Two links again, for people who hate metered sites:
Roanoke: http://blogs.roanoke.com/andybittervirginiatechfootball/2013/10/01/if-ex...
Norfolk: http://hamptonroads.com/2013/10/if-exums-fully-healthy-hokies-might-try-...
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Andy when do you get to talk to the assistants about the move is it today or tomorrow?
How cool would it be, if Exum plays lights-out from start?
Get your 2-way Facyson!
Can we start calling him 2-Face-On? As in Batman?
God I hope they don't take Facyson out of the starting D. Exum is not as good at corner as he is at Safety. He really struggled last year. They need to ease Exum into the games, because a Microfracture surgery is no laughing business and most players are a shell of their former self when they return.
By the end of last year, Exum was a much better corner than he ever had been safety. Did you stop paying attention after the Cincinnati game? Or did you just not realize that teams were completely unable to throw to his side of the field starting at about the midpoint of the season....
I see both sides of this debate. Facyson stays on Defense, they remain deep and Elite. (I personally feel it'll be weeks before Exum is as productive as Facyson.) I can see where that unit needs any help, but they are getting better, or at least I feel that way. I dunno, I'd like them too keep it the way it is, but Logan having another potentially solid target would be sweet.
(On my knees, hands clasped, praying to Bud Foster) Please - God of Defense - please don't let the Powers that Be fuck with your defense. You guys are gelling like nobody could have ever expected. Please talk them out of making this horrible decision. It would be wonderful and idealistic if The Daycare was open for business right away, but there's some saying about a bird in the hand that isn't coming to me. Please Mr. Foster, don't let them do this.
What is making them go with Facyson instead of Kendall to be the one who does double duty? I see they were both great at receiver in high school, but I thought they even went as far as promising Kendall he would see time on both sides?
We currently have a total of 11 interceptions and Facyson has 4 of them. I'm personally concerned about moving our top interception producer to the offensive side of the ball. How long will it take for him to learn the routes and read the defenses?
Personally, I'd like to see Facyson stay in the secondary at let Exum work his way back to a starting job, if, and only if, he performs at, or better than, the same level he did last season.
At least we know he can catch balls thrown near him
Hell he can catch passes that aren't thrown near him. And he'll be able to fight for jump balls, too.
Heaven forbid they take Caleb, who practiced at WR and is now wasting away at RB, back out to WR. Instead let's take a CB having a great freshman season and move him to offense. That way he doesnt get any experience against ACC foes he'll be facing for the next couple years.
(I'm still not a fan of moving people all over the GD place)
Well, are they looking for a WR, or a way to keep a playmaker on the field? If we overlook the "problem" of having too many corners, by all means, Caleb could be the guy to help at WR. That still leaves an extra CB. But what are the coaches really trying to accomplish?
From the outside, it just seems like a waste to keep Caleb at RB when the WRs are struggling so much
The thing is, Caleb was struggling as much or more than the current group of WRs. We'll see what we get there with Facyson, who actually did play WR (and was pretty darn good at it) in high school.
I will deal with it but I will not accept this. This kid is on his way to All-ACC honors and potentially All-America. Don't fix what ain't broken (at least on D). Don't do this Beamer.
That is the question, is he a defender who takes a few snaps as WR (ala Macho Harris), or will it end up as a position change (ala Greg Boone, Marcus Davis)?
Good point! But I really hope that doesn't distract his gameplay on Defense. Push him to receiver just too pull him back, is it worth it? A lot of the issue in the Passing game comes from QB too. Doesn't matter who's running routes when the ball doesn't get there. Stanford and Byrn look pretty good, and this group is still learning.
This isn't a position change. I think even if Exum is starting that they will rotate and putting Facyson at WR in a couple packages 1) adds a different type of threat (he's fast, he's taller than our receivers not name Coles, has great recovery speed, and can CATCH) 2) Keeps him on the field. Whether you like it or not Beamer will play his senior coming off an injury and given him the chance to start. Maybe he's being too loyal, but personally I think Exum has earned the right to at least get the shot at starting. Lest we forget before the season started Exum was most of this forum's man crush. Given that we will see how it all plays out.
To quote Peter Griffin (minus the gene therapy), "guiltyyyyyyyyy......."
What a lot of you are failing to realize is that Facyson will still be playing on the defensive side of the ball. He does not appear to be moving to play ONLY offense... He's seems good enough to be a contributor on both side of the ball, and so that's what the coaches are trying out. They aren't converting him to an entirely different position....
I agree STLHokie, but what worries me is the possibility of him getting hurt on offense then that would leave us with a rusty Exum on a limited depth at DB position already.
Eh he could get hurt in practice. It's a man's game and shit happens. I don't think fear of injury should play into it. Obviously it doesn't for the coaching staff since Jarrett is still returning punts even after French's fantastic analysis as to why he shouldn't.
plus it takes time away from him focusing on D. When he takes time to learn the system he will be taking reps and chemistry time away from the current WR crew.
I'll never buy the "well, he could get hurt" argument for just about anyone. You can get hurt pretty much anywhere, anytime in the course of a game or practice. The idea here is to get him on the field more. Yes, more plays = higher statistical chance of injury. But if that's the rationale we're using, we shouldn't play anyone ever. Put the kid on the field wherever you can and let him make plays. That's my take.
Chris Gamble comes to mind.
I believe that the last defensive player to win the Heisman won it by doing more than just playing defense!!!!!!
You deserve this.