During the good old days of Virginia Tech football (i.e. 2016, 2017), I used to joke with my wife about how much easier it was to write this column when the Hokies were a 7-win team. There was more to react to, more to vent about. A lot of that venting stemmed from critical missed tackles at inopportune moments, with the occasional reference to the confusing running back rotation or shortcomings at quarterback.
The 2018 season has been an entirely different story. My left eye now twitches when I read, hear or think about how "young and inexperienced" Tech's defense is. The missed tackles and poor execution happen with regularity and lead to record setting performances. I can't bring myself to write about them over and over again. This season of losing has become progressively harder to reflect on on a weekly basis because, frankly, what else is there to say?
I could talk about how, following their most recent loss to Pitt, the Hokies have now given up the most rushing yards and the most total yards under Bud Foster in two of the last three games. Or how that rushing yards record I just mentioned — which Georgia Tech initially broke October 25th with a 465 yard performance — was bested by Pitt despite the Panthers running the ball 42 less times. Or that the 13.9 yards per play surrendered to Pitt was the most ever recorded in a matchup between two FBS teams since 2005. Or that the Hokies ran 86 plays (most of which occurred in Pitt territory) and only managed 432 yards of offense (5 ypp) and 22 points despite facing the #82 defense in the country.
Most yards per play in a game (vs. FBS), 2005-18:1. 2018 Pitt vs. VT (13.9)2. 2016 UNM vs. Wyo (13.5)3. 2011 GT vs. Kansas (13.5)4. 2010 NIU vs. EMU (13.2)5. 2017 Memphis vs. ECU (13.0) https://t.co/BCUk8Axr3b— Bill Connelly (@SBN_BillC) November 11, 2018
If you thought the loss two weeks ago was bad, Saturday's group of players was like, "Hold my beer." But no one wants to read another 1,000+ words on how embarrassing the loss to Pitt was. We're just beating a dead horse.
This doesn't look like vintage Virginia Tech. There's no fire, no will, no focus. French's film review was nauseating, confirming what I feared most: This team is currently lost at sea, there's a hurricane on the horizon (pun intended), and help isn't coming.
Earlier in the season, the losses felt like the result of one side of the football failing to carry their weight. Recently, it's been more of a team effort. The last two weeks have felt like all of the Hokies' warts have been laid bare for all the nation to see. And boy is it ugly. The defense has been appalling, especially against the run. The offense flashes the occasional moment of brilliance amidst long periods of mediocrity. If one unit plays well, the other falters. And on and on it goes.
In some ways, I can excuse the poor performances from the defense. As starters continue to go down with injuries, their replacements are forced into trial-by-fire despite little, if any, veteran support. It's an almost impossible situation, one any defensive staff — yes, even the almighty Bud Foster — would struggle to mold into an effective unit. The offense, however, receives little sympathy from me. I simply cannot wrap my head around how pedestrian they've become despite a veteran offensive line, capable weapons and a hard-nosed — albeit hard-headed — signal caller.
The personnel packages and play calling were abysmal Saturday afternoon, leading me to wonder if Brad Cornelsen had ceded play calling duties to the dude selling perogies in the Heinz Field concourse. I often try not to armchair quarterback the play calling, principally because I find it unfair to pass judgement without the requisite context. I have no clue in the moment whether a given play was primarily aimed at setting up something bigger later in the game or if it was just a bad play. But the sheer stubbornness Hokies fans were forced to witness on Saturday afternoon was infuriating.
After multiple fourth down conversions by Ryan Willis on (what became) the Hokies second scoring drive, the Tech staff inexplicably placed Willis on the sideline for multiple first and second downs in favor of true-freshman Quincy Patterson. After some predictable, slow-developing inside running plays, WIllis was then trotted back onto the field and forced to convert on third and fourth downs despite being consistently behind the sticks. Yes, the drive ended in a touchdown, but it was in spite of the staff's game of musical chairs. Willis seemed to have finally found his groove, so why temporarily place him on ice and put a cold QP4 in a difficult position when the defense is 99% certain of a run call?
Another aspect of the gameplan that irritated me was the hard headed commitment to the run despite the sizeable second half deficit. Down 3 scores in the second half, the offense continued to try and run the ball up the middle on first and second down with little success. It wasn't like the defense needed a breather — they were only on the field for 4 plays at a time before Qadree Ollison or Darrin Hall busted a long touchdown run.
For example, on the Hokies four second half drives, they averaged 12.5 plays and 68 yards per drive, possessing the ball for 20:54 and coming away with a mere 14 points. The ball control is commendable, but it was completely unnecessary against an offense repeatedly busting big run after big run. And to put that time of possession in perspective, it was only 4 minutes shy of Pitt's total for the entire game. There was no sense of urgency, and it was palpable from my couch in Rhode Island. Tech ultimately ran the ball 48 times, compared to 38 passing attempts (56% of their plays) despite trailing all afternoon.
These are just two examples that jumped out to me. Look deeper below the surface and there were certainly more moments worth questioning. This obstinate approach only made the voices criticizing the staff's perceived inability to make in-game adjustments grow louder.
Get over the fact that you had a package of plays planned for Patterson to run or were committed to a balanced gameplan. It's like walking into a wake and asking why the mood was so dour. Read a room, guys.
I've given up trying to predict what fans can expect out of the last 2 (or 3) games this season. I've resigned myself to the realization that, for the remainder of the year, the Hokies are that middle-of-the-pack opponent that could put it all together and surprise a better team. Think 2017 Georgia Tech in their win over the Hokies, their lone victory in the season's final five games.
The good news is that Tech will close the regular season with two rivals, neither of whom are world beaters. Miami looks shockingly average, while the Hoos are...well, the Hoos...and anything can happen in a rivalry game. Regardless of age, experience or talent level, the hope is that it won't take much for this staff to get their players ready for back-to-back games against their biggest rivals. If the Hokies play flat once again, it's going to make an already long off-season feel like an eternity.
Comments
Ouch.... I did not realize it was that bad.... I need a beer now.
I don't recognize the defense. Can't remember a Hokie D playing like this. I feel like we've always been the team making adjustments at half time and coming out stronger. What a strange trip it's been this fall.
At least we've got this campus master plan innovation thing (sarcasm)....I'm so excited about it, I just want to have another drink and start watching basketball.
I think Bradburn is the hard-headed one, correct?
I will upvote you but I don't like it
For the first time ever I was pretty damn embarrassed wearing a Tech hat out in public. Pitt fans (there were surprisingly a handful at one bar) were either assholes, or fans of everybody else just gave me a pat on the back and a "rough year, huh?" like I had lost my job or something.
Pitt fans are assholes. The only time I was "thrown out" of Lane Stadium was by an asshole Pitt fan complaining that I was throwing a cup after a Touchdown.
For anyone that went to VT games in the 90's, after we scored a touchdown, we threw our empty drink cups. I was just partaking in the tradition.
empty cups, empty pizza boxes...we threw lots of things come to think of it!
Hold up...this was an accepted tradition and those same people get their panties in a bunch when someone throws a paper airplane? Woah.
If we threw paper airplanes immediately following a touchdown and only because we scored a touchdown, then it may be more accepted.
The purpose of throwing cups and pizza boxes was because we put 7 points on the board...
Lol, people act like throwing a paper airplane is assault and battery. But getting thunked on the head by a pizza box is A-Okay because it was celebratory. Gotcha.
Celebrating victories, touchdowns, blocked kicks...not just passing the time because we wanted to see an airplane reach the field.
95 Miami comes to mind immediately!
It surprises me how much we still pile up on the O ad nauseum. The D is the main root cause and yet I see more vent threads against the O than anything else.
Maybe we were trying to ball-control so they wouldn't score a 100 on us? Maybe give Coach Foster more time to figure out and coach up our D issues?
I'm sorry, but these type of articles perturb me. You add nothing of value other than to add fuel to the fire of giving the D a pass (like everyone else) and yell at Corny and the O staff. Are we that stubborn as a fan base that we can't see past our own O&M-tinted glasses?
Lots of teams field a bad defense, but have an O that can at least be competitive in a shootout.
I'm not as down on Corn as most, but Fu set this particular bed by proclaiming Bud wouldn't need to win games single-handedly anymore.
Bud would have lost that game with THE ALABAMA defense.
OOPS --- confused post...OUCH...forgive me...totally confused, impulsive...I'll take the downvotes...but definitely an error...
Bud is the best DC in the country --- I meant something else and can't remember what it was.. think i'm confused by how bad we suck...
This is actually the most ridiculous thing you've posted on TKP recently.
Indeed. See my edit. Jeez. RIDICULOUS>
Ummmm wat?
Jerk Alert.
Still one of my favorite gifs every. Very glad the HokeiRespect this is gone though. It was kinda sanctimonious.
Is this an embarrassing attempt at satire?
Nope. Just embarrassing. Good grief. My words got all f'd up.
Lmao. You realize a comment isn't a stream of consciousness right?
Think I meant to say something along the lines of no coach (bama) could win with our current roster on d.
See my post below re: offensive injuries and attrition. We give the D a pass due to injuries / attrition but not the O?
And #49 isn't the best, sure, but it's not the worst either. It's not #93.
Our defense is allowing opposing teams to set single-game offensive school records against us. Our defense just allowed the most Yards per Play in all of football over the last 10-15 years. Our defense has allowed 45+ to be scored on it 4 times this year, once by dreg Old Dominion.
There's a difference between bad defense and truly horrific defense. Our team this year is trending closer toward truly horrific than bad.
Cornelsen, is that you?
The offense is bad (ineffective) the defense is abysmal. I don't see why anyone should be pigeonholed into exclusively criticizing one side of the ball. S&P ranks the defense No. 93 and the offense is No. 49. There's also context, the offense was expected to blossom this season while the defense found its footing. Well, it's been a long winter for the O and the LPD can't tie its shoes.
I don't see why anyone should be pigeonholed into exclusively criticizing one side of the ball.
The article basically criticized the offense after in one sentence acknowledging how bad the d is. The tone of the offfensive criticism by you and others is very different than the D. The tone for the D is dismissive (Bud earned the right etc...) but the tone towards the O is one of outrage. It is NOT objective - not even close. It is the easy play because of Bud's history.
If I was Corny and commenting on a fan website then you really can pile it on me.
The reality is that the OL is worse-off at 3 spots relative to last year (after injuries and attrition) so that's one of the main reasons we can't do very well up front. Secondly, we've lost our starting QB. Though Willis is playing well, he still can't run a proper read-option (at least as well as JJ). If all you expect is to throw it around all day then that isn't very realistic - this isn't NCAA Football on PS3.
I'm not trying to be an O apologist and I agree I'd like them to do better - and yes they've had a few moments of head-scratchingness, but they have reasons (unfortunately) of not firing on all cylinders either, but no one really wants to cut them any slack. #49 isn't the greatest ranking, but its not the worst.
If you need your O to be #13 in the nation and/or to play a PERFECT game to overcome your #93 D, then that's completely unrealistic.
(EDIT for typos.)
We have put up less than 24 points against Power 5 opponents 76% of the time since 2017.
I added an entire thread of how stagnant our offense has been. This year, with a veteran line, is even more troubling, especially against teams that have average-at-best defenses...
Points Scored Vs. Power 5 Opponents Since 2017.
But yet, wer'e not a really a veteran line. Copy-pasting what I said below regarding the line (and our O as a whole):
If you can't do anything up front with your OL then I don't care what kind of scheme you do - you won't get much done. I'm actually surprised we're #49 in the nation seeing how beat up our OL is.
Couldn't we adjust our tempo on offense? That seems like the one area where we have not tested adjustments. I don't have the stats, but I feel like we ran a lot more 'up tempo' style plays in 2016. We started out that way in 2017, but I feel like we now have a governor set on our offensive engine to where we cannot go beyond 55 mph when we have the ability to hit 75.
I guess what would you want to see more of? We ran something like ~80 plays I think. Slower down or speed up?
Better play-calling is what I'd really like to see. And maybe taking more shots downfield. It seems like we love the 5-7 yard pass, and then launching a few at 30+ yards, but we do not cover the intermediate range that well. Clearly our offense is not able to convert plays into points if we run 80+ plays per game - that falls back on play-calling and execution.
EDIT: We rank 87th (out of 130) in Points Per Play and 88th in 2nd half Points/game.
Again, we take what the defense gives us. Against BC we couldn't run against 6 in the box when they did a 2-high look. Against Pitt they press us at the LOS so we have success doing fade throws, but those aren't going to work every single time, and the numbers might've suggested a different play call. Further, I've mentioned a few times in this thread why we're so banged up on the OL this year, so we've stalled because of that too.
I agree that i don't know why we did the QP runs in the Pitt game, but we've scored every time he's come in to a game situation this year anyways - so maybe he actually gives Ryan a breather and allows him to de-stress for a play or two? Who knows. I'm not so concerned with play-calling at all on the whole though.
The offense was also expected to have Josh Jackson behind center. As well as he's done, Ryan Willis is still a walk on transfer from Kansas who still can't make the correct reads after six starts.
That screams coaching issues:
Given his stats, I think it's safe to say the staff has absolutely crafted the offense around Willis's game. Third best QBR in the conference behind Ryan Finley and Trevor Lawrence, and he's gone from a 0.71/1 TD to INT ratio at Kansas to a 4/1 ratio here. Given your three points above:
1. It's only poor planning/recruiting to give him backup snaps if there's a better option somewhere on the roster. I think you're underselling how bad the QB situation was when Fuente arrived. Willis was accepted as a walk-on as an emergency option. Supplanting Hooker as the backup is more a testament to Willis than an indictment of the coaches.
2. When the zone read is eliminated, the rest of the run game suffers. That's really frustrating, since Willis actually has the physical tools to contribute to the run game, if he could just consistently make the right read, which brings us to...
3. The coaches cannot make the QB make the right reads. At some point it either clicks for a player or it doesn't. After six games for Willis, I'm leaning toward doesn't. He's being put in a position that plays to his strengths, but taking the next step in development is on Willis, not the coaches.
Upvote for a solid response.
I don't think it's fair to compare production at Kansas to that at Tech, it's apples and oranges. Either way, I think the transition from JJ to Willis has been a wash. Willis is a better passer, JJ is better at executing the option. To me that really neutralizes the "Tech is without its QB1 argument".
Except they want a player that struggles reading to read.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting. It's not like it's a buffet out there and all transfer QBs are prime choice and we went and got the worst of the lot - it's relatively a limited choice and a decision had to be made. Simiarly, Coaches saw potential in Willis and recruited accordingly. Yes he's not perfect but I wouldn't say it's poor evaluation and planning . I would assume they saw the potential that odds are he'd be a worthwhile QB in our system and offered accordingly. Sometimes they don't pan out unfortunately
If you remove the option, then what other run game would you suggest? We struggle plain running the ball and if options aren't there to make it easier numbers in the box then there's nothing else really to go to is there? I'm not sure how else you could plan a running game with less option when straight-up running isn't doing it either. Answer: zilch of a run game.
Also keep in mind, it cost us nothing to bring Willis in. He was a walk on. The decision the coaching staff had was, are we better off taking this guy as a developmental project to have as a doomsday option? That's a no brainier.
I'm a software engineer, not an offensive coordinator. However, as Cornelsen could easily identify when his computer is broke, it's apparent when the Virginia Tech offense isn't right. Neither of us have much of an idea how to fix problems outside of our domain.
However, re-read French's review of Georgia Tech. They run a dang offense called "The Triple Option". Against the Hokies, it was mostly abandoned in favor of a read-free quarterback power run attack. "THE. TRIPLE. OPTION." Good coaches figure out what they got and how to adjust and get it done.
We all have to remember a strong offensive line can make an average QB look great, and any running back a Heisman candidate, and that's what we are missing.
If the QB has time to scan all options and not fear for his life, it becomes easy to be the QB. The same goes for any of our running backs. If they have a hole, then going North/South is better than running into the back of a lineman who is getting pushed around by the defense.
This is where we need BIG, strong recruits!
I have to agree with this after watching Bama steamroll LSU. Bama's RBs don't seem like anything special, but with the quality of the rest of the O, they really don't need to be. And of course we all now know Bama has the best college QB in Tua, so that part isn't what I am talking about, just the RBs.
Alabama was already playing the game on easy mode. Giving them Tua is like playing the game on two player and just not doing anything with the second controller.
Nail hits head. The offense is floudering; even when putting up respectable numbers, the O is not consistently putting up what matters...points. There are long stretches of stagnation and we have not been able to Run the ball effectively at all in ACC play. We haven't had a competent offense since Jerod Evans left---by the way many of the "10 Records" that Fuente credited to Cornelson last week were individual records set by #4.
The playcalling is predictable and situationally tone-deaf--i.e. QB 16/19 in 1st half vs. BC and then go away from that in the 3rd quarter and not sniff scoring territory.
Combine that with whatever the hell the QP packages are trying to accomplish and you have a clear indication for criticism.
So what did we mean by blossom - all our WRs were pretty green - we didn't have an answer at RB and JJ was a game manager. The "strength" of the team was the OL , which we've figured out isn't nearly as good as we hoped. I am not a stats guy, but it looks like the the O went from 96 to 49, which seems like it's trending in the right direction. I agree on the mind boggling use of QP3, and it's obvious they've shut the door on Hooker. It seems to me that QP3 is Jerod Evans (or they hope he will be ) . I just didn't see it ever becoming a force - better, yes, but nothing outstanding. I do think they need to do better playing to Willis's strengths - but I discount the GT comparison you made below. They are still a triple option team - they tweaked because of us, not because of them.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Ain't that the damn truth.
The offense has had moments of brilliance and yes some grinding halts for sure...
But this defense....?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Let's get real, forget about Bud being the great coach he is, and take a look the the defense --- it is beyond horrible, and there have been ZERO moments of brilliance in the last several games - ZERO.
I love the team, and it is bad, which I'm ok with - but the INSANE focus by many on on the offense of Cornelson is just....well....it has become funny, not even frustrating.
You're right in pretty much everything you said, but if you think that a bad season by Bud means he's done for and needs to go then you don't know college football
definitely don't think bud needs to go.
Made a moronic post upstream and I recant the whole thing.
I'm delirious from our shittiness.
understandable shit and pitt happens
This isn't an attempt to justify or explain away anything that happened on Saturday, but if the offense didn't control the time of possession last weekend we'd be talking about how we just gave up the most points in Virginia Tech history this morning.
I would probably be considered an O apologist, but the bit with QP does give me some pause. I think we're all hopeful he's the future, and the sooner he gets experience the better. But I didn't like that it was potentially taking us out of a game that was still within reach.
That said, I think the challenge of having 3 qbs in 3 years is difficult to overstate. If we have learned anything this season, its how important continuity and experience are to producing a consistent product on the field. I think the coaches deserve some credit a) for getting Willis in the first place (it would be even worse without him right now, clearly HH is not ready, and maybe there was some prescience on the part of the coaches), and b) making him serviceable. He really has limited turnovers thus far.
To counter, I would argue that continuing to rail against the defense week-after-week adds nothing of value. The defense has been horrendous. Everyone knows it. My dental hygienist, who casually follows Nebraska because she lived there for a year, said, "Oh, I'm sorry, your defense is having a rough year" the other day when I mentioned I went to Tech. Forgive me for not wanting to waste another Sunday afternoon rehashing the same storyline. It's boorish. I don't want to write it; you don't want to read it.
Honestly, your comment is unfair to the piece. With these columns, I try to react to each game with an eye towards the big picture. As I wrote above, neither the offense nor the defense is deserving of much praise. I've discussed this all season long. Neither unit is playing well by any measure, regardless of the circumstances. I think we can all agree on that. I did not yell (or type in all caps) at the coaching staff — I simply discussed decisions made during the game that caught my attention (and, frankly, bothered me).
I am entitled to my opinion, as are you. Please do me a favor, and every other person who writes and/or contributes to the site, and avoid such disparaging rhetoric. I understand that people are frustrated, but we're all trying to capture the game as best we can and provide the community with quality content worth discussing.
I can truly appreciate what you're trying to do, it's just that I disagree with your execution. And you're right, I don't want to read another piece about how horrible our D is, but I absolutely don't want to read an article lambasting the O that (at least to a few of us) seems to be a scapegoat for this years woes that makes us even more depressed.
Here's an honest suggestion - if you're eyeing towards the big picture, why not write the article with "what's holding up the offense?". I've mentioned a few times about our OL woes, but what most folks are only talking about are "we should be here ... but we're not". I'd love a read that dissects why we aren't there.
In any case that's just my thought. Take that for what it's worth or not at all - your choice.
I think that's a great suggestion, but that's not what this column is about. I'm not the best person to write that piece. One of my colleagues may be. I would even encourage you or another community member to do the same. Regardless, I'll take the suggestion to heart moving forward.
I understand that you (and likely others) don't want to read another article criticizing the offense, but there are a group of people with the opposite viewpoint. I can't please everyone here, and I'm not setting out with that goal. Additionally, I disagree that criticizing the offense is a veiled way of scapegoating. You're putting words in my mouth, and that's unfair. If you're going to parse everything we write, please exercise the same caution when you comment.
I appreciate your article because I needed to stop hearing stats about the defensive performance and its place in the record books. The reason AXD1985 hasn't been able to understand yet about your piece is all based off of expectations and content delivery. Everything about the defense has already been hashed out in earlier Slept On It's and the expectations after the ODU game for the defense are that of a bottom of the P5 level.
The offense on other other hand has the ability (hence the crazy about of plays we ran in Pitt territory) but manages to stall or make execution errors in the worst possible moments. We expect and see the promise in the offense and therefore have the expectation that they should score more than 22 points against most ACC teams, especially poor ones like GT, UNC, and Pitt. Fair or unfair, its all about expectations, and the defense is too young to compete, the offense is not, even with Willis back there.
We'll agree to disagree. I've said my piece and will leave it at that.
I give the defense a pass too. Much better at this point than giving it a run.
Foster is dealt a shit hand this year with graduation, attrition, and youth. It'll get better. It sucks now, you're right, but it'll get better.
Fuente was brought in because he was an offensive mastermind. So...?
Why do i click on these when I am at work and no adult beverages are within 7 more hours...
Spot on. The defense has been beyond repair due to losing 9 of our 11 best players and one promising CB to a freak injury. Even with Bud's pedigree I didn't expect them to win us games when most of the people starting last week would be a least 1-2 years away from seeing the field in a traditional VT defense.
I am with Pierson on this one, I didn't think I would ever be more critical of our offense than with Stinespring and Loefller, but watching our offense Saturday was like banging my head against a wall. When you get down 3 scores in the second half of any football game, unless you have Barry Sanders or Herschel Walker on your team, you should be throwing the football down the field over 80% of your plays. You also have to treat every drive as a 2-minute drill, where no more than 15 seconds comes off the play clock in between plays.
Why we repeatedly tried to run when our only moments of success offensively were throwing jump balls and either catching them or getting DPI's called is baffling. The same thing against GT and BC and really a trend all year. I don't care if they rush 3 and drop 8, THROW THE BALL DOWN THE FIELD. Our O-Line our terrible run blockers but decent pass blocking, so use their strengths and actually look like you want to get back in the game. Now Corn's strategy works fine if you are up a couple scores, but the lack of adjustment when we are down big should lead to some serious conversations amongst the staff.
This isn't Madden lol. We take what the defensive gives us. And part of that is to keep the D honest by running when the numbers in the box are in our favor.
The other team have FBS-quality players on D. Put it another way - how often do hail mary plays work when they rush 2or 3 and have the rest back there? What are the statistics about those kind of plays actually working for the O?
Okie State did a pretty good job of that against a pretty good VT defense.
There's also a strategy to pass to set up the run.
Folks forget we were without starting DBs against OSU. I think it was Terrell, Stro, and Adonis?
In any case, you can't take one example and extrapolate it to the entire football scene. Your P-sample is way too small.
It has been clearly pointed out by Fuente, French, and others that we still can't run the ball even with numbers in our favor. And your example isn't that pertinent, I am not saying throw Hail Marys, but run some basic route trees that get at least one WR open and move the ball down the field so we can get back in the game. I said 80% of the time because we can mix in some runs when they start to key pass to keep them honest but we seem to be doing the opposite with running on early downs, which has just led to 3rd and longs and a lot of 3 and outs.
Read my post re: offensive line attirtion and transfers. You'll see why we can't run the ball well when the numbers are in our favor. Combine that with Willis' inability to do a read-option well and you're going to be one-dimensional pretty fast.
You don't think we're doing that? And if you can stop the run with 3-4 people then you are basically flooding the backfield with defenders and the numbers aren't in your favor no matter how many "basic route trees" you think will work. See our game against Duke where we stuffed them with 3 DL and flooded our backfield accordingly.
Also trusting Willis to make the right read on those route trees, when history shows us at least half the time he'll chuck it to a double covered Hazelton, or leave the pocket too early and miss the open receiver.
Then have the RB or TE catch the jump pass over the middle. Our OL has been decent in protecting the pocket. But the biggest problem in going downfield repeatedly is can our QB make more than 1 read?
You realize any OC has to make the opposing defense respect the run in order to keep the passing game open, right? We were slinging the ball all over BC. They dropped two safeties into coverage and the passing game evaporated. But our run game is hamstrung by the fact that Willis still can't make the right read, so the zone read, a bread and butter play for this offense, is essentially out of the playbook.
You give Willis 50 attempts per game, he'll keep slinging it even if the opposing defense drops nine into coverage. And there's a good chance he'll target a receiver that's triple covered. Like it or hate it, Fuente is as turnover-averse as Beamer was. Maybe even more. There's a reason Willis is averaging one interception per 59.5 attempts this season, after averaging one every 25.4 attempts at Kansas, and it's all because of how Fuente and Corn are managing him. They're putting him in a position to be successful, playing to his strengths and mitigating his weakness. But he's taken the zone read off the table, and we just don't have the running game we need to compliment him.
I'll say this: to my eye, Cornelson has been a lot more successful limiting the mistakes of a mistake-prone player in Willis than Bud has done with Caleb Farley and Reggie Floyd this year.
Considering the possibility that Willis is being handcuffed by the offensive coaching staff to limit turnovers one wonders what the fan consensus would be on this speculative Willis stat line:
50% completion percentage, 50 attempts per game started, 300 yards per game, 1.5/1 TD/INT ratio
Instead of what we actually have:
60% completion percentage, 35 attempts per game started, 220 yards per game, 4/1 TD/INT ratio
Edited for typos
There are plenty of fans who would take the former, but Fuente will always take the latter.
the more this season goes by, and the more reaction I read to people just whitewashing just how truly horrible we are on defense, the more it is becoming clear that dcwilson might have been right, and people will give Bud a pass for anything, while taking the daggers out toward the offense on the slightest hiccup.
For shits sake, everyone keeps bringing up all these injuries and attrition to excuse why the defense is bad, and then raking Corny and Fuente over the coals, but come on, our QB1 has been out since the Old Dominion game, which just so happens to pretty much be the last time we kind of looked competent offensively. Gee, I wonder if there's a correlation? Nah, better to just play it safe, say the coaches suck, the OC should be fired, and have it a day. Yep, that'll do.
I don't think our O was that good before the ODU game. We beat W&M easily, but FSU awe had the ball so many times in their territory and got almost no points (3rd quarter, anyone?). Our D looked better, so we weren't paying much attention.
Our first drive vs FSU was a thing of beauty - right down the field for a score. Got my hopes up too high.
I think part of the reason people aren't bringing up the QB1 injury is related to not being all in on Jackson, not many people have seen that as a step down and therefore not a valid reason for a lack of success. The inconsistency of the offense is frustrating, you see the moments of brilliance and just want to yell "YES THANK YOU, now just do that again" when in reality maybe we have a QB that runs hot and cold and a OC that may be in his own head a little bit trying to call the perfect game.
I'm not saying JJ is the best QB we ever had, but we had more plays we could use with him under center. It's been widely noted that Willis can't do a proper read option (and i actually saw that a bunch of times at the Pitt game when we tried to do the Veer option), which exacerbates our ability to run the ball.
I do think Willis is a baller, but he's limited compared to JJ. What Fu said re: "consistent results" is accurate. The inconsistency would be much less if we could use our full arsenal of play calls instead of just half of them.
You say that as if he's so wide open that even the cameraman gets faked out the 2 or 3 times he's kept it this year.
A camera man isn't a defensive player. And he's done it a few times, sure (wasn't saying his success rate was 0), but he's not consistent. But his TD against UNC was due to a busted UNC player assignment. Further, from what I could see in the game against Pitt, he couldn't do the intervted veer well at all - he kept when he should've handed off and vice-versa.
It's not my statement btw that says Willis can't run the read-option very well - it's the coaches assessment. I'm certainly not making this up for shits and giggles.
I was agreeing with you. Basically, at this point the defense knows to key on the RB on the read option. There's no sense in respecting Willis' ability to run. Even if he pulls it and goes the distance, he isn't doing it again.
Oh sorry - I couldn't tell.
I would disagree with one thing though - I think Willis has better wheels than JJ. If he could do it more consistently then the D would key on him and leave our RB to worry about one less defender. if Willis could actually do the read-option better he'd be more of a running threat than JJ would IMO.
Willis has a way better first step than JJ. Ideally you want Willis's glide and JJ's ability to read.
JJ had two games I can remember that he actually made a correct read option and kept the ball himself and that was against WVU last season and a few plays against ODU this season. I disagree with the statement that JJ makes better reads than Willis. Lest we forget, after the WVU game he would almost always just hand the ball off on obvious read option plays and the excuse was he was just a RS Freshman.
Well coaches compared JJ to RW during the pre-season and they have said that JJ is not only the better player that gives them the chance to win / be more consistent, but also STILL makes the better decision on the read-option. I will go with their evaluation over what you could "see".
I think everyone and their grandma acknowledges that the defense is horrendous this year. Recruiting is a major reason for this, it's been rehashed hundreds of times over the past couple of months. Aside from this shortcoming, what else do you want Bud and co. to do to right the ship this season? I think it's 100% clear what the problem is, and there's not a lot we can do about it right now. We've reached the acceptance stage on this unit.
The reason the conversation keeps steering back to the offense is because we think we see something correctable out there and it's worth talking about. Sure, the offense has had a few injury and youth issues as well (I don't think it's anywhere near to what the defense has had to deal with, and if you agree with a large portion of this community, Willis>JJ anyways. I don't, necessarily.) That doesn't excuse the baffling decisions made with the quarterbacks or the insistence to unsuccessfully run up the middle repeatedly in the 2nd halve of games where we're chasing a lead. We have decades of proof that Bud is no slouch, but these offensive decisions are coming from guys who have yet to prove themselves to this fanbase on a consistent basis, and I think it's fair to talk about them.
My biggest worry is are we addressing our recruiting on defense? The cupboard is obviously bare, and no matter how you cut it that is mostly Bud's fault. As DC he is in charge of recruiting for the defense.
The cupboard is bare at DL, but I wouldn't put it all on Foster. I'm sure we wanted recruits but we missed on them. That's never really just on one coach when recruits pick another school over us. In any case, because of Bud we're stocked at LB for the next several years - so one could argue that too.
It's a collective failure that we don't have enough quality DTs.
are we though? last time i checked, we were sticking freshman in all over the place at LB.
Well yes, they are young, but we've got quality players at the two positions.
Think about it: we lost Ashby and Rivers - our starting Mike and Backer - and replaced them with Kearns and Hollified. Not saying we upgraded but I don't think we lost much of a beat (though Kearns isn't as good in coverage).
Whip though isn't really an LB position anymore, so I will not comment on that.
Don't forget about Tisdale and Artis as well. LB should be a definite strength over the next few years.
We have recruited EIGHT 4*'s on defense in the last two classes, our highest rated recruit each of those years being a defensive player. We've landed four offensive 4*'s in that span.
He's actually been recruiting DE/LB really well from a talent perspective, but the one area where he hasn't recruited well in recent years is DT, and obviously he and Wiles hold blame in that regard. That said, it still doesn't necessarily hold all the blame. The draft board is a team effort, but scholarship allocations, and targets are ultimately on the final say of the Head Coach. We've allotted a substantial # of scholarships to WR's and that has given us fewer to use elsewhere in recent classes, which can make missing on a few studs hurt even worse.
I think we've been a little weak in recruiting DL for a while, but recently in particular were met with a perfect storm of early departures through the draft, behavior, etc. as well as other guys that were recruited not making it in the door.
I don't think it's some systemic failure on Bud's part to attract talented players, unless it's specific to DL (and it could be). Our top recruits over the past few classes were all on the defense (with the exception of Jerod coming in late over Deablo).
We're recruiting well defensively, except for glaring gaping holes at DT and FS. Unfortunately, with holes like that, its going to be extremely difficult to control the LOS, putting a lot of pressure on the LBs and DBs to stop the run, and it'll be very difficult to stop the stretch pass, as we won't have over the top help.
Which... considering the way this year has played out, are pretty much the critical weaknesses we're already seeing.
I'd like to direct everybody's attention to this article I found on top of r/cfb:
Hold on. We need to talk more about Pitt's hilarious mauling of Virginia Tech
Yet again we lose in record breaking fashion. The numbers are pathetic regardless of how much attrition we've gone through. Bud and the team should be ashamed of themselves. And this is coming from somebody who has been very critical of the offense for most of this season.
Nobody is denying that the defense was horrendous last week, and for much of the season. I'm sure that defense is embarrassed. It doesn't mean people can't point out the issues with the offense.
The defense has been horrendous the whole season. The offense have shown moments of promise basically every game. The defense has shown zero promise for almost all of it. Nothing (except for FSU)
I think I'd disagree. I'm still pretty excited for basically all of our LBs in the future. Find somebody to keep the OL off of them in the 2nd level and I think we might have the best crop in years back there.
except for that time we shut down the Duke running game with 3 lineman....man those were the good old days
Defense was decent in the first half against BC.
...and for most of the first half against ND.
The need to slam the offense despite the defense putting up nationally horrific numbers just reeks of denial about how bad things are with the defense. They want to believe its just an aberration and instead, focus the anger on the offense, because if the problem is that the defense really is that bad? That wouldn't bode well for the future of Virginia Tech football, a team that needs a strong defense to survive.
Its easier to cope with this season if we mentally forgive the defense for being bad. Its in our comfort zone to blame the offense. So that's what we do, even when reality is showing us otherwise.
You should be a psychiatrist because your take is, IMO, 100% correct.
Not that we need to make major coaching changes this year.
The team, coaches, and fans need a do-over so to speak. Forget this season (once its over), prepare for next, play better. If not, then yeah, I'll be willing to get out my pitch fork too. But not this season, too much lost too quick.
With regards to this article, it was essentially two lines at most about the horrible D and then the rest of the body scathing the O - which isn't warranted IMO. I've stated my reasons why above and don't care to rehash again.
I'm sure they're smarting - no need to go whole hog on them.
The whole point of my disagreement isn't to say O is perfect and let's blame the D. I think the D is hurting big-time with their injuries and everything else that's been covered. I don't want to lay into them further either. But let's not use the O as a scapegoat. They've had injuries / attrition too but no one seems to give them any slack.
I want to write this one off to the gods as a shitty year where whatever could go wrong did go wrong. It's just horrible luck that we were injured in places we couldn't afford to be. If this continues for another year or two then i'll be inclined to believe it's something more systematic.
Obviously, VT just needs to learn how to cheat at an elite level. Then we'll start winning games again. /s
I started thinking about all our issues and just like that I'm pissed again. Ugh.
Why is Pitt, indeed.
Weird question: have we gotten a pick-6 or ST (non-offensive) TD this year?
Those are huge momentum plays that can take the pressure off.
We had the blocked punt in the end zone for a TD, FSU I think
Okay. So 1. I had forgotten about that.