called out in-game)
if we had a decent OC, maybe one who also had coached TEs, then maybe he would have noticed and told the TE to take a stance like its gonna be a pass play, then run block?
I mean, even the casual observer noticed that Clemson seemed to know everything VT was going to do offensively during their first meeting.
By the second time the teams met, you'd think they'd have figured something like that out.
I hear that this past year, they could tell what the next play would be by how Bucky fell down after the previous pass.
Did Bucky lead the country in the least # of yacs?
Aww, c'mon. If you throw a jump ball to a covered receiver and then expect a ton of yacs, aren't you being a bit optimistic?
I feel like what you described is more what we did for Ford than Bucky. Lot more jump balls in coverage stick out in my mind for him anyways.
I just can't remember a time he caught th ball and went foward. He was always falling. Maybe it's a jump ball and hint but I think it's not being able to adjust to a ball in the air. He could adjust to catch it but that was it
I think it is a combination of three things. We did use his height to target him in jump ball situations a lot. We had a lot of less than accurate throws where he had to make significant adjustments to catch the ball. There are very few players his size who can overcome the momentum of going full speed and having to torque your body, reach and stretch to catch the ball, and still keep their feet. Most who can are all pro at WR or TE. Then there are a few times he seems to go down for no good reason. I think our frustration over these plays influences the way we perceive the others, and makes us forget the times he caught an accurate ball in space and kept running.
I'll be honest... the way those 2011 games played out, I've been wondering this for a while.
Didn't Clemson have a GA that was a GA at VT the previous year and the VT coaching staff didn't think to maybe change up the signals? I remember seeing this rumor somewhere.
No but Dan Pearman was the TE coach at Tech the year before, and then went to Clemson in '07.
I've never really read about this in college football. But doesn't everyone try to do that? Is it not allowed under the rules or simply frowned upon?
It's virtually impossible to prove. So, it doesn't really matter if it's against the rules.
Fair but I was curious if it actually is against the rules. And if everyone tries to do it, what makes Clemson better at it?
I'm not sure the actual rule on the practice. Also, is it that they are actually better at it or are others just blessed with more integrity? All good questions.
I mean, if they found a way to pull it off, more power to em. If our signals are so obvious that teams like Clemson, who we play only once a friggen decade, are able to figure it out, we deserve to have them stolen.
I agree. Doesn't mean I like it. Hopefully, CJF instills some PLAYSEC because I think we'll see them sooner rather than later.
I guess they might have found it worth their while the year we played them twice.
But you're right, it's up to us to protect our signals or to change them frequently enough to mitigate the problem. If they're acting on your signals, it seems you'd have an excellent way to misdirect them.
Seems like if that was your sole job to watch and track signals / trends, it wouldn't be that hard to break, outside of the Stanford wristband approach. These are college kids with limits on practice time so not sure they can change too much each week and avoid mistakes.
I would think the hard part on defense would be getting the D calls and then trying to "steal" the O calls and adjust before the ball is snapped by a no huddle team.
Of course its not that hard to read our defense signals when Bud is putting his fists on top of each other screaming "Stack, Stack, Stack"
I feel a lot better about it with Fuente having gone up-tempo.
As long as your are not recording the signals it's legal.
Recording them is ESPN's job.
This reductionist excuse seem whiney. Doesn't Alabama huddle?
"They beat us and we think we're good so they must have stolen our signals"
So does Florida State, theory doesn't really hold water. And there's no way we put up that many points if they know what's coming with us, they had a huge physical advantage over our offense and we still showed 'em a good game
Not so fast my friend. They blew up most of our plays like they knew what was coming, especially early in the game. We scored and managed to get some crucial 3rd/4th downs with some cheeky and busted play calls. We weren't consistently moving the ball against them until late in the game.
I'm not saying they are definitely stealing signals by any means, but I am saying your logic here doesn't hold up to disprove it.
The second best d-line in the country against an average o-line will do that. We should worry about getting better on offense before we start lamenting stolen signals.
Probably should get better on offense AND make sure our signals aren't getting stolen.
A good d-line with your signals is going to be impossible to beat.
ok fine, but I still think this coach was just salty. His theory doesn't really hold water past two games, much more likely Clemson just didn't show up to play
It's circumstantial evidence at best, but it's also not the first time in the last two years that I've seen rumors/whispers of Clemson stealing signals. Which, if true, wouldn't actually be that rare, it's a pretty common thing, very difficult to police and almost impossible to prove. So it doesn't really matter either way, and obviously Clemson's DL was/is extremely talented so they would blow up many plays regardless.
Not always, they have done more no huddle and spread stuff the last few years.
Mark Richt?
Outside shot that it's Cutcliffe too... but I doubt it.
That is about the only thing he could say other than "They flat whooped our ass"
I had to look it up to verify that Miami played at Blacksburg last year. Otherwise, Richt wouldn't have been a candidate. He's otherwise never been to Blacksburg, unless he was the backup in 1982.
Having attended that game, I concur. That was a hell of a night!
95% chance the GT one was Bud Foster.
Love this quote about Boston College and our previous OC:
For as smart as Loeffler seemed, the guy just can't get an offense going at the college level.
Weird because the next sentence is what I found interesting.
I'm a complete nerd so I happened to watch a few BC games recently to see how they were picking up Loeffler's scheme. I was surprised by how they showed flashes of juice. Look, I was as happy as anyone to bring Fuente in this year but I also may be alone in appreciating what Loeffler has been trying to do for the past few years. Loeffler has had very little NFL talent to work with over the past four years but managed to field offenses that were competent enough to get to bowl games.
Loeffler knew his role, he tried to limit turnovers, and he relied on his defense. He didn't try to be a hero or make a name for himself by doing something flashy. There are a lot, A LOT, of offensive coordinators that would have gotten Steve Addazio fired last year. I think that if they are given the time they can make BC respectable again.
I'm with you on this one.
I thought and still think if Loeffler ever got into the right situation with some decent talent, he could create a pretty potent offense - if he let's that talent do what it does best and not spend so much time trying to outsmart DC's at X's & O's.
Personally I've always been of the mindset that if you have the time and resources to dedicate solely to going through another team's signals, figuring out the patterns, and decoding them all correctly, you deserve to know what's happening on every play. Never understood why so many people see this happening and freak out like their team is getting cheated.
Unless we're talking about some behind-the-scenes deal going on to pay for the signals from somebody who leaks them, in which case my opinion still goes back to that the team having the signals stolen should probably just be protecting them better.
I dunno. A lot of people are still pissed about Antietam...
That is a hardcore reference.
Maybe Clemson found our signals in a cigar box.
Concur. If it happens on the field it's fair game IMO. Don't like it? Get creative and change it up, or use a wristband, etc. How is "stealing" signals different than any other kind of film study, or reading what the other team is planning based on alignment, pre-snap motion, etc?
If you really want to address it, it's time to use NFL-style wireless comms between coaches and players.