This post is copied from a poster over on 247 (STL22) so credit to him for doing this research.
VT has now scored 28 or less in 12 of the last 15 games vs. FBS opponents (59 vs. UNC last year, 35 vs. ODU, 31 vs. Duke). This is absolutely terrible, especially considering we play in the ACC coastal which has been a joke the past couple years aside from Miami last season.
Fuente was hired to come in here with his staff & provide a spark to our offense so that Foster wouldn't have to win us games. It's year 3 and our offense may have actually regressed. I understand we have had some turnover on the roster & other things but that happens at every school. This is unacceptable for a program of VT's status. Let me know if you agree/disagree. Just honestly don't know how to feel right now.
Comments
Posted this in the vent thread, but this statement from Fuente makes me pissed. I feel like he's saying "My buddy did a good job three years ago, it's the student-athletes we have today not doing their job now."
Completely agree. That's exactly the type of comment I was expecting but hoping we wouldn't get from Fuente. Pissed is an understatement right now.
Similarly pissed. What he did 3 years ago doesn't mean shit in 2018. Everyone we're playing in this conference has seen it and know how to gameplan for it.
Fuente also said Corn wanted to sub in QP when Willis went down because he wanted to run that package. Great. Where was that desire to change things up in the 3Q when our offense looked like a middle school powder puff squad? It's piss poor coaching and it's infuriating to watch.
That's poor. Come on Fuente, you can't say stuff like that.
As is often the case, the full quote reveals a much different attitude than inferred from the tweet.
"Play calling has nothing to do with it," he said, bristling at the notion of any change to coordinator Brad Cornelsen's role. "Play execution has 100 percent to do with it. And that's not taking (blame) from the coaches to the players. It's the coaches' job to get the players and teach the players to execute.
But then he says stuff like this when asked about adjustments:
That's not a great answer.
I don't even understand what he's trying to say here. "Passing the ball was working so we adjusted to run the ball instead and that didn't work." ???? Is that really what he's saying?
No. He's saying BC adjusted to take away the pass (he made a comment about BC playing two deep safeties and not blitzing), so VT looked to take advantage of BC's alignment by running the ball, which should have provided a numbers advantage.
It helps if you don't assume the coaches are imbeciles.
It helps if you don't assume the coaches are imbeciles.
This part was worth repeating.
Odd that journalists and viewers think that they have better insight than the coaches. After all, we've actually watched games, but most of us don't coach players as a full time job.
And the opposition does not have imbeciles as coaches or shit players.
Actually, the growth of this BC team is a perfect example of giving a new coach time to develop their team.
Correct. Boston College is benefiting from giving Loeffler time to get results.
I remember him getting criticized by many of the same people who are now criticizing Fuente.
Counterpoint: Loeffler has been at BC the same amount of time that our staff has been in place. This is his third season.
But Addazio's fifth.
Yeah, I'd call this the 5th year of their rebuild. In the case of BC, he got a two year head start, which may have been what he needed.
In Steve Addazio's 3rd season, BC won 3 games (0 ACC games).
Right about now I bet they are glad they let him recruit and develop the players that are now upperclassmen and build depth too.
They could have pulled the plug after year three and state they gave him plenty of time to get his guys on to the roster.
The two years before Addazio got there they went 4-8 and 2-10. So... I expect they knew a major rebuild was necessary.
And VT was 9th & 7th in the ACC the two seasons prior to Fuente, not exactly competing at a high level either.
You're really going to liken 7-6 and 2-10? I mean you're welcome to.
I feel like some people here have been doing that lately.
No, I am noting that the performance did not improve by year three at BC but was consistent with the previous results. The improvment took years to realize after changes were made.
Fuente did not inherit a good team and it takes years to recruit and develop enough players to have upperclassmen contributors and depth. It is impossible for Fuente to be playing with a full deck as of yet and the calls for his firing (you may not be one of these people) are unfound. I believe Fuente and Buzz both accepted their VT job in no small part due to the perceived perception of patient and realistic fans.
Umm... Okay. From the team Fuente inherited a number of guys are currently playing in the NFL. How many guys from Addazio's first year are in the NFL?
Addazio posted in immediate turn around from 2-10. In Loffler's first year they went 3-8 and I'm sure he was made aware of how bad that looked.
But you just noted that the most talented players left early for the NFL. The value of those players generated quality results for the 1st two years of the rebuild but without them, the program only has two classes of players to put on the field where every other team has four classes worth of players to fill out the depth chart.
I wish the team were playing better but I think it is rash to start questioning Fuente at this juncture. There are many issues that led the program to where it is today. Hopefully Fuente will have fixed enough of the problems and the results will indicate this. If these results persist for the next two seasons, I will feel that Fuente had time to produce on the field and/or make the staff changes to make it happen.
Which is to say he inherited a program in decent shape. That's way different than inheriting a program in the shape BC was in.
Again, most people aren't looking to fire Fuente, but they need something more than what amounts, "The play calling is perfect and the players aren't executing." Even if Fuente owns up to the lack of execution even a minor acknowledgement that , "We are going to look at everything, including play calling, to try and get back on track." would go a LONG way. But throwing around Cornelsen's 10 broken records (which means he had the memorized so he KNOWS people are all over it) isn't doing anything to inspire confidence. That is, as I've said before, a "sit down and shut up" response. I assure you that's going to happen here.
Hokies fans are having Beamer/Stiney flashbacks right now. Fuente, as the head coach, needs to understand and at least appropriately coach speak his way through it.
But telling me the play calling isn't something that needs be looked at doesn't cut it.
Doesn't matter what he says.
We're losing games due to poor execution, mental mistakes, dropped passes, failures to complete tackles, etc. Would different play calling fix those things?
No amount of coach speak is going to make people feel better about losing these games.
He's basically saying they changed up their defense so we ran to take advantage of the change... Except we failed...
It could be better but I don't think most fans care anyway. They are just angry and want to vent. The vast majority of fans aren't interested in actually analyzing plays to understand what happened. I've gone back and looked at plays to prove points and have challenged others to do this a few times but have never seen anyone take me up on it. I can see how it would be frustrating for a head coach to respond to some of the criticisms when any answer he gives is wrong. Fuente has given multiple clues that this year was going to be difficult but nobody wants to hear or accept that either.
I think the issue most people have (myself included) is that the fans don't want clues. For once I want Fuente to honestly tell us what the hell is going on.
And even if Fuente admits that the coaches were responsible for the team not being able to execute, why is execution to blame week after week? Give them something that they can execute or teach them how to execute it. Just don't keep giving vague excuses like that.
You want him to be like, "well Cunningham committed a personal foul like an idiot and that hurt us and then we false started in fourth and short to ruin that drive. Hoyt had another bad snap that led to a turnover. Then on one series we Turner wide open with a chance at a TD and Ryan missed that one. Finally hazelton doinked one of his chest for a costly interception."
That's a large portion of what the hell was going on. People would be freaking out if he said that though (and rightfully so) so he doesn't have much choice but to dilute it down to execution errors.
Those things were clearly apparent to people and that wasn't the extent of what people are upset about.
Explain to me what people are upset about other than, "playcalling sucked. We don't score enough points."
The most significant contributing factor to that statement is the plays I just pointed out. Those plays killed more than 25% of our total drives.
People make mistakes. This team is going to mess up. My problem is that they're messing up stuff that our coaches should be able to fix.
Cunningham gets a stupid penalty that cost us. Call him out on it and bench him. Send a message to him and the team that he's not going to tolerate stupid penalties. (The problem with this is we seemingly don't have the depth to punish or bench anyone because we're already playing freshmen/our only/best players we have.)
False start? Take that person out of the game. (See above with depth issues)
Bad snap? Find someone else that can snap or have him snapping balls for the entire practice until he could do it blindfolded at a Metallica concert in the pit.
The missed passes happen but Ryan was absolutely spooked after taking that shot before half time. He just chucked that ball to get rid of it before he got laid out again. Ryan Willis isn't Michael Brewer.
Hazelton interception happened because he was 2 yards (+?) from the sticks and was already looking up-field before catching the ball. I think he was put in a bad position there but still you have to make the catch before you can run.
And look, if these mistakes are because our players are bad, that's on Fuente. He recruited them. Hell Bronco essentially said his entire team was shit and his players are playing hard and getting results this season. Blaming execution is a blanket and empty excuse for a lot of problems.
You've made it clear that you think it all falls on Fuente no matter what. So why do you care if he just says the problem is execution or invites you to his house for a private film review detailing the Xs and Os of every play? The end result is the exact same.
Shouldn't it fall on Fuente though? It is his team. These are his players and his coaches. If a position group is not doing their job, shouldn't he sit down with that position coach to try and work out how to fix it? If a player is making stupid mistakes shouldn't he figure out how to prevent them from doing so? Someone has to be accountable for the mistakes and execution errors.
As a fan, I just want some evidence that this is happening. The problem is that the only thing we see is a 60 minute game once a week. All I'm saying is if he went in to the post-game interview and said "look we're still being plagued by bad snaps and penalties so we're going to focus on that in practice this week" and they come out next week and don't have any stupid/unnecessary penalties and all of the snaps are good, I'm a lot happier than when he says "we need to execute better" and we lose while making the same mistakes. That doesn't mean I'm expecting him to fix all the problems and win every game from here on out, but I just want to know that he's capable of identifying problems and fixing them.
Do you think that's too much to ask/expect from a head coach?
You actually need him to say "we put in our backup qb, and the center tried to hike it over his head"?
Or, "Ya know, we probably shouldn't have run into the punter"?
I feel certain they'd make players sit out, but they'd have to recruit additional players out of the stands. We do, in fact, have more offense than we've characteristically had at VT. I see the problem as more that our defense just isn't it's normal self, and our special teams/kicking game aren't quite as special as they usually are.
What's hilarious is Fuente did exactly what you are asking for regarding the issues with punt returns. He clearly stated it has been a problem area and they have tried multiple players in practice to solve it. Also in case you missed it, we've pulled Hoyt for Chung multiple times and shuffled players along the OL.
If you cared enough to pay attention to what's happening rather than grabbing your pitchfork and justifying it through post game quotes, you will see the coaches making changes and trying to correct the issues.
The product on the field is not good enough. I agree with that and think eventually the excuses will no longer be valid. However I don't think that's the case this season when there have been plenty of warning signs that it was going to be a struggle. If it's not improved next year, I will start to have more significant doubts.
I don't see playcalling changes that make execution easier for inexperienced players. We've been flat out whooped in our last two home games in the second half. There are bad play calls. Cornelson needs a sit down.
Can you give more details or examples? I am completely open to hearing them if you have a compelling argument. However I have not seen anything offered than conjecture and opinion on the matter. If what you say is true it should be easy to prove me wrong with specific objective evidence.
When Cornelson gets that sit down, how exactly do you want him to account for Tre Turner dropping two drive-killing passes and Eric Kumah having on offensive pass interference called against him versus Georgia Tech? Or for a pass boinking off Hazelton's hands into the hands of a BC defender? Or Harris leaving the pocket much earlier after nearly getting broken in half on a delayed blitz?
I really thought I had a legitimate criticism about Corn's playcalling in the second half when he kept trying to go back to the run, until someone pointed out BC dropped their second safety out of the box and went two deep because Willis was picking them apart. In that case, running the ball is the right play call, even if it wasn't successful on the field. Corn saw the situation and made the proper adjustment. Halfback runs between the tackles didn't work, but that toss sweep to Peoples was gorgeous, and QP's series exploited BC's front seven.
I have yet to hear anything articulate, nuanced argument against Corn's playcalling. It's all a bunch of generalities and frustration about the stalls we're seeing on the field. But assuming offensive struggles = bad playcalling is more often than not just a layman's perspective. I have yet to experience a game this season where I felt the playcalling was either overly predictable or inconsistent with the situation. Again, I thought I was able to say that for the first time last night, but only because I failed to notice BC switched to two deep safeties.
If anyone wants to have an actual dialogue about what Corn is calling that they take exception to, I'm game.
For the most part, I agree with you. I have not watched video replay of the game (I don't have time for that). BC did change in the second half where safeties stopped blitzing and were less aggressive in run support. Corn tried to take it to them up the gut for playing off the line. It did not work. The first three series of the second half had runs for loss or a gain of 1-2 yards. We went three and out each time.
We had nine consecutive series where we did not score.
So my complaint. Yes, we SHOULD be able to stick it to them up the gut. Yes it IS the right play calling to to that, at least positionally and strategically. But guess what. It did not work. The O line just could not do it.
So my thought is ... after 3 or 4 of these series where they are obviously floundering and cannot do it, why keep trying? Why keep hitting your head against the wall? Do something different. Outside runs, screen passes etc. Or take them head on and go ahead and pass anyway.
They obviously could not execute. Doing the same thing for nine straight series then yelling at them after the game that they could not execute also makes no sense.
I get exhausted saying this but once again, go back and look at the play by play. It does not support your statement that we did the same thing for nine drives. In fact we passed 20 times and ran only 6 times in the first 7 drives after halftime. What adds to the insanity of these complaints is that for the TD drive, we actually ran the ball 8 times and only passed twice.
But yes, Corny did the same thing for nine straight series. And that was run up the middle every play.
We shouldn't have been in shotgun on fourth and inches anyway. Let's not let that slide.
This. This is it. This is all that needs to be said.
People are angry. That's what it all boils down to. And like you said, they aren't interested in actually analyzing what isn't working and why.
The problem I have is, TKP is my forum of choice for analyzing VT football, including what isn't working and why. And I feel like that conversation hasn't been had here since we lost to ODU. It's all just a bunch of rabble rousing and vent threads.
I'm growing far more frustrated with this place than I am with the state of VT football.
I couldn't agree more, and it's keeping me from even considering joining TKPC at this point.
Frustration with a loss is okay, but the way people react - both in in-game threads with foul language and the like, and in post-game threads? Frankly, it embarrasses and angers me far more than what's happening on the field.
Play analysis has nothing to do with it. The site contributor analyzing the plays is the same guy that his very first year here set records for being the best online VT analysts. He knows what he's doing.
It's the commenter's execution that is the issue. We need to get that cleaned up.
Plaid.
And CJF wonders why some players aren't buying in.
Which players? Because even players who only played one year under him are defending him.
That statement is just a deflection on to the players. I would love a coach to you know take some blame in a loss.
Except the quote Bitter listed that you're all railing against is incomplete. The exact quote is:
"Play-calling has nothing to do with it. Play execution has 100 percent to do with it and that's not taking it from the coaches to the players. It's the coaches to get the players and teach the players to execute. The guys calling the plays are the same guys that his very first year here set 10 school records. He still knows what he's doing."
As well as:
"The people out there have changed and we have got to do a better job everybody around our staff getting those things done."
I know because I was listening to the post-game interview and heard it with my own ears.
He also said:
"Nobody cares that we're young. They don't. ... That's just the way it is. It's our job to continue to get those guys working hard to continue to get better."
He can throw in the disclaimer that he's not deflecting blame, but it's kind of like when somebody says, "No offense, but..." to cushion an inherently offensive statement to someone.
How he can objectively sit there and say playcalling/game management decisions have all been just fine is beyond me. And if it truly is an execution issue, it's the coaches job to modify their scheme to something that the players they have can execute consistently. I hear him say it's their job to continue to work hard, continue to get the players better. We aren't seeing progress, we aren't seeing recurring issues and problems improve. We still have trouble with snapping the ball in week 10. We aren't seeing a an on-field product that is indicative of "continuing to get better." At this point, it's all lip service.
I think you're interpreting this wrong. Fuente isn't saying he isn't culpable for execution issues. He's correcting a misdiagnosis. People are saying we're struggling offensively because of poor play calling. Fuente is saying the play calling isn't any more of an issue now than it was at Memphis or in 2016. The problem is bad reads and bad technique are preventing the offense from taking advantages of mismatches we're trying to exploit. That's the problem that needs to be solved.
This is horseshit, and will make a bad situation worse for CJF.
It's nice coming in year 1 and winning and taking ACC COY honors with someone else's players. Show me what you can do with your own guys.
Honestly can see why so many guys have bolted early. I would find it hard to deal with a personality like that.
A personality like what? The quote is completely incomplete.
Jesus Christ, people, this is Twitter. It's a 140 character-or-less comment on a quote that otherwise won't fit! Twitter is "sound bytes", and generally BAD sound bytes. Given it's 11 years old and has only made money for the first time ever this year (and only by cutting costs, not improving its business model), I'm somewhat surprised Twitter is even still around.
Before you rail on a snippet of a quote, why don't you go look up the full quote instead?
Taking credit for success and eschewing any blame. He may be a good coach (jury is still out) but that is no way to lead.
Here's the full quote.
"Play calling has nothing to do with it. Play execution has 100 percent to do with it. And that's not taking (blame) from the coaches to the players. It's the coaches' job to get the players and teach the players to execute."
Dalton Keene said, "Honestly, it's just our execution. I think we're calling the right plays, but at times we just don't focus in enough, maybe, here or there. It could be one guy during one play, and it really changes the game. There's definitely been flashes (when) you could see how good our offense could be. But we just need to stay focused."
Seems like at least some players agree with Fuente.
Thanks for providing the full quote. I'm glad he admitted some share of the blame. I was too harsh.
Whether it is bad play calls or poor execution the result is the same. If it is only poor execution that has plagued this offense this season than that is more concerning than if it were bad play calling. We'll never be able to recruit well enough to afford being bad at coaching players to execute the plays in our playbook.
My viewpoint is that young/inexperienced players are more likely to suffer from execution errors. As someone pointed out recently, we only have 6 seniors on this roster and as a result it does not seem unreasonable to me that we are struggling with execution this season. Now that said, if we continue to struggle to this extent next season, I would then start to become a lot more concerned about the program's future.
Most of the offensive starters have been in the system almost 2 full seasons now. Turner and Darrisaw are the only true freshman impact players who can be excused for youth at this point. I agree youth plays a role in some of our mistakes but I think some people are overweighting its role in our struggles.
There were a ton of dumb mistakes. We have seen them all. By not executing, I think Fuente is properly calling guys out on that. And he is showing discretion.
And as I posted earlier, we should have been able to run the ball in the second half with the way BC was playing (two high safeties in pass defense). But we couldn't. So it is not play calling, it is execution. Fair enough.
But ... if you see your guys are not executing the run, why keep calling it? Why hit your head against the wall? Are we trying to prove a point that we are making the right calls positionally but failing to execute? Ok point made. But guess what. They are still not executing. So take the BC secondary head on and start passing anyways.
We finally said screw it were are going to start passing when we went down by 14. And guess what .. we went down the field and scored.
So I do fault Corn somewhat for stubbornly insisting we run the ball when it was obvious we did not have the strength and or talent on the O line.
To be fair to Coach Fuente, this quote is out of context. He also said it was the coaches responsibility to teach players to execute. He did not throw his players under the bus.
The way I see it...it is definately 3 fold
1. Play calling
2. Player Execution
3. Coaches coaching players how to execute correctly and fixing mistakes
I think 2 and 3 are the issues. At this point in the season, it's disheartening that so many mental errors haven't been reduced. That is on the coaching as well as the player executing
Oh my...that is abysmal.
Defense played their hearts out today. They weren't perfect but that was a hell of an effort from a misfit and maligned group with a bunch of backups playing most of the game. The offense did them no favors all game.
Right on! What they faced was pretty much Loeffler's ideal offensive personnel set. I feared another blowout loss. The defense stepped up admirably.
Absolutely.
The defense has not been great this season but with all the youth and backups they really put up a fight and gave us a chance to win.
Bud's worst defense held BC's offense to 44 yards in the first half (-4 rushing!). Our O put up 14 whole points, looking inept and disfunctional toward the end.
Got to do better...especially when you've gotten all the good recruits over the last few years.
The offense did today what it's been doing all year. Look good at times, especially when in rhythm, then have a couple of drives that go backwards (penalties, bad snaps, poor execution/play calling), then have three to four drives with no urgency and bad play calling that go nowhere, then put together late scoring drives when they have a sense of urgency.
I complained about Stinespring.
I complained about O'Cain.
I complained about Loeffler.
Now, I complain about Cornelsen.
Maybe running an offense at Virginia Tech is just really hard.
Mike O'Cain couldn't coach a turd out of my ass. Had forced my mind to forget about him. Here we are.
I was always a fan of Rickey Bustle.
We were TOUGH on both sides of the ball back then. To have those nasty OLines, once more...
He did a good job for us but I think he left the program three times and that may have burned Beamer out.
Maybe your problem is that all you do is complain.
Agree this offense is a joke! Clearly poor coaching!
Yes because the defense hasn't been a steaming pile of shit this year
Not sure what that has to do with the offense putting up less than 4 TD's a game for the past 1.5 seasons in one of the worst divisions in the P5...?
Not as consistently as the offense. Offense only played well enough to win vs Duke and W&M. Defense won the FSU and UNC games and has played well in other games as well. Offense is the main culprit even if the defense hasn't been good.
D gave up over 500 yards to UNC btw
Allowed 19 points and forced two fumbles that led to touchdowns including a game-winner. Wasn't great but it win the game for us.
And the O scored 22.
No one has scored fewer points against UNC this season.
The UNC defense is alright. Their offense is horrendous and teams are rolling up points off of terrible turnovers by their QB. They are a decent QB away from being 6-2.
People can complain about the offense all they want but the defense is by far the worse unit. The BC qb was awful yesterday, we stacked the box, and they still ran over us.
Yes. Yes. We can't stop the run an entire game.
Is the offense too tired from not being on the field?
How in the world is this a logical retort to you?
He's just trying to instigate. Ironically it's the same thing he accused DC of.
Laughable
So because I'm not a party of the Lynch mob tonight I'm doing the equivalent of coming on here and throwing the middle finger at everyone like dc did after that game?
Christ, this place is a cesspool tonight.
Yeah because your comments haven't ever been a steaming pile of shit before
Sweet now we are into personal attacks
That's a personal attack? Nut the eff up and take a lap, man.
Ohhhhhh noooooow I remember why I don't come on here after a loss
Might wanna take a break from posting for the night man. Don't wanna ruin that precious leg count of yours.
You aren't responding to anyone with any respect or offering any substance. You are just making snarky quips.
You think calling everyone else a cesspool is not giving us the finger?
Alum were you able to get the game? I know you mentioned not being able to watch in the game thread. If not, you should watch this game. The D was not perfect but the effort level seemed to be 10x better than against GT. The offense absolutely hung the D out to dry in this one - especially in the 3rd quarter.
And yet, Memphis keeps on scoring in bunches. Perhaps Fuente brought the wrong Co-offensive Coordinator with him.
The other one is now OC at Texas A&M...
Fuente makes Mike London look like a competent game manager.
Shouldn't have gone for it on 4th down in the 4th. Defense was playing well and field position was important with how bad our offense was.
4th and 1 inch and we line up in the shotgun, run motion, and get a penalty.
False starts and illegal procedures are unacceptable at home, in the 8th game of the season.
There have been so many critical mistakes on 3rd or 4th and short. Bad decisions regarding going for it, fake punts, and timeout usage.
If I was Whit, corny is gone tonight and Fuente takes over the play calling.
Agreed on all counts. Couldn't have said it much better myself.
I was all in on him at the beginning of the year and he has completely ripped any confidence I had in him or his staff that he brought in week by week.
Whit absolutely has to have this conversation in one form or another. It doesn't have to be an ultimatum but something has to be said.
Screw that, shitcan Vice and Hilgart.
At the end of the first half, we get a stop on 3rd and long with 1:15 on the clock, and Fuente spends 15 seconds trying to figure out if he should call a timeout or not. This, after BC had just taken a timeout on the previous play so he had plenty of time to think the scenario through.
I still think Fuente's the right guy for the job but I'm questioning it more and more each week.
VT has scored a total of 14 points in the second half in the last two games.
*AT HOME
I miss the good old days, when we rocked Lane from start-to-finish. In good weather and bad. We could and did intimidate visiting teams with our noise and spirit.
I thought the crowd did a good job last night. Like the defense we showed some toughness and kept the energy up even some things went wrong. I wish fewer people had left when espn still said we had a 25% chance of pulling off a come from behind win. But that allowed me to move down close to the field, so if you have good seats then I'm ok with you leaving early.
I do have complaints about this team, but I like the way the offense is trending.
My complaints are:
Overall, I'm seeing enough improvement that I'm willing to give our staff more time. The offense isn't good enough to win games, but the Defense isn't able to give them any advantage (field position, turnovers, momentum, etc). I wouldn't be heart broken if Fuente switched up playcalling duties, but I'm not ready to call for Corn's head either. In general, I'm not a fan of change for the sake of change - if you're going to make a change, you better be making an improvement. TBH, I'm seeing enough improvement that I'm willing to give the offensive staff more time.
Easily the most clear-eyed, level-headed assessment I've seen.
And as someone who has only recently started questioning the genius of this staff, it articulates my feelings on the state of things almost exactly.
What? No it's not lol. Just because it is positive doesn't make it clear-eyed. His assessment makes things sound really good. Just a few discipline issues here and a few bad play calls there.
You should go back and read it again. He brings up all the points that we all understand as "problems" but actually takes a minute to acknowledge that there are some positives as well. You can do both; It's a hard thing to do right after a tough loss. That's why I said "level-headed" - it considers all aspects.
I understand why you'd take issue with "clear-eyed" - I'd say he's on the O&M end of the color spectrum, but it's a rational comment that doesn't venture into unrealistic rhetoric about massive changes and falling skies. We are a thin, young, team being coached by a staff that has had trouble guiding said team through adversity. I'm getting tired of making excuses for this team too, but he's right - it isn't all bad.
This site (most sites, tbh) after a loss is like a call-in show - every one wants to blow the whole thing up, fire everyone, blame people, get indignant about what we as fans "expect", "deserve", etc - and anyone with a notion that falls outside the "this all sucks" narrative gets their call cut off (or in our case, gang-downvoted).
It's easy to bitch and downvote. It's hard to actually take a breath and try to understand what's working and what isn't. He's a better man than me - I was over on the game thread earlier flinging shit like a lot of us were. Which is why, a few hours removed from the game, I'm glad to read a post like the one above.
Sue me.🤷♂️ (please don't.)
The thing that drives me nuts is everyone bitches, but no one offers solutions. If you want to fire someone, who is a reasonable replacement? How long do you think it will take for the new person to see success? What makes you believe it will come faster than it will for the current staff?
Just curious, do you disagree with any of the positives I've listed? Or do you believe the negatives I posted outweigh the positives? Or do you think I overlooked some critical issue?
I am at the point where I would not be the least bit offended if a certain midwestern TKPer fired up a website dedicated to the axing of our OC. Hell, I still have my "No BS" t-shirt somewhere in the back of my closet, and it wouldn't be too difficult to turn "No BS" into "No BC."
I know I still have a Fire BS shirt somewhere in the closet. Ahh the good old days, winning inspite of inept play calling.
Houston, we have a problem.
I continue to believe in the offensive scheme we're running under Fuente. I'm nowhere near the point I was at when I agreed to take the reins on the FBS blog.
My central criticism of Stiney's offense was that he tried to be everything, and consequently was able to accomplish nothing. We did the worst thing you can do when designing an offense: we had a dozen different formations and ran one or two plays out of each of them. The play (and how to defend it) was telegraphed by the formation. We don't have that problem under Fuente. The offense holds its cards close to the best and can run pretty much any of its plays from any formation. And even then, the different formations we use are so similar, it's hard for defenses to key on anything from a given alignment.
The play calling just hasn't seemed problematic to me. People bitched about the play calling against GT. What I saw was the same play calling that had us exploding out of the gate for three straight TD drives suddenly drying up because of pass drops and offensive penalties. Against BC, I saw Corn adjust to go with the run after BC dropped into 2 deep safeties. That's the right call, but we couldn't run up the middle. That's an execution problem, which is exactly what Fuente said.
As Hokie fans, we tend to believe in Bud Foster even when we have bad years on defense. And the reason why (even if some people wouldn't be able to articulate it) is because we believe in his scheme. We know his scheme works, so when we have bad seasons, we accept it's because we were missing some critical component to make his scheme work. Maybe it's an undersized DL, maybe it was a mike who struggled, maybe it was being thin in the backfield. Whatever it was, we accepted that some component was missing. We knew we'd get better if we shored up whatever the weakness was. Given what we've seen of the offense under Fuente, I believe the same thing.
I think to be successful, Fuente's scheme needs three things:
In 2016 we had two of the three things, and we saw the best offense in Blacksburg since Tyrod. I'm fact, we saw a better overall offense than we had with Tyrod, because our offense wasn't just a blue chip QB making shit up on the fly.
In 2017, we had half of one of the things we needed. The receiving corps took a huge hit losing Ford and Bucky, but Cam Phillips went straight HAM and some of the young receivers started coming into their own. But Jerrod Evans' decision to go one and done was catastrophic, both for himself and the program. The offense suffered.
This year we have one and a half of the things we need. We are loaded at receiver, and Steven Peoples is playing out of his mind. Our run game isn't quite reliable, as Peoples has certain limitations and McClease is hit or miss this season.
What we've missed the last two seasons is a QB to run this system. Both JJ and Willis are competent, skilled QBs, but neither are the right QB for Fuente to have taking snaps. JJ, for better or worse, was Lefty's guy. He's better suited to a system like that. Willis, for as much as he's come along, is a walk on transfer from Kansas. He's here because Fuente needed depth.
While it was only one series, seeing Quincy Patterson against BC gives me hope for the future. Running only the wildcat package, QB efficiently moved the ball down the field against a very good defense, even when it was obvious what we were going to do. Beyond just his efficiency, he had the look of a field general. This looked like his offense. In other words, QP looks like he's ready to lead. He just isn't ready to run the playbook.
Am I foolishly optimistic? Maybe. But what Fuente said after the game rings true: this is the same offensive staff that gave us immediate offensive success, when it had two of the three things it needs to run this scheme. Nobody was complaining about play calling in 2016. And this really can't be overstated: Jerrod Evans was supposed to be a two year fix for this offense. We should be seeing JJ for the first time this season, as a r-So, leading into an epic off-season competition with a r-Fr QP. Everything got thrown off script when Jerrod thought for some reason he could go pro after one season. But one bad season hasn't made me forget what this offense can look like when it has enough parts to work. I want to see what we look like with QP before I even think about the possibility of maybe considering calling for change.
I disagree. The offense in 2016 was the most dynamic we have had in quite some time, however the offensive production game-to-game had a direct correlation with Evans' play. When he was on, we thrived. When he was off, we were quite bad. Remember the Syracuse and GT games? Evans struggled to get into a rhythm and the offense wasn't able to adjust or compensate. That year was the result of a very good college QB who basically was our running game paired with an experienced supporting cast recruited by Beamer.
This offensive system depends on the QB to basically be the running game. I do not like the lack of emphasis on developing a consistent, physical running game, and I think any elite program needs to be able to establish that. Our offense relies too much on smoke and mirrors and misdirection to gain rushing yards. We aren't physical enough to win at the point of attack and impose our will rushing the ball, and I don't see that changing because of the philosophy of this system.
As French commented previously, QP absolutely must succeed here, as Fuente has tied his tenure to developing him as our QB. To date I don't have great confidence in his abilities as a QB/offensive guru or developer of talent. Willis isn't perfect but has looked to be a better/higher ceiling QB than JJ so far. It is disturbing that Hooker has not progressed (and has arguably regressed) since he arrived here and was hailed as a big piece for Fuente to build around at the time. If Quincy isn't ready next year and we trot JJ back out to mediocre results, the displeasure will become deafening.
I disagree with your disagreement. Unless Fuente has tweaked his scheme since coming to the ACC, I can't agree with your assessment that this scheme calls on the QB to be the running game. Lynch got a lot of carries at Memphis, but mostly because the zone read is a bread and butter play in this scheme, and we need a QB who can be effective on the keep. But the way Fuente used Brandon Hayes at Memphis in 2014 and the way he's using Peoples this season tells me there's plenty of room for a halfback to carry the running game in this scheme.
You're right in saying Jerrod was our running game in 2016, but that's because his game lent itself to being that for us. Jerrod was a strong, confident runner who had a great first step when he decided to tuck and run. He loved running, and Fuente structured the offense around Jerrod's game. Travon contributed in 2016, but either he wasn't quite ready to the the guy, or our O line just wasn't rebuilt to the point of supporting a more traditional running game yet.
I do recall Jerod commenting when he left that he ran way more than he had anticipated he would. I think a lot of was him making plays and was out of necessity for the traditional running game being ineffective. We still haven't seen that really change over the last two years. The QB has to be the catalyst in the running game, and if they are off, the entire offense is going to have a bad day. That is my concern with the scheme we have seen employed at VT so far.
My comment was more hyperbolic than anything. Maybe I'm just jaded from offensive woes. Such is the plight of a Hokie fan it seems. The "offensive guru" tag, and Fuente's statement to Bud about not having to worry about winning games with the defense anymore certainly don't help. I am fine with our offensive scheme, but I'm definitely not sold on Cornelson's playcalling. I'm not ready to break out the pitchforks per se. I'm just saying it wouldn't be bad idea to at least go ahead and secure the domain name.
The fact people are now using this clearly tongue in cheek comment from the initial hire of Fuente while they were all happy go lucky at the introductory honeymoon period against Fuente is...
Its sad, really.
You're concentrating on the statement instead of the sentiment behind it. Whit specifically hired CJF because of his offense. That offense has been under-performing. And yes, there has been an execution problem. But there has definitely been a coaching/playcalling problem as well. And the honeymoon period is over. It's Fuente's baby now.
Play calling did not adjust to what their defense was giving us ......we took what they gave in 1st half ....2nd half it's like we were determined to run even though they choked down the lanes and stopped blitzing ...
I 100 % blame play calling for the hideous offence in the 2nd half.
Agree. For the love of God, why were we running McClease straight into the teeth of that defense in the 3q?
because in the 3Q they actually took a defender out of the box and ran 2 high safeties ... that alignment is favorable to running the ball rather than passing. Cornelsen called plays accordingly... and our OL, TE and RB were not able to get it done.
the main problem I saw in the 3Q is something that's been going on all season.. McClease looks worse this year than he did last season. Slow to the hole, slow to turn up field, lacks vision.
I hope to see Peoples running the ball at the 'burgh. Did you see that BC linebacker bounce off of him?
What does "choked down the lanes" mean? If that's the terminology for "their front 4 beat our OL while they were able to drop more players in coverage" then yes, that's what happened. Which begs the question, what did you see that their defense was giving us at that point? Honestly I'd love to see specific examples and the full replay is on WatchESPN. I prefer to be able to review plays in slow mo but this time watched plays and took screen shots on my phone. Numerically the advantage was by running the ball, but it doesn't seem that people are satisfied with that answer.
We had 392 yards of offense, BC had 396
VT had 23 first downs, BC had 19
Keep in mind BC is a 7-2 team in the top 25. And they have a decent defense.
We lost, but Abysmal??
We scored 7 points & had about 80 yards of offense in the 2nd half. Willis had 230 passing yards & 2 TD's with like 3 incompletions in the first half & cornelson decided to come out in the 2nd half & run the ball on both 1st & 2nd down against a loaded box. Don't think we got a first down in the 2nd half until the 4th quarter. Yes. The offense was abysmal. Partly because of players making mistakes (drop by Hazelton leading to the pick). But mostly because of the coaching staff putting our offense in a shell to protect a very slim lead.
Precisely this. We outmuscled them in the passing game early and then absolutely abandoned it once we got a lead.
Honestly I'm not trying to be a dick but go back and watch the film. It doesn't support this statement at all.
First Drive:
1st Down - Pass where Willis tried to throw a slant but the BC defensive end knocked it down. Let me say it again- THIS WAS NOT A RUN.
2nd Down - Run with a zone read look. NOT AGAINST A LOADED BOX and it looks to me like Willis MADE THE WRONG READ. Keene intentionally released past the DE while the LT pulled, leaving the RB running directly at the unblocked DE.
3rd Down - Pass where BC dropped 8 and we only had 4 receivers. Willis checked down to Kumah well short of the line to gain but Grimsley may have been open for a first down (top left corner of the image)
Second Drive:
1st Down: Run with McClease. BC was in standard alignment (4-3), which isn't loading the box. Admittedly I don't like this call because we had 4 WRs and appear outnumbered for the run.
2nd Down: Run with McClease. BC in 4-3 so the box isn't loaded. We have Keene in the backfield to block and the slot is supposed to crack the OLB so the numbers should be favorable. The blocking is poor and there's no excuse for not gaining yards here.
3rd Down: Pass on 3rd and long but BC only rushes 4 and gets pressure, flushing Willis from the pocket. Almost impossible to call any play that's going to work when that happens.
Feel free to rewatch yourself and comment on what you'd have liked to do differently based on the defensive alignments.
Potd
Damn, son. Joe needs to put you on payroll.
The one that has to be driving Fuente/Cornelson insane is the zone read. Look at the blockers on the right side! You have the D line sealed, a pulling tackle ready to take on the inside linebacker, and a slot receiver coming down to crack the outside linebacker. Everyone defender within 10 yards of the LOS is accounted for with a blocker, yet the entire play broke down because of the wrong read.
If I'm being honest, I don't see how this would even be a read and not designed for Willis to run right. Maybe I'm totally wrong and missing something but the angles that every single blocker are taking seem to indicate that was the intended action.
Yards literally mean nothing if you don't put up points.
We've scored 14 total points in the last 2 games in the second half against teams that aren't good.
We average ~20 points a game against P5 opponents under Fuente and Corn.
The offense sucks.
I know you speak of just the offense, but I think it is fair to say that the team as a whole is struggling. Our defense this season is the worst I've ever seen. This is our kick in the balls.
That's very true, but our defense had us in it tonight when we were all expecting Dillon to run roughshod over us. Everyone shares in the collective bedshitting of the season. But tonight is on the offense and Corny.
I agree.
The D had some young players playing out of their normal position and they help up pretty well.
That's coaching.
I'm not saying the defensive coaching staff hasn't had their share of problems. It seems recruiting could be a somewhat of a problem but only at DT.
The ends that slid inside seems to do okay (Porcher IV). Even though he's a pretty big end at 270+... Is he supposed to stay at end?
The Willis interception that gift wrapped their td was on corny? I don't see it. There's an unspoken (sometimes spoken) rule to not call our players for boneheaded moves - but we'd all agree there have been many that game changers that have nothing to do with the play call. Bottom line is that our team is not very good and we are expecting good results. Blame the coaches for poor recruiting and even stupid offsides penalties. But personal fouls, balls bouncing off your face mask etc... that is an individual making a bad play. The team is extremely weak. The coaching change time is not upon us. They need another year. My 2 cents.
I'm not sure why we continue to talk about the offense and defense like they're not separate entities? Both are bad. We've heard all season about how the D lost so much, basically excusing why it was so bad. I can kind of get that. The offense does not have the excuses to be as bad as they are. There is more talent and experience than last year. The coaching and player development on the offensive side of the ball has not been good, especially considering the HC and OC are touted 'offensive gurus'
Maybe this is really the point, right? It's not that they were billed as a "good enough staff to let the defense carry the. team.". They were billed as gurus.
Didn't Fuente allude to Foster's defenses not having to be perfect?
We scored 21 points on drives or 65, 61, and 75 yards against a good defense and offense has been our strength most of the year.
Got great, but losing 0-3 to wake Forest in overtime was abysmal offense.
Last week posters were after the DC this week he's great and there after the OC. Sometimes football teams lose.
I'm not Giving Bud or the defense a pass... but I believe the days of invincible defenses carrying teams and winning games is over... we need to consistently score 30+ a game to win ... Corn was supposed to be that guy and I'm just not seeing it... it just looks like we are getting worse and not better. I'm a proud Hokie fan. I watched Beamer build us into something awesome from nothing and it's painful coming to grips with the fact those days are gone. We may not get them back. Either way... I'm not seeing anything that gives me a lot of hope for the future of this program. I hope I'm wrong. Go Hokies
At what point does someone point out that we're on our backup quarterback?
Willis is better than JJ.
I don't know that I agree with that. Willis threw several bad balls that were almost picked and even missed a few important reads - like having Cunningham wide open in the end zone on the series that, IIRC, ended with a Hooker fumble.
Somebody had to say it.
Admittedly, he's not *that* much better, but we certainly have more big play potential with Willis.
That would be more appropriate if they didn't keep talking about our quality QB depth. But Willis made a lot of bad reads and locks on to his receivers pre snap.
With all due respect to JJ, I think Willis is better. Not sure what happened in practice before the season, obviously the staff had their reasons. Maybe Willis is just better in games than practice? But I like what I've seen from Willis so far, considering he wasn't getting any reps with the 1s until a few weeks ago. Anyway, I don't think the backup QB issue is what's holding us back, we're arguably in better shape because of it.
Willis has the better arm, but JJ has the better head. Willis misses the read on the RPO about half the time and gets locked in a WR rather than progressing through his reads. I think the RPO is why JJ got the job over Willis.
Come on Fuente that statement is "horseshit" , you are rapidly loosing support of this team and the fan base. Take some responsibility for your and this coaching staffs hideous performance this season.
I think its fairly obvious the team is regressing both in season and during Fuente's entire tenure. There are large chunks of games, typically in the 2nd half of games, where we flat out can't do shit. And that's been the case with a variety of players over the years so Fuente can just STFU with that nonsense of throwing his current players under the bus. It's coaching. Period. For a guy who was hired to be an offensive spark, his entire staff is pretty darn lackluster. He needs to recognize he and his staff are the problem, be accountable, and make a change. If he can't do that, then Whit needs to step in and make the changes for him.
I don't know if this has been said elsewhere, so sorry if I'm repeating someone else, but I'm not going to read another 200+ comment vent thread tonight. It's not good for my health.
But I think the most disappointing thing was the fact that our fans were filing out of the stadium at the end of the 3rd quarter down a touchdown in a critical game. It was about 50 degrees. Perfect football weather. It was like 6:00 PM. Not late at all. And we're down 7 points with 15 minutes to play and fans are leaving.
When did we get so soft? If you're discouraged and you don't want to go to the game, sell your tickets. That's fine. But if you decide to attend the game and we're right in it after 3 quarters, sack up and support your team.
I agree. It's disheartening to see fans not willing to stick it out through the entire game. Just feels like the program in general has been trending down this year, performance, coaching, fan spirit/enthusiasm, etc.
Fuente's comments & inability to take responsibility plays a large part in that IMO.
Our student section was embarrassing when the camera panned in the 3rd quarter, down 7.
Win or lose, stay the entire game and show this team that we support them regardless of the outcome.
That's always happened for the homecoming game, whether we're good or not. Once their queen is announced, big clumps of the student section (usually wearing fluorescent "vote this person" shirts) disappear.
Maybe VT should change how they do homecoming?
If it is a sellout, let in 500 people for $1 each after halftime?
thats One sign of a losing culture. (Not saying we have one)
That's not great to see but until the team shows them they should have stayed they will continue to do this. This happened Beamer's last season a couple of times.
Unfortunately it's become all to easy to predict what happens in the second quarter with the offense against teams not named William and Mary.
Sadly its only going to get worse from here, tickets will soon drop to $10 and the stadium will average around 20k. We are nearing the end of hokie football.
Since the team is about 1992-level soft, it makes sense that the fans are also.
The next big decision could be QP's redshirt.
I can think of very few reasons I would find pulling it to be acceptable.
I posted something about how we scored the fewest points of any team vs. UNC. Let's see how this looks for every opponent this season.
FSU: Only NIU and Wake Forest scored fewer points. 19 and 17 respectively.
W&M: We scored the most with JMU a close second at 51 points.
ODU: FIU, Charlotte scored fewer points.
Duke: Only Pitt scored more points.
Notre Dame: Only Wake Forest score most points.
UNC: No one scored fewer points.
GT: Alcorn St., Pitt, and BGSU scored fewer points.
BC: Holy Cross, Purdue, Louisville and Miami scored fewer points.
With a few flukes this isn't a pretty list.
Sometimes when I think about our output this season...
There is no way they can pull his redshirt. If there is any reason this team is going to rebound and do well in the next several years, he is it. Seems like there is something special about the kid.
But why waste a game only playing him 1-2 plays? But a package of plays in for him and let him play. He can play 1 or 85 plays and it counts as a game.
Good question... I noticed they let him pass which is promising. It got batted but... He's a true freshman.
I agree, if they are going to play him, get him for several series, but I don't want them to play him for more than four games. I want him here as long as possible
"Seems like there is something special about the kid."
Why lol? Like, I'm not saying he is gonna be bad or anything but where has this sentiment come from? Just wishful thinking? His high school tape? We haven't seen him play much of any significant time in college yet. We have no idea if he is special at all. Someone that is special probably wins the job as a freshman. As of right now, he is just a normal freshman.
All I know is we've scored every drive QP has played.
I didn't think QP looked good at all. He looked lost and his one throw was terrible, looked like he was going to miss the screen man by 5 yards if it wasn't almost picked. He needs the redshirt.
Also looks like Hooker will be transferring after this year. Guy has been in the system 2 years and the coaches still don't think he can fill in at third string? I think he will look around for a better chance to play.
He is third string. QP is the wildcat, hence why he hasn't thrown a pass when he's been in.
Michael Vick redshirted and he was pretty special.
I've said this on other threads before: we lack the offensive firepower to bail the defense out of a game. I feel that our offensive mindset is "Score 30 points and let the defense hold them" when, especially this year, we should be "Score 75 points and take some pressure off the defense."
There is no reason why we cannot be aggressive with our play-calling, and try to throw the ball more than 5 yards downfield.
"You don't have to play great defense to win games anymore" - Fuente to Bud Foster 2015 (Or something like that)
We're actually averaging more points per game than we did in 2011-2014. I agree the offense needs to improve but even in this down year with many fans now calling for jobs, it's worth noting that we endured even worse performance for 4 straight seasons in the recent past.
My point would be that if we had a typical Bud Foster defense, there's a good chance the team is 6-2 and we're talking about how the offense is young and we wish they'd performed better, but 2019 could be a special season.
My point is it was Brad's job to take us away from having to fully rely on the defense, not regress year after year back to what it was prior to the Fuente era
And my point is, after expecting BC's running game to kill us before the game, our defense actually put us in a position to pull out a win and the offense shit the bed.
Our offensive scheme asks a bunch of 18-22 year olds (mostly 18-20 right now) to dink and dunk their way down the field for 4-6 yards at a time. Pretty much any penalty or small mistake (penalty, bad snap, etc) sets us back too far and kills the drive. To make things even more difficult, we also can't get anything running between the tackles. Until we can start ripping off more explosive plays I don't think our total offensive production increases.
I was also expecting the number of stupid mistakes on offense to decrease this season, but here we are in week 10 still committing a ton of personal fouls, running into the punter, bad snaps, committing way too many false starts, etc. I say we give Fuente another season or two to fully evaluate, but I really haven't seen anything to convince me that he's a good head coach.
I think the offense cost us this game. The defense got a turnover and a key 4th down stop to give a couple of short field situations we didn't do much with. We should have had 35 points in this one. Execution, play calling, both, whatever you want to pin it on, all aspects on offense need to improve or we won't be watching Hokie football in December.
I will add that we really should have punted rather than going for it on 4th down with about 11 minutes left in a 1 score game. The offense was pathetic up to this point, not sure what gave Fuente the confidence they could pick up the first down. The defense was good enough in this one that I don't think BC puts together an 80+ yard scoring drive. The short field and BC TD put the game away.
There is a very simple solution to this team's woes. Fuente needs to get this team fully dipped in some dork magic!!! Boom!
This is the kind of top notch analysis that keeps me on TKP.
Yes, that's clearly what's missing.
"Boom...Roasted!"
What are everyone's thoughts on all of the offensive line swapping? Seems like Hoyt and Chung alternate at center, and Chung slides over to replace Smith when Hoyt is in at center. Towards the end of the game yesterday, I even saw Tyrell Smith in at LT. Is all of this swapping building depth and preserving endurance? Is it situational? Is it an indication that we have not settled on a consistent line yet? I am puzzled to see this much rotation this late into a season.
With this team. Getting as many guys reps will prove valuable imo. Need to get guys on tape so they can be evaluated and coached up.
Let's break this down more:
Since 2016, 35 games total:
1) Virginia Tech has scored less than 30 points in 18 games and are 8 - 10 in these games
2) Virginia Tech has scored 30 or more points in 17 games and are 15 - 2 in these games
3) Virginia Tech has scored 35 or more points in 13 games and are 13 - 2 in these games
4) Virginia Tech has scored 40 or more points in 6 games (out of 35 Total) - VT is 6 - 0 in these games
5) When Virginia Tech wins, we score on average 36 points and our opponents score on average 13 points.
6) When Virginia Tech loses, we score on average 23 points and our opponents score on average 37 points.
7) Virginia Tech is 11 - 5 in Home games
8) Virginia Tech is 10 - 4 in Away games
9) Virginia Tech is 2 - 3 in Neutral Site games
Replying to my own comment - it's what the cool kids do.
So in other words, we have only put up 30 or more points just under 50% of the time. When we do, we win 88% of those games.
I ran the numbers a couple years ago, and going back to when we joined the ACC in 2004, this is a consistent statistic. If we score 31 points in a game, our odds of winning skyrocket. Most seasons, Bud's defense generally only gives up around 20-24 points per game, with an average high mark on the season of around 30 points. Most seasons, if we keep our offensive production to around 24 points per game, we'll still win 8-10 games.
We're 37th in S&P+ offensive rankings. Our defense is 81st. One side of the ball has coaches who have been here 3 years, the other has coaches who have been here 20ish. I'm not trying to be like that one dude who clearly hates Bud Foster but I think criticizing the offense when the defense has laid a turd all year is a bit pointless.
Recensy bias will get after ya.
Were are we if you remove William & Mary? I doubt we're 37th.
I know he used to remove FCS teams for his calculations. Not sure how he does it now.
Probably still top 40. S&P is corrected for strength of opponent. It also removes garbage time from the calculation, and "out of reach" was going on for probably close to half of that game, so it would remove more like 1/12th or 1/10th of the data from the calculation as opposed to 1/8th. Most of our season has been played outside of garbage time; with games within reach, so the WIlliam and Mary game doesn't quite count for an entire games' worth of data in the S&P. (FEI is the calculation that omits FCS opponents entirely.)
Metrics won't be affected as much as simple statistical corrections (if our W&M game is taken out, our Yards & Points per Game/Drive/Play tank noticeably).
Phil Steele does "Game Grades", where each week's performance is given a "strength of opponent" adjustment. The William and Mary game is our third best game (behind #2 FSU and #1 Duke). So pulling the William and Mary data is probably similar to pulling half of the data from our third best game.
Here's the stats for us to all look over. It appears our running game still isnt very good and our adjustment to a passing game 2nd half is suffering
due to 2 passes a game that get dropped, we are under-preforming. If we improve in the 2nd half passing yards and completion by about 5%.
Taking that in to account (68% Completion rate and 5% increase in yards per catch) we would have an additional 300 yards of offense this season putting us well above normal and a more complete games
I heard all of the furniture was taken away as souvenirs.