We may not have won the game, but apparently we won the day...
It's been noted that VT set the standard for crowds at College Game Day back in 1999, apparently we keep raising the bar.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Apparently they took notice of lit our FAM is....
The DJ at gameday said this was the best crowd. I also saw somewhere (I think ESPN instagram) that it was the loudest crowd! Its great to see VT back in the national spotlight. Also got a lot of praise from the commentary when I was rewatching the game. Overall I think it puts Hokie Nation in a really good light.
Great to see a strong gameday presence and gameday atmosphere. Really represented the fan base well and showed that 66K strong can outshine some of the larger venues. Well done.
I'll see if I can find just this clip and post it later, but there was a cut from Sports Center to the Game Day crew around 8:30 Saturday morning where they were having a hard time hearing the studio and just looked like they were having an awesome time enjoying the atmosphere. Awesome to see, glad we continue to set the bar for incredible atmospheres in college football.
The first 5 seconds of this give you a quick sense...
Yeah, too bad the team didn't duplicate it on the field (sorry, still pissed about the whole 0-5 v Dabo thing). Ok. Done. Rant concluded.
We were playing the best team in the country. You know that, right? We got beat by the better team. It takes time to build a program to the level of Clemson and Alabama. We are 19 games into Fuente's time at Tech. What exactly did you expect?
Less of expectation, more of hope. Like I said, 0-5 vs Dabs (particularly what happened back in '11) still grinds my gears. Just me.
Not just you. There is something about losing to the goober that rubs me raw.
Well obviously we all hoped to win. But realistically it was a tall task. We knew that going into it. What happened in 2011 has nothing to do with any player on this team or the majority of our coaching staff. You can't hold this team accountable for both losing on Saturday night and for losing two games six years ago.
They fought hard and never gave up against a Clemson team that would dominate all but a few teams in college football. I believe we will get to that level within a few years and compete at the highest level with Clemson, but until then I think we need to be realistic and keep in mind Coach Fuente is just getting started. Alabama lost to Louisiana-Monroe and went 7-6 in Nick Saban's first season. I think we can live with a 14-point loss to the defending national champs.
Yeah. And again, I'm not negating that. I just wanted the score closer and I still don't feel the team showed up with the same or more intensity in their playing as the crowd. I'm not holding this team responsible for the losses back in '11. But that still doesn't mean I'm not annoyed and pissed about it (if you've noticed in some of my posts, records and numbers get to me. It's just who I am and how I feel). Of course I can live with it.
I disagree that Fuente is still getting started. I agree he's still new. I do trust him and the staff (mostly). But the team did not duplicate the intensity of the crowd in their performance on the field (at least I seem to be the only one that feels this way).
My take is that we played it safe on offense to try and settle Jackson in and avoid turnovers, and it came back to bite us. I think FuCorn also anticipated a much more aggresive Clemson defense, which we did not really see. This was the first real "bad game" we've had from a gameplanning standpoint in the Fuente era, IMO. We did not attack as much as I thought we would. Playcalling was safe for the most part, and the emphasis on avoiding mistakes and turnovers may have actually psyched the team out. I'm sure Fuente and Cornelson will evaluate and learn from this. We had nothing to lose at all and played like we had everything to lose.
I would apply this same statement to the other 4 games this season. "Slow start" may be an intentional decision, to allow a FR QB, young WR's and the OL to get game acclimated (game is different speed than practice). Combine that with dropped passes and it looks even worse (notice that Clemson got on a roll, in part due to a great catch on a well covered WR, that lead to their 1st possession FG).
Yeah, I think what we may have perceived as slow starts or playing vanilla throughout the first four games may have been more a reflection of where we were offensively. Still, I think we did not play nearly as aggressively as we should have. James Clark was apparently out with an injury, which now I understand. But I'm still shocked we did not see the AJ Bush package. His athleticism would have been invaluable as a change up when receivers weren't getting open. I think we just played this one way, way too safe offensively. When you have nothing to lose, we should have thrown the kitchen sink at them from a playcalling perspective.
The coaching staff are taking the entire season into account, not one game, not the fifth game of the season.
1. There is no AJ Bush package. He is the backup QB and needed in that capacity for the entire year. If we are in the ACCCG, I would be ok with them using Bush to change up the game plan, not before then. But I don't know that the coaching staff thinks like fans do, so I wouldn't count on that happening.
2. This was the 7th most important ACC game VT will play in 2017 since every Coastal game is more important than either Atlantic game. Pulling out all the stops to win the fifth game of the season, showing your hand to the remaining 7 teams that need to be played, would not put the team in the best position to win those games.
3. The offense struggles because there are only a couple of veteran players at skill positions with only Cam Phillips proving he can be consistent and relied upon (and double teamed), the young guys are learning as they go, and with all due respect to Cam, there is no super star player like Saquon Barkley that can take over the game.
But don't worry, they can still win the rest of their games if they keep working hard and stay focused week to week.
I agree with most of what you said, but in terms of the Bush package, I say why the heck not!? Fuente and Cornelson absolutely DO NOT strike me as the type of innovators that are going to limit themselves or leave options OFF the table (unlike some other assistant coaches and coordinators from recent history).
So he gets hurt who is the backup now?
Pretty Woman
That's easy. Jack Vick-uh, Click.
Click Click Boom
Maybe Bush just isn't good enough? Jackson is an okay runner. If we really want to mix it up, maybe run a wild turkey with Peoples or McMillan. Don't see the point in bringing in Bush.
I grow restless and weary of all this anti-Bush rhetoric. #Vote4Bush. You can't just keep someone of Bush's talent caliber all boxed up. Hop on board. When it comes to Bush, you gotta be open, think and operate OUTSIDE the box.
Bush is underrated.
You would have loved the 60s
McMillan also played QB in high school, he's probably capable of a couple of downfield throws w/ single coverage on a receiver.
And see, I can go with this. In terms of the Bush package (go ahead), it makes me think that Fuente and Cornelson HAVEN'T pulled EVERYTHING out of the book for this game, which, if that's true, is very intriguing and exciting.
We walked outside where we were staying around 7am on Saturday morning a mile and a half or so from downtown, and we could hear the crowd already, so I'm not surprised to see them heaping praise on us.
Really, we should expect to get Gameday more often from here on out. The ACC has improved, and we're a good team again, and will only be getting better. And more importantly, when you consider ratings, our offense puts up style points more often than not, which make us attractive to showcase. It won't be 10+ years before they come back to Blacksburg again, that's for sure.
Especially with the nice OOC (+ ND) schedule we have the next five years including Notre Dame, Penn State, Michigan, and WVU rolling into Blacksburg.
Gameday was also at the Battle at Bristol.
They were there because of the venue, and not necessarily because of the teams.
This past weekend was because of the teams.
I'm just saying Gameday was there.
It was just last year.
But sure, if VT is a ranked team playing another ranked team in that atmosphere, it greatly improves our chances of getting Gameday. ESPN likes us. They really like us.
But physically in Blacksburg, not just at a game VT happens to be playing in. I think we should expect to see them back more often. We made a big impression, and the ACC is on the rise, arguably the best conference in football now.
So we lost the battle but could potentially win the (recruiting) war? I'd be good with that
We might even be making an appearance next week.
I was standing next to the Washington State flag during the show (awesome group of people, btw), and thus, I was right there when Tom Rinaldi came over to film an interview with one of the guys holding the flag. It's highly likely that he's doing a piece on the flag next week, which will be its 200th appearance at GameDay. I'm hoping he uses at least part of that interview in the piece, since I was standing behind them with a "UVA SUCKS" sign.
Leg for the "UVA SUCKS" Best gameday sign by far !!
I was hoping you could get everyone to lower their signs and just let that one Stand out.
As expected, Tom Rinaldi did do a piece on the sign that aired today. Sadly, they did not use any of the interview from last week in the piece.
They did use several clips from last week, including one where the guy asks the girl if she wants to wave the big flag. I'm pretty sure I was just off-camera for that one.
At least VT has had some decent representation on GameDay today:
-appears in the Wazzu flag piece.
-hosts say that the TCU crowd is giving the VT crowd a run for their money.
-According to the Bear, the last "big game" that Miami won was against us in 2005.
Time to stack another poll.
As a Hokie and a Yankees fan, there are no losers here!
Just saw this when it reloaded after my comment. As you can see below, we may have differing opinions on this.
Same boat as you, but recency bias has me leaning towards Hokies
Get on this, kids. I just voted, and we're down 65-35. Please don't let us lose to a Yankee.
STANKIES!!!!
To be fair they said on radio that it could be lopsided due to the company being northeast based. However for those that may not listen to the radio show one point Dave (host of the tailgate show that was in town) said he wondered why they didn't continue the song into the lyrics (I imagine somewhat like what we saw at Fedex vs WVU )vs. cutting it off without even fading it. I'm not sure if its been discussed, but thoughts? would it be an improvement or not?
Discussed in another thread, by the time you get to the good part (or the part that everyone knows, "exit light"...) too much time has passed. What it cuts to now happens to be the VTCC playing the fight song, key aspect of the college entrance. I'm having trouble imagining a smooth transition anywhere, and drawing it out might only make it worse. Perhaps later in the game.
Yeah my mistake, I now recall that in one of the threads in the lead up to the game it was discussed. I thought it was funny to hear it discussed on the show, saying that was a big takeaway for an outside perspective. Personally I agree with you that its good now, it would also be wierd if im right on my times the total time of enter sandman we use is like 40ish seconds and the chorus that you reference doesn't happen til after the one minute mark so the 20 seconds extra would be a little awkward. The only way I see it working is keep it playing as the away team enters and by the time they hit the field in full it might be there, but I'd have to see how it lines up and even then it still may not work.
Clemson friend who came to the game with me asked the same thing. He had no idea that the song didn't play out. Was very disappointed.
It does seem like they've had enough time to figure out how to make it as smooth as possible.
Like they're professionals.
It really was pretty sad when they started playing it during that second-half video when we were clearly not going to win the game.
We may need to put Leonard in.
It's weird because they started playing the song an extra 10-20 seconds from 2013 onwards. No idea why they decided to change back to old ways against Clemson. It completely cuts off the hype.
To me it would be an improvement. I think the aspect of a sing-a-long to the lyrics (after all, who doesn't know the words?) would greatly add to the experience. But that's just me.
I honestly can't think of anything cornier. If it's spontaneous and EVERYONE does it, it's great. But a sing a long that doesn't get 100% participation is just sad.