SBNation recently dropped this cool article on the history of the option. Here's a video summary, but I recommend reading the article too.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
SBNation recently dropped this cool article on the history of the option. Here's a video summary, but I recommend reading the article too.
Comments
F*%K chinballs. Just sayin'.
The option is deadly when you make the right reads
When you consistently make the wrong reads, you end up with the 2018 Virginia Tech offense.
Ouch.
Firing the OC would somehow clear that right up, though.
I get where you're coming from but we struggled mightily in conference play outside of UNC last season as well, with a QB who did make the right reads, and we still couldn't score for shit.
So yeah, your response makes sense in regards to this season, but that snappy comeback doesn't eliminate the reality that the OC could still be an issue. Our playcalling last season was equally as baffling and frustrating.
Checks last year's conference record : 5-3. Looks at losses, #2 Clemson, #9 Miami and Chop blocks chin balls. Looks at roster, Cam and his sports hernia, a bunch of froshs, and we still went 9-4.
Sorry but I'm not buying it. Seems like we did okay with a R-Fr QB would could run the read option.
Go back and peep those box scores brother, we won games because our defense was a top 10 defense by S&P. We never scored more than 24 points in an ACC game outside of UNC.
Ok. I thought the goal was to score more points than the other team. Looks like they did that 9 times last year.
If you think we should be scoring 50+ points per game, then we should switch to the Big XII where nobody plays defense.
I think it's reasonable to want us to score 30 a game in conference play if we want to be a consistently good team that can challenge for a conference title. I don't see where it was necessary to make the jump from "we should score more than 24," to "we have to score 50+ and be in the Big12."
The most glaring example of this complete offensive incompetence I was referencing occurred when we scored 22 points against GT, where the offense scored 16, because Stroman had a pick 6. The play calling blunders included us going for 2 way too early in the game, AND turning down a field goal opportunity to go for it in the first half. This left 4 points (5 if you count us kicking the XP on the Stroman pick 6 instead of going for 2 since we wouldn't have needed to if we hadn't gone for 2 and turned down a field goal opportunity earlier) on the field that would have put us in position to kick a game winning field goal on our final drive. You might recall that final drive being the drive where we threw back to back contested, low percentage downfield passes on 3rd and 1 and 4th and 1 from about GT's 30. Those play calling blunders were all on some combination of Fuente and Cornelson.
And I think it's reasonable to score more points than the other team and win the game. The arbitrariness of a number doesn't mean anything. We scored 35 against ODU and lost. So if we're throwing out an arbitrary 30 ppg, why not make it 50?
Personally, I find it completely acceptable to score 24 points, give up 10 and win the game. Yes it's fun putting up 64 points on ECU and seeing our QB throw for 372 yds and 5 TDs. But it's just as exciting, to me at least, to see him throw for 322 & 1 TDand beat BC 23-10 because it counts the same in the win column and it's a conference win.
That's my opinion. You're free to disagree.
Perhaps you've forgotten that the original point of this disagreement was whether having a QB who made proper reads should alleviate the OC from any blame.
We won more games last year because our defense was elite (9th in S&P, as I stated earlier) NOT because JJ was better at making run reads. The fact that we won more games does not mean our offense was much better last year. The offense was pretty equally mediocre to inept in conference play last year as it was this year. I'm not suggesting making proper reads in the run game isn't important, but I am suggesting that even with proper reads being made consistently, our offense still wasn't very good in conference play.
Of course I'll take a win however I can get it, but that wasn't what we were discussing.
I was going to write a well thought out response to your comments. On second thought, why should I? Your mind is made up and nothing I would write would be well received.
Go Hokies!
What is my mind made up about? I'm just suggesting it's okay to be critical of the coaching staff. I'm not even calling for anyone's job. That said, there are a couple I don't think I'd miss much.
They made another video about the nickel being the new base defense. It features Mook.
Fun fact: Richard Johnson (who did both of these videos) featured Mook after reading French's articles on TKP.
They put out an entire series of articles about the option for the Army-Navy game tomorrow. It includes the history, RPOs, the special preparation required for Army-Navy, and the triple option being used at the high school level. I'd really recommend checking them all out. Articles can be found at www.sbnation.com/college-football
It's so weird. I hate the option when we play it but I love watching it when it kicks UVA's ass like in the military bowl last year. I wonder why?
Speaking of the option, my HS alma mater hired the coach from Grayson HS in Georgia three years ago and now we run the triple option with 5* defensive end Zachh Pickens playing BBack. I'm watching them play for State in South Carolina 5A (highest class in SC) as I type this.
To save you a rabbit trail, yes I went to the high school where "Radio" still attends school. As in, the movie "Radio."