There's no doubt that this has been a rough and unfortunate season of Hokie football. The offseason was full of attrition, losing key players for all sorts of reasons from injury, legal trouble, and even academics. We started the season decently well, but by the end of the ODU weekend we had reached a deep low, a low we've felt before, but it never makes it any easier to handle. From there on we lost a few more key players to attrition and injuries.
The defense was the worst of my 15-16 years of following Hokie football old enough to really understand what was going on, and it was tough to watch games like Pitt and GT where we reached a new level of hopelessness. The offense was often disappointing as well. We had tons of execution errors, the primary issue of the offense alongside inconsistency though you can argue they go hand in hand.
Ultimately, the season will end with us breaking a 25 year winning season streak. The first full season of Hokie football in my lifetime ending with a losing record. There will surely be lots of lamenting the struggles and low moments of this past season, and I don't fault anyone for doing so. It was a disappointing ending for sure, but it was not all doom and gloom. We did manage to keep alive our dominating streak over UVA, and we keep alive our now country leading bowl streak.
For those two things I feel like the season ended with some level of success, albeit relative success in the wake of an otherwise emotionally and mentally taxing season of Hokie football. There are some reasons to be excited, promising young players at a few key positions emerged, an exciting receiving corps, and at least some of our recruiting needs were met at ESD.
It will be a long offseason with a lot of questions and worries (how much will the defense realistically improve? Can we effectively address our DL issues, and can we get the young secondary to take a leap forward?) . There will likely be some more attrition, it just always seems to happen that way in college football. However, it won't be long before spring rolls around and we start to get some hope again, whether warranted or not. Either way, it was a tough season and on some level it's a relief for it to be over, but it won't be long before the hunger returns to watch some Hokie football.
...Go Hokies!
Comments
We have issues at every level of the defense. The very fundamentals seem to have completely disappeared. Is that due to youth, no talent, coaching, all of the above? The defensive "improvement" throughout the season is what has me most concerned. Bad football players can make form tackles; we have many on defense who don't. Next year will answer my above question of what was the main problem. However, the fact that we don't make fundamental plays on defense is concerning....and what may be even more concerning is not that we don't, but maybe we can't.
I'm glad the streaks are still alive, and that the season is over.
Fuente and the team have some work to do.
I think a lot of it is coaching.
Personally I do not think it is coaching. I think it is youth and simply lack of talent. As youth gets more experience I think we will see it's more lack of talent. I just do not have good feelings about next year.
On defense it is both.
Oh shit it's the offseason
No, it's basketball season. ACC play starts tomorrow at 1. Let's enjoy the next few months of potentially the best basketball team in school history.
We'll have all summer to worry about football.
Is it an overstatement to say this is the most important off-season since 2-8-1? 2003-2004, 2012-2013, and 2015-2016 also come to mind.
No, I think you've got it right.
We're at a critical juncture for Fuente.
I'd say it's the most important since the 2-8-1 season in 1992 for sure.
There's a lot of parallels between the 1992 and 2018 seasons too. We had a super young team in 1992, and a dynamic QB (Maurice DeShazo) who just wasn't quite in control of the position yet. And like this year, there's a big chunk of the fan base that is pissed off and feeling impatient.
I don't see us having as dramatic a turnaround in 2019 as we had in 1993, considering the 1992 team played a bunch of guys who would eventually become STUDS (Cornell Brown, Antonio Freeman, Dwayne Thomas, George Del Rico, Antonio Banks among others), and most of their losses were close losses.
But I'm optimistic that with the players we have coming back next year (quick prayer to ward off the attrition demons), we should be looking at at least 7-9 wins in 2019.
I like the optimism but with the Coastal getting new coaching staffs at UNC, GT, and Miami, I don't think even the football gods have an inkling of how it's all going to shake out next year.
I hope and pray that next year we keep the LOLUVA and bowl streaks alive as well as begin a new winning season streak. I'd also prefer it if we wouldn't do it with such a flair for the dramatic.
Actually Cornell Brown was a true freshman in 1993 (I had freshman English with him) but I agree with your optimism for best year. Give these guys another year to grasp the playbook and to mature a bit more and the experience they gained this year will pay off
No, the team wasn't just bad, there were off field issues, late season transfers etc. it's more than just giving up 7 YPC to every team to you play.. the issues are deeper. And like Fuente said need to be addressed sooner than later.
I'm extremely proud of this squad for finding a way to keep the bowl streak intact. However, I'm not at all surprised to see the season end on an ill-advised, badly underthrown ball by Willis. We wrang every ounce of production we could out of him, but his limitations are his limitations. I'm ready to see JJ resume the reins, or QP seize his opportunity by the throat.
What? Are you talking about the ball that the S picked off to end the game? That's your badly under thrown ball? The FS caught it 5 yards in front of Hazelton, who couldn't continue to run under it because a DB ran right into his path and bear hugged him. That was a beautiful throw and Haze catches that 9/10 times but didn't get the chance due to the PI-no call.
Yes, Ryan has his limitations, but throwing, and even accuracy throwing are not them.
I thought that was more of a PI than the previous one that was called. You judt cant impede the receiver like that. I also thought Hazelton could have fought through it better.
I thought it was a reasonably well thrown ball too. Willis should've looked off the safety. If he does that, it looks like a great pass (1 on 1) and it would've been a travesty to not call PI (although, in theory it shouldn't matter if the safety intercepts it).
Another thought about Willis: it was his best game this year regarding making the right reads in the read-option plays.
I really can't follow this. I'll grant you that Willis doesn't have the best read, but his wheels and arm are better than that of JJ. JJ can read, but no one respects his run because they don't have to respect it. Nor do they have to respect his deep ball.
I think Willis might learn to read and see the field during an offseason working with the 1's. I don't think he has any other limitations.
Seeing the field seems more like a skill that can be coached. He is already strong running and throwing. ( He has the measureable athletic abilities)
It has been an interesting season to say the least. There is now 9 months of speculation on how we can improve but overall still very proud to be a Hokie and not a Wahoo, Hurricane, or anyone else.
Hopefully like Bud said, these guys will train agitated and get bigger, faster, and stronger so that we can take the next step with a relatively easy schedule next year.
This is a level-headed summary. I do however think some major staff changes will be made if we can't get at least 8-9 wins with our weak schedule next season.
I think there should be staff changes this year. I don't think there will be.
If there are no significant staff changes and we win any fewer than 10 games in 2019 I seriously think Fuente should be fired. I'm willing to give him one more season to prove himself because the deck was a bit stacked against him, TBH.
But he was hired to bring a high octane offense to Blacksburg and let Bud control and maintain the defense. Our offense hasn't come close to what we were promised and the defense has gotten worse and worse. I do believe that Fuente had a hand in selecting the CB and Safety coaches and they're clearly weak links. I'd like to belive Foster would've hired different coaches if he had complete control over his defense.
The only thing our offense does consistently is fail miserably to make in game adjustments, which is sort of critical at this level. For an "offensive guru" that's pretty piss poor. From day one they've talked about getting a running game and here we are at the end of year 3 and our rushing offense is pedestrian, at best.
I know lots of people will point at youth and poor recruiting at the end of the Beamer era as excuses for our performance. But we have enough talent on this roster for a good coach to win more than 6 games... Especially in a league as watered down as the ACC.
The attrition was certainly unprecedented and for that reason I'd give Fuente one more season. But if our offense remains in the middle of the pack and our defense doesn't return to something close to a standard Bud Foster defense then I see no reason to keep this experiment going. A true offensive mind could do more with less. Blame Cornelson if you want but ultimately its Fuente who is responsible.
We hired Fuente as head coach, not just for his offensive mind. The fact is that the offense IS different. It is better than when Fuente arrived. Recruiting has been decent. The defense has taken a step back, and it's hard at this point to know why.
Fuente gets another year because that was part of the bargain when VT hired him. To give him enough time to improve the team. So far, he's improved recruiting and improved the offense. Not sure what the hell is happening on defense, but I'm willing to give him another year on that as well.
So yes, next year is going to be important for the Fuente tenure. Would have been no matter what.
As for insisting on 10 wins, that's a bit ridiculous. While I'd like that, it's not really the criterion is it? Even if that's the result we all feel the team should have.
Whit explicitly went after an offensive minded coach because VT has been terrible on that side of the ball. He didn't want to just improve the offense, he wanted to bring in a guy who would field a legitimate top teir offense.
Marginally. And that's not good enough. Dino Barbers has done more with less at Syracuse. There's really no excuse. A good offensive coach would be able to fix VT's running game in 3 years. Cornelson hasn't shown any marked improvement on that side. Our offense was basically exactly the same at the end of the year as how it started. Same mistakes and miscues have plagued us all season. That's not the mark of competent coaching.
Have you seen our schedule? I wouldn't expect to beat ND. Otherwise our schedule is cake. The hardest games we have are probably Pitt and Uva. UNC, GT and Miami have new coaches. Duke is Jones-less and Wake and BC are almost an unfair gift of crossover teams in the ACC.
There's no excuse for VT not to win the coastal division. The coastal is soo bad that Uva might legitimately be favored to win the division. Chew on that for a minute.
From what I saw, UVa was a decent team this year.
Mostly because they had a solid defense and Bryce Perkins is a decent quarterback who makes decent decisions and can run for it if he needs to. Mendenhall is putting pieces in place.
Chew on that for a moment.
This is chess, not checkers. It takes a while to put pieces in place. I still have faith in Fuente's ability to do that.
I hear everyone here keep saying that. "I have faith in Fuente to build the program". I'm not trying to dog him. But I would like to hear your side on what you think he has done in Blacksburg through year 3 that's demonstrated enough for you to have faith in him.
Rewatch games before Fuente arrived and watch them for this season. No way in the world, that we would have a back up QB, replace a starter who's out for the year and the back up throw for 2,500 yds and 22 TDs in the equivalent of 11 full games.
The poor play of the D would be the major decline that you'd see, but Bud's still the DC, with basically carte blanche regarding decisions on that side of the ball, so you can't put that on Fuente.
Is the O where it needs to be? Nope, but I see improvement (OL improvement is very notable).
It's not a difficult argument to make that we aren't scoring well in ACC play over the last two seasons. So for 2/3 Fuente seasons (the most recent 2) we've scored over 24 in ACC play three times, (2017 UNC, 2018 Duke and UVA). I'm not saying Fuente is trash but that is not much of an improvement from the 2012-2015 Beamer years offensively. The stats are nice but if they aren't translating to the scoreboard in our most important games (conference games) that is an issue.
The drop off by the defense this year is also an issue, but it is not enough to call a trend. We actually improved from 2016 to 2017 with good defenses both seasons (top 10 by S&P in 2017).
I'm not part of the fire Fuente crowd by any means, but I am not impressed with our offensive output in conference play the last two seasons. I think it's a fair criticism for people in the fan base to be disappointed in that aspect. Our second half offensive outputs were particularly troubling during the UNC, GT, BC, Pitt, and Miami stretch with the sole exception of the game winning drive against UNC (a game in which our offense was overall pretty bad)
This is a good post.
If I can add... Some of those games you mentioned we did score some garbage points, so if you take those out....
I think most people here would agree that Nix is a bad coach for Foster's defense. And he is buddies with Fuente from before Fuente was at VT. And you're trying to tell me that Fuente has zero responsibility for the terrible defense we suddenly have?
I'm fairly certain that I can, in fact, put the bad defense on Fuente. And our offense isn't all that good either. Not good enough for Foster's defense to not have to carry the team. Fuente never should have said that Foster wouldn't have to worry about that anymore. Here we are at the end of year three and we still don't have a respectable running game and our offense absolutely isn't good enough to cover up deficiencies on defense. Egg on Fuente's face IMO.
Fans and football gurus alike have been critical of Cornelson as a play caller and game manager. Our offense hasn't taken any significant steps forward under his control but ultimately it's Fuente who is responsible for recognizing that Cornelson isn't performing the task Fuente promised when he was hired. Fuente needs to figure out how to help Cornelson to get the offense performing like an offense coached by a proclaimed offensive minded coach. If our offense doesn't improve drastically and the defense doesn't return to the standard we've grown accustomed to then Fuente will have failed. If no major changes occur then 2019 is the year VT needs to break through to save his job. I think he can buy himself another year (possibly two, depending on how much changes) by making substantial changes to his staff.
But for the last three years Fuente has talked about fixing the running game and for the last three years our running game has remained terrible. If we can't run the rest of the offense struggles. I would expect a good coach to find a way to revive the most important aspect of the offense. When that coach even states that his priority is to do just that, and he can't manage it in three years, how much longer are you willing to put up with that?
So that's why I believe Fuente needs to win a minimum of 10 games in 2019 if he doesn't make staff changes. No change means that he's confident this staff can perform at this level. If it doesn't, then he needs to go.
When did Nix and Fuente every coach together? I can't find a single overlap.
Willis Should HAVE Never Been the Back-up to JJ. That's on Fuente and Corny ! And Fuente is the Head Coach, Bud Foster answers to Him, period. We have Coaches sleep at the wheel here at VT. Piss poor playing calling, No Tackling or desire to tackle , That's a Coach's job to teach or put someone on the field that has a desire to play and Tackle ! Bud has lost his desire for that Fire on the sidelines and it shows in his players. VT has a problem only a AD can get straight, tired of Excuses !!
Your kidding right? Just compare JJ's win loss to Willis. This isn't even a debate.
I'm not agreeing with Jack Crow, but win-loss record is a terrible stat for comparing QBs.
Ok then use completions or INTs. Willis has traits that JJ should pick up but he isn't a better overall QB than JJ.
The point is they're BOTH not gonna get the job done. They both have serviceable qualities while at the same time, major impediments that will not aid in achieving our goals.
This may be one of your best posts. I couldn't have said it better.
What 'traits' does Willis have that JJ can just pick up? Actual arm strength? Legs that can make a play?
Yeah, why doesn't JJ just pick those things up?
Where is this "arm strength" of Willis? He isn't throwing bombs out there to gauge that. The trait he has that JJ doesn't is sometimes you have to take a risk, the problem with Willis is he takes too many each game.
Case in point, the last 2 passes of the season were deep balls into double coverage. Both were picked off, but the first was called back to DPI. We had time to march, and we were moving the ball, and those throws gave it away. The first decision was bad, the second, after the first was already picked, is a tough one to swallow.
For me it's not doing things like throw the ball away. Not knowing when to slide or when not to slide. When to keep and when to handoff.
yeah, the read option wasn't a reliable weapon for us this year because he routinely made the wrong read. And that play is supposed to be our bread and butter.
the zone read was not a reliable weapon for us last year because even though JJ made the right read he didn't have the speed to hit the hole when it was there. you can teach reads. you cant teach speed.
I will agree that JJ needs to lose some weight and add some speed, and Willis's size gives him an advantage on the zone read. But let's not forget JJ has made some great plays with his legs before. The West Virginia game in particular stands out
1. You can't teach speed. The way to speed him up is to get him making correct reads faster.
2. He doesn't have much weight to lose. You don't need to be 6% body fat to play quarterback. I'd be afraid of him losing durability in the process.
You realize we were on our own 37 yardline with under a minute to play, needing a touchdown, right? The second was 2nd and 10 with 38 seconds left right at midfield - not a crazy time for a downfield shot to be taken. Us 'moving the ball' was the PI call
Judging the QB on 2 desperation throws at the end of a game, both of which had DPI, is an interesting rubric.
yeah when Rambo saves our ass against LOLUVA RW has balls and scared money don't make money. when the defense makes a play RW makes to many mistakes. We wouldn't have even been playing in a bowl game if it wasn't for RW. obviously we don't know what we would have been with JJ all season. but I don't think many hokies would see a much different outcome for the final results. QB play wasn't great enough to overcome all the other issues. It wouldn't have been regardless if it was about 90 QBs in the country this year either though.
to put it into perspective a lot of the guys in JJs corner expected a big jump for him from year 1 to year 2. but seems that none of those guys are willing to give RW that same chance. I don't get it.
for the record im in the QP wagon. I want to see him win the job and start till he jumps to the draft.
JJ 2017: 59.6% Comp, 7.55 YPA, 2.22 TD/INT, 135.2 RAT
2018: 62.1% Comp, 9.91 YPA, 5 TD/INT, 170.3 RAT [if you care to look at 1 ACC game and 1 FCS]
Willis 2018: 58.5% Comp, 7.46 YPA, 2.66 TD/INT, 138 RAT
I mean, it's really close however you look at it. Personally, I'd take the guy who can put up nearly identical numbers with a younger cast, as a freshman, and who is more likely to make the right read in any situation.
However, hopefully it won't matter and Quincy take the next step and takes the reigns.
It's crazy how my eyes say one thing but these stats say another.
Is there a stat that excludes throw always, as it sure seemed like Ryan was better at getting rid of it compared to Josh, who memory says took the sack or tried to scramble with his concrete shoes?
Also, does YPC tell a different story compared to YPA?
Interesting, I would say a big complaint of Willis vs JJ is that Willis didn't know when to throw it away. But I'm sorry to say idk if there is any stat of throwaways.
As for YPC:
RW: 12.75 JJ: 12.67
Thank you. Well, your #s do not lie. Josh not as bad as my memory suggested and Ryan not as effective as my mind imagined.
Using W-L as a comparison of the QBs? Come on, man. You want to compare the 2017 and 2018 defenses but then attribute that to QB? Horrible argument.
College QB's who are the best can process information faster than others. There are plenty of kids with big arms or who are fast, but they are never elite because they aren't good enough mentally or they are not accurate enough with the ball. If they have elite physical skills with the mental part you have an All-American. People discuss arm strength speed etc. This isn't the NFL as people will be open. We need a 2nd/3rd year starter who progresses mentally with playmakers around him. 2019-2020+ we have a chance for that to develop (no guarantees). Possible multi-year starter, and we have a bunch of young WR's who could turn out to be special (this year's class has a chance to be special at WR).
Willis has the physical skills to be fairly elite, but his ability to make the right decisions and be accurate time after time aren't there. If he outs in a tremendous amount of off-season work he has a chance to make a step.
I've always said that the mental side of sports is under emphasized. This seems to be particularly true when evaluating QB's. We place the label of "game manager" on QB's who don't have elite arm talent, but make good decisions. There have been some very good NFL QB's who didn't have great arm talent (Dan Fouts would be the poster child).
That said, I don't how much hard work can make up for a lesser ability to process the game mentally (just like throwing 100 more balls per day over the prior year won't necessarily make a huge impact on arm strength). I do have hope that Willis can improve in the read option, since it seems to be a VERY simple read (though I've never done it, let alone at game speed). If he can cut the poor reads by 90%, through repetition, then the O with him at QB make significant improvement. Clearly, he'd need to continue to work and develop in the passing game. I'm simply pointing to the read option as the area of proverbial low hanging fruit that could have an enormous improvement.
Dude. Super fast release and can rocket intermediate passes with the best of them. Although I can't stand him or Pats, he definitely has a top 25% arm.
I'm not quite how to measure arm talent, but he doesn't really take shots downfield, which seems to demonstrate below average arm strength. I thought that's what you meant. Agreed, his passing mechanics in the short to intermediate routes are elite.
2017 is off the table because of the defense we had so looking at 2018... not great
So, I have faith, but not confidence, in Fuente. His time at TCU and Memphis tells me he knows how to run an offense. His turn around at Memphis (which was considered one of the hardest jobs in college football when Fuente took over) tells me that he knows how to build a program (which means he should be able to rebuild ours). His 2016 season at VT tells me that he knows how make the best of the pieces he has.
I've said it a few comments now, but with all the issues in 2018 (injuries, attrition, last minute coaching changes), it's really tough to isolate the issue, and determine how much of this team's challenges are due to coaching (failure to develop and deploy talent), recruiting (failure to scout, acquire, and manage the roster), and things outside of the control of the coaches. I just hope that Fuente & Co haven't fallen in a hole too deep to climb out of.
Solid post. For me, 2019 is put up or shut up time for this staff. Fu made some comments post game acknowledging that changes needed to be evaluated and made. I'll believe it when I see it. If no staff adjustments are made, that tells me he believes we are set up to succeed next year, so it's time to see it.
We have an absolute cakewalk of a schedule. Two FCS teams, ODU which is a bad G5 our program should be capable of beating, and we avoid Clemson, Cuse, NC State, etc by drawing Wake from the Atlantic. Our biggest competition for the division might be UVa? Miami is a mess, GT has a significant rebuild, and we get Duke Pitt and Carolina at home.
If we can't win the Coastal next year, consider me checked out on this experiment. No excuses, it's time to produce.
Or that he believes his current staff will find success faster than the alternatives
If the plan is to field an effective offense 3-4 years from now, he may run out of time. For a coach hailed as an offensive guru, that side of the ball has been very underwhelming since the end of 2016. Overall yardage has increased, but the scoring and effectiveness against P5 competition is still sorely lacking. There are coaches doing far more with far less.
We will see how big of a jump the defense can make next year, but there absolutely must be improvement there. As many have alluded to, I don't think the coaching from the new assistants is meshing with Foster's overall scheme. If he thinks the staff that's in place now can get the job done, that's great. But if the secondary looks completely lost again next year, major questions will be raised.
Truthfully I think this points back to Fuente. I don't think Bud is truly able to run his defense his way and that's why we've seen such regression. Nix and Mitchell seem to be Fuentes guys, not Buds, as seen with the comments Brenden Hill made. Mook's dad also alluded to this in a post on this site a few weeks back.
Mitchell and Nix should be fired and let Bud bring in who he wants to match his system. His defense has worked for decades and you can't convince me that suddenly it doesn't. It falls in the coaching somewhere and we know Bud and Wiles are proven.
As many have said, next season is it. If we have another garbage season with no staff changes something has to give. I wouldn't necessarily say fire Fuente after a bad next season but I also wouldn't disagree with it. People can point to impatience but we shouldn't be sitting with a losing record this year with the talent we have if we're honest. I'm not at all convinced Fu and Co are cut out to be D1 coaches, the jury is very much out.
As much as they pay Foster, he should get to choose his own assistant coaches if he wants, and he should certainly have his say as to how they coach.
If that isn't the case, I think we know what's wrong.
with the talent we have
What talent are you talking about? I think Hazleton and Walker were 2nd team all-acc...and maybe only 1 or 2 other players were even honorable mention. I don't think our problem is a scheme issue, it is a talent issue. Our roster is full of "nice" players, but there are no difference makers. Maybe Tre gets there, but we really need someone like King or Robinson to get there as well to take the next step.
As far as Bud goes, I would assume he has some input into the hires being made. But again, it comes down to talent. Without Webb, Adonis, Mook, Hill, a healthy Mihota...he was forced to play a lot of guys that weren't ready to play. He can't play the defense he wants to because of a lack of talent, not because of Mitchell and Nix.
While I agree with what you're saying, we have plenty of talent across the board. Guys like Dax, Keene and Deablo have plenty of talent. If you want to argue experience then that makes more sense, but this team has the talent, albeit raw talent. Those guys should have developed but most people don't see it.
I would argue Mitchell and Nix DO limit Bud on what he can run. If he needs those coaches to teach concept A but they go off trail and teach concept B because they prefer it that's a problem.
Uh... what talent do you believe we have that I missed all year? We might not even have 2 players who would get drafted by the NFL this year if the entire team was draft eligible.
Maybe not NFL caliber talent but most of this roster is talented enough to not get their asses handed to them by GT/BC/Miami at home.
Youth. I was listening to the pregame on the radio yesterday and according to ESPN, after an interview with Bud for the bowl, he explained how he had to pretty much scrap the playbook and dumb it way down because we were so young they weren't able to take hold of the more intricate coverages. They expect things to be much better next year.
As for the issue with tackling, no explanation given.
I'll believe it when I see it with this group. It was much more than youth in 2018. We had veterans who couldn't gap fit at all throughout the entire season. Most of the defense, as you mentioned, had significant issues tackling all season long. Not a single player on defense was able to get off a block consistently, including the veterans.
I don't know what it is; talent, strength and conditioning, buy in, etc., but something is broken beyond the fact that the team is/was young.
I think the key that a lot of TKPers seem to be missing is the impact of youth. The coaches have a thirty day preseason to get these guys ready to go and rely heavily on veterans. If they are having to coach play book, technique, conditioning without solid veteran leadership then it is too much. Healthy programs have attrition too but this year was supposed to be rJr's and Seniors from Beamers last class and they are nonexistent.
Having veterans on the field to help coach the young guys up is a huge part of CFB. We literally had none of that on defense for the entire season and any time we had some semblance of consistency, that player goes down injured.
I question the offense as much as anyone else though. We were supposed to have a much improved receiver core and OL. Maybe JJ and Willis are completely not the QB mold for Fuente...but if that is the case I (and this is hindsight talking), why not just scrap it all and play QP for the entire season and see what happens?
All I will say is that Whit has proven himself, Fuente has a proven trajectory but it remains to be seen what he can do here. This year, as many ITKs have stated numerous times, was "rock bottom" but we don't see it that way because this was year three of Fuente's tenure when rock bottom normally occurs closer to year 1 or 2.
I will give Fuente two more years because next season is, well and truly, Feunte's team. I would like to see some changes this off season but I am just an armchair fan speaking and have zero experience coaching or recruiting.
Just because people say recruiting has improved doesn't make it true. The data says it hasn't improved at all. Same as it ever was and the on field product is showing that too.
The data actually says it has improved. For Fuente's two full classes, only 2013 has been better in the composite this decade (and that got a major boost from Fuller). Let's remember what 2014 and 2015 brought in terms of wins and losses. 2016 we played in the title game. So maybe give the kids a shot to grow up and let their talent speak for itself?
Recruiting for certain position groups is as good as ever (OL, LB, WR) but recruiting for the DL and recruiting corners and RBs for whatever reason, has plummeted. These were once our identity.
We have dug a huge hole, and while we have picked up a few prospects at DT and DE, none of these are gamechangers. Our two starting CBs are gonna be much better with experience but no depth behind them. We did pick up a promising RB this cycle so hopefully we get that turned around.
2019 is going to be another tough year for the DL. Our defense requires interior gap penetration to disrupt the run and a good edge rush in the passing game. I do not think we have the talent in the pipeline to fix this anytime soon.
I am holding out hope that Gaines will be healthy by next year and Garbutt/Belmar are able to take a step forward as edge rushers. DT we are really banking on Crawford/Fuga to be immediate contributors and for Hewitt and Porcher to progress. I'm trying to keep expectations low and hope to be surprised.
Not really.. you can parse it by composite or use "P5 offers metric" or whatever you want. Fuente is signing 25-30th ranked classes. Beamer did that the past 20 years with few exceptions. "improved" recruiting would be top 10-15 classes. VT's recruiting profile in 2019 is the same it was in 2011 or 2003 or 2005, etc. not measurably improved at all. IIWII. And if "composite" or "P5 offers" was so much more valid that whatever Beamer's classes are being evaluated by, the product on the field would be better. It's not. And this year to plug holes, we went JUCO- again not an "improvement" in recruiting.
Improved means improved. One spot higher in the composite is still an improvement.
Please use some actual numbers if you're going to make an argument comparing numbers.
As far as taking a step forward, Fuente kept the streaks alive, so he gets another year. Nobody said it would be a quick process.
We'll all be taking a hard look at Fuente next year, as it's make or break time. We'll be looking at the overall program for signs of improvement. If they are there, he likely gets another year. From what I can tell, he's a decent coach.
This has been discussed a lot how do you not know that the average player taken is better under Fuente than Beamer.
When will that show on the field? When will that yield more 4 and 5 star players? 2020?
Here is the thing many don't seem to understand Tech isn't going to ever sign a class full of 4 and 5 star players. However I can't recall recruiting classes with as many 4 stars in a long time.
The defensive recruiting is like it has almost always been outside outliers like Fuller.
That's my point. Frank Beamer signed good 3 star players... dozens with out issue. "Improved" recruiting at VT would be signing more 4 and 5 star players. We have not done that ,really. A few more 4 stars but nothing major.
"Improved" recruiting at VT would be signing more 4 and 5 star players. We have not done that ,really. A few more 4 stars but nothing major.
But nothing has improved...
Fuente has signed three straight classes with five or more 4-star players per class is pretty good for VT. From 2002-2016, this has only happened three times (2012, 2010, 2008). It's not a huge improvement, but it's definitely moving the needle.
Simple question - how many of Frank's recruits are still contributing on offense this year and/or will next year? Zero receivers, QB's, 1 RB and some of the O-line although if started to shift later in the year. Impossible to be very good with hardly any upper class men contributing.
Without recruiting Jerod, 2 years ago could have been miserable. The program had HUGE holes in talent on offense when Frank retired that they have started to plug, but to have the expectations that hiring a coach fixes things is foolish. You hire a coach to build a program which takes years of recruiting, development etc
Note - Frank had some good talent in the program that was older when he left (thanks Loefler and Moorehead) He did not have much good young talent - especially on offense.
Ask Dabo how long it took to build the defensive brand at Clemson - remember 2012 Vs WVU and giving up 70 in the bowl game? (Venables 1st season) If Clemson listened to their fans they would have fired everyone.
JJ was a Frank (actually Lefty) recruit. The RS Juniors and seniors who signed LOI's out of high school will still be from the Beamer recruiting class (though Fuente had to hang on to those cruts).
Understood. Jj was technically Fuente's recruit as he signed with Fuente regardless of who did the legwork. My point is still the same.
Not, not really. JJ wasn't recruited by Fuente, so there's no way that you can honestly call him one. Fuente kept him and the other recruits from that class, but he really didn't have much choice, since it was too late to try to get anyone else. Yes, he signed the LOI while Fuente was in charge, but before Fuente took over as HC, a little over a month before signing day, it's likely that he didn't speak to any of the recruits.
even with JJ not counted to Fuente he is still correct. You're missing, or overlooking, the larger point.
Exactly. This would only make the point more valid. If you don't count that class you have 2 recruiting classes under Fuente and only 1 is enrolled in school yet. Take all the "composite" scores you want, but recruiting results are tabulated 3-5 years later.
Also - Fuente made in-home visits to all those recruits with Jackson being a huge priority. To think he wouldn't visit those recruits and they would just sign isn't a likely situation.
I didn't suggest that he wouldn't contact and visit recruits. My point is that he couldn't do so until after the bowl game and he formally replaced Frank. At that point, yeah he wanted to keep that class, because other wise there would be no class of incoming recruits. As such he didn't choose to recruit them, to VT, he simply did his best to keep the players who Frank's staff chose to recruit and who had committed to Frank's staff. It's not the same as Fuente and his 1st year staff recruiting those kids from the beginning. We have no idea how different that class would be, if Fuente had taken over a year prior (though we've seen a definite uptick in the two classes that Fuente had a year to recruit).
All of Fuente's best RB's thus far are Beamer guys... 2 of them walk on's initially. Most of his good OL have been Beamer guys and his starting QB the past 2 years was a Beamer recruit (until he got hurt). Yes, WR recruiting was an issue at the end of the beamer era, but again- Fuente's 2 best thus far were beamer guys- Phillips and Ford. Yes, Turner will eventually be better than Phillips, IMO- Hazelton too perhaps. Bottom line- If recruiting has improved dramatically, the rankings and on-field product would show it.
Would you measure freshman year Ford as the final Beamer product? Ford's best season was with Jerod. The RB situation hasn't worked out yet, but King is possibly a big step forward and the O line issues are improving (don't think the lack of O line talent didn't contribute to previous recruiting missed - it did).
I still at a loss as to the final verdict on recruiting for a coach whose Juniors and Seniors are from the previous coach and we are playing the youngest Power 5 two deep in the country. I think you are under-estimating how poor the last 2 classes were under Frank. Granted, Ford, Phillips and others were very good, but they weren't in the last 2 classes. This was a very well known issue (even with Frank) within the program. That wouldn't be exposed until year 3-4 as those classes aged out (14 scholarship seniors over 2 years is abysmal).
If these issues are here in 2021 then it's a different context and story. I also don't think the issues are Bud's in the defense. We simply are too young and not developed enough. At one point during the bowle game we had 7 freshman playing on D.
The defense was a bottom 15 defense in all of FBS this year. Only 3 P5 teams gave up more yards per play than VT- Oregon State, Illinois, and Louisville. The defense was a far, far bigger issue this season than the offense. You gave lip service to the defensive issues but then always came back to phrases like "offensive guru" and "true offensive mind" for why Fuente should be fired. Well, Foster is supposed to be a top 5 defensive coordinator. He has legendary status in Blacksburg and it's not exactly a simple proposition for Fuente to fire him or even undermine him, like many seem to believe is happening for some reason.
If you truly believe this, I don't understand how you reach the conclusion that we should "fire Fuente" before wanting to "fire Bud Foster." For the record, I think it's premature to fire either one but the defense is the side that performed at a truly unacceptable level. If you don't recognize the complexity of the situation that Fuente is in after retaining Bud as DC, then you are either willfully ignoring or vastly oversimplifying things. It was literally less than a year ago that Fuente was being mentioned at the top of the list for many high profile jobs and fans were freaking out about him leaving for Florida State or Oklahoma. One 6-7 season later and everyone is ready to fire him? If we can't exhibit any more patience, understanding, or loyalty than that, our football program deserves Charlie Weis as the next head coach.
Wow so we weren't the worst defense in the ACC. Literally surprising
The defense has been awful. Bud Foster has a pretty good track record though. The weak links in the defense are coached by new guys brought in while Fuente has been head man. I imagine Foster had some say on their hires (hopefully) but Fuente likely gets to make the final decision there.
But none of that is really the point. Fuente literally told Bud that his defense wouldn't have to carry the team anymore because there would finally be an offense in Blacksburg. Where the hell is that offense? Or any proof of its impending arrival? We all knew that this would likely be the worst defense in Bud's history but Fuente was so confident three years ago that if our defense had a bad year the offense would be good enough to keep the ship upright. Welp! That didn't work. And I'm fine with blaming some losses on the defense but being unable to score more than 24 points on a single conference opponent is a damn failure for someone touted as an offensive guru. That's why I emphasize that point.
Yes, the defense was awful. But we knew it would be and we hired an "offensive coach" three years ago to make sure that when our defense did struggle we'd still be okay. Our offense hasn't been any good, particularly running the ball. That's a serious problem for a guy hired to make it go.
And I'm not on the "fire Fuente now" band wagon. I'm on the "If we don't see significant changes and the 2019 team doesn't win 10 games Fuente should be shown the door" band wagon. It's a much smaller wagon, but there's room to hop on board.
Before someone uses this against you to deny your point, we did score more than 24 on two conference opponents: UVA and Duke. However, your point still stands because that is just the third time in the last two seasons (3/16 ACC games) that we managed to score more than 24 in a conference game, and we aren't in the SEC west playing blue-chip laden defenses week in and week out. We are playing against some of the worst P5 rosters in the country.
Thanks Chris! Good looking out.
Point still stands - we've been pretty underwhelming against bad defenses
This is what kills me. Not only have the results been bad to mediocre, but they've come against bad to mediocre competition. The beamer squads of the aughts would have feasted on matchups like this. Not because of superior scheme or coaching, but because they had superior talent. This is also why I can't agree yet that recruiting has improved despite whatever minor bump shows in 247's average recruit rating.
Those same teams that lost to FCS JMU? 38-7 to 7 win Pitt? 4 win Syracuse? 8 win LOLUVA, BC, WVU all in one season?
Our rear view mirror of past losses seems to have some OM tint to it.
Eh... the '02 season definitely soured and caused Bud to tweak his defense. But that's one season. And the JMU loss was actually BSU beating tech two weeks in a row. Not a shining moment for sure, but def not ODU. My rear view is pretty clear and tint free I assure you. I can be super critical of those teams as well for beating up on charmin-soft #GOACC squads. But those VT teams IMO had plenty of talent and it's supposedly Fuente's job to improve on that acquisition of talent. I'm just not convinced he's doing it yet.
And that's the other thing I notice is that folks aren't comparing Fuente's success to Beamer's high water mark during the aughts, they're drawing comparisons to Beamer's final three years when the program was in a tailspin. I think that's setting the bar too low.
Edit: And don't forget that Pitt squad had Larry Fitzgerald and Rod Rutherford... and that WVU squad was a DickRod coached team on the precipice of Pat White and Steve Slaton read option spread greatness. We barely beat them the following year with one of the greatest VT squads ever fielded.
Correct because that's the starting point Fuente had. He didn't start with the top Beamer teams he started with among the worst.
Regardless, that's setting the bar too low IMO.
Could you link to where Fuente said that? Everyone quotes that but no one can point to where and when he said it.
Sourced
So it was a joke between Fuente and Foster. So not some public statement about how his offense was going to take priority or what shape it would be? Context adds a lot there, thanks Jugs.
Joke or not, private or public doesn't matter. Fuente said it to Foster. And he hasn't delivered.
I still don't think your post warrants a DV though so I'm gonna even you out
It's my downvote stalker no biggie but thanks.
As to the point you don't think a joke has more context than saying something like that at a press conference has widely differing meanings?
Foster also insinuated a promise in that quote that he would maintain a perfect defense. So they both damn liars. \s
Its pretty nuts that we have so many people taking this throwaway comment said in a joking manner between Fuente and Foster and turning it around and using it as this trump card to rail against him.
And I don't mean that in a good way. Its like people forgot that the national pundits lauded the VT job as being so good primarily because this kind of behavior didn't exist here. And yet we seem to be going out of our way to crap all over that good reputation.
Well then the national pundits just weren't paying attention, because we've never NOT done this for an offensive coach, to my knowledge. Along with all other fanbases in football.
Look what happened when LeBron James joked about compiling championships at Miami (at a pep rally).
The comment is damming. That's why people point to it. I think it's pretty clear Fuente brought the wrong co-oc with him from Memphis. People are justifiably upset that after three years our offense is ranked 40 spots lower than Memphis in s&p+ offense rankings.
Everyone feels cheated. They expected (fair or not) that Fuente would bring that offense with him to Blacksburg. Instead he left it in Memphis. We like to think of VT as a cut above Memphis. We should have more resources and better recruiting (even in the late Beamer years) and therefore the talent should be there to produce a better offense than we've seen. Now I'm not expecting a top 10 offense in year three but I'd like to at least see us in the top 30 or so. Fuente/Cornelson just haven't shown much evidence that we're heading there.
But to me, really the biggest concern is that our running game hasn't shown any progress in three years. And supposedly it's been a point of emphasis for the coaches. That's not comforting to me.
But like I've been saying all along I'm on board with giving Fuente one more year to prove the doubters (myself included) wrong. If our offense doesn't take a significant step forward and this team doesn't win 10 games against possibly the softest schedule we could hope for then we really need to stop lying to ourselves and admit that we're not seeing or getting the results we expect at VT.
VT hasn't had a competent offense in a decade or more. We've been starving for one and three years ago we were promised one. To date we've been let down. If things don't change drastically next year how much longer can we realistically be convinced to wait?
I actually felt like, from a coaching perspective, we maximized our running game pretty well this year. The talent is still limiting and that has definitely been a focus on the trail. Last year, the big downfall was the inability of the backs to make one guy miss. That felt dramatically improved this year. Peoples also improved catching out of the backfield. It isn't where we want it, but I was encouraged by the progress. Perhaps the stats would show I'm wrong, I'm going solely on eye test.
The backs were consistently failing to make a guy miss, there is no doubt about that. However, we have also been horrid in yards before contact. In at least one of the last 3 season we were dead last in the P5. There are multiple considerations to make with that kind statistic, but usually that stat does not reflect on well on your OL's ability to create any sort of downfield push or open proper running lanes. Our run blocking has been upright and passive for the most part the last few seasons and we have been very unreliable on traditional short yardage running plays as a result. We rely heavily on misdirection, rarely on winning at the LOS with good leverage and beating the man across from you.
Your expectations are so far beyond realistic that I'm confident you wouldn't be satisfied with any coach short of Nick Saban or Urban Meyer in Blacksburg.
Actually even then you might have wanted to fire Saban after year 4 when Alabama went 10-3 (after all, they were trending down fast after going 14-0 in year 3!).
Our talent level is so low that we lost to ODU this season. We lose our best player and face uncertain prospects of the defense becoming even an average unit, and somehow the expectation is to boat race the Coastal and push Clemson to the limit or it's time for Fuente to go. I'm honestly at a loss for how anyone's expectations got so high.
Straight up we didn't lose to ODU because of lack of talent... We have the 5th most talented roster in the ACC per recruiting rankings. If you want to argue that is not right by a few spots that's fine, I don't care to have that argument but I will cede it, but we were more talented than every Coastal team recruiting-wise except for Miami and UNC who was ranked 29th and we were ranked 31st.
There is no way to pretend like we have a roster that should have lost to ODU, no matter how young or inexperienced. The offense did NOT execute in the first half against a bad G5 team, 14 points with 7 coming off one 90 yard run play that turned out to be a giant outlier for our entire season. In the second half, the defense completely fell apart. That was bad coaching, preparation, motivation, and execution on both sides of the ball. Some players were probably properly motivated (I don't want to be hyperbolic), but the body language of the majority of the squad was meh at best.
I don't think it was talent, but rather the lack of experience. Are you really judging the team on it's body language? They were stunned. You should have seen MY body language! It wasn't for lack of motivation that I was curled up on the floor. They were punched in the mouth. And the ODU quarterback had the game of his life. Some days are just like that. Shouldn't have been, but was.
It's not whether you get knocked down, it's whether you get back up. And this team did that by beating UVa and earning bowl eligibility.
I think most of us agree that we'll learn a lot about the team next year, but I'm not looking forward to an off-season full of hyperbole in this forum. Our expectations are high, but possibly a bit misguided. I expect a lot more "sky is falling" over the next eight months
This quote sums up the season much better than most of the analysis offered here:
Experience and leadership does matter in football, and our team just didn't have a sufficient amount of that this year.
Could a different coach have squeezed another win out of this crew? Maybe. But that coach probably doesn't have the potential of a Fuente. We'll know a lot more about this in a year or two.
I've evolved into a huge believer on how much leadership affects the way a team plays. Look no further than a Sam Rogers or more recently a Benny Snell ("Snell Yeah!") from Kentucky. I really think Dax will become that vocal leader that we need next year to bring the best out of everyone around him.
Snell has some serious charisma, in addition to some serious talent.
He was their glue. You could tell everyone on that team liked being around him. That's exactly what you need is someone who can lead by example in how they ball and how they act.
My whole post was about how we most certainly did not lose to ODU because of lack of talent. That was my only point. We lost for a litany of other reasons, but we were substantially more talented than that team and several others we took L's from as well.
If you had left it at that, I'd have agreed with you. But then you said:
This part I disagree with. Experience and leadership do make a difference. The implication is that it's all on the coaching, because there was plenty of talent there. This part is debatable, and far from a given. Experience is a huge factor in college football, and it was pretty clear that our team did not have enough of that.
I think we'll see a big difference next year. Same raw talent, more experience.
I'm not saying experience doesn't matter. I am saying experience and youth are not excuses to lose to a team as bad as ODU.
Their quarterback had the game of his life.
Our team was struggling with basic football because of the sum total of the inexperience on the field. Yes, this shouldn't happen, but we had talented guys who didn't quite grasp their roles out there and were lucky not to get caught out of position. A little misdirection on one play and they're looking confused for the next three downs.
Most of ODUs players wouldn't even be given the opportunity to walk on at Tech. Even if we were starting all freshman, the talent discrepancy alone at VT should beat ODU 10/10 times. The experience piece is a cop out. It's not these kids first time playing football. They were good enough to win at Doak, and demolish W&M. They should absolutely beat Old Dominion.
I agree that VT should have won, if talent were the only factor. It isn't.
So why are YOU saying they lost that game, specifically? And why does my comment have a negative vote?
And experience isn't the only other variable that go into the game. The team was under-prepared - could be motivation, could be lack of film study, emotionally not ready, could be a litany of other things. There were not adequate in-game adjustments made schematically on both the offensive and especially defensive side of the ball. Whatever the cause of the loss, it's inexcusable. The coaches have a roster with enough talent to win that game every time. Even the youngest guys on the team have thousands of hours invested in learning and playing the game. They didn't just forget how to play. Inexperience wasn't it. In most sports, losses to teams with drastically inferior talent typically fall on the coaches and lack of preparedness. The team should be ready to play against ODU the same way they were at FSU.
And while I greatly disagree with your past posts about experience being the key to, or a justification of the ODU loss, I didn't DV you, so I can't answer that.
If the team hadn't struggled in every game, I might agree with you.
This wasn't a one-off lapse in preparation, but an entire season of struggling with basic football. Everywhere you looked there was a mental mistake happening, or a guy out of position, or a guy missing a tackle. So I don't think it was a lack of preparation for that specific game.
Those players don't have thousands of hours at the college level. There were too many players who were in their first season of college football, which compounds mistakes.
If you want to blame the coaches, and I know you do, go ahead. But you really can't discount the inexperience as if it didn't make the difference in that game.
A. Saying most of the guys at ODU wouldn't even be given the opportunity to walk on at Tech is incorrect. A lot of them probably were.
B. Please tell me how you know they were underprepared for that game. Take me through the prep you know they did and didn't have for that game and tell me what was lacking. I get they played like crap. I get they struggled tackling. I get our young DBs couldn't cover perfectly thrown fades to bigger receivers. But i'd like to hear what you know they didn't do leading up to the game to prepare properly.
LOL I stopped reading at this point. You can't convince me that ODU has more talent than VT. VT lost to ODU for various reasons but talent was not one of them.
You might think my expectations are unrealistic but if you look at our schedule you'll find that half of the coaches in the ACC would easily win 8 games at minimum. At VT the expectation is to contend for the conference title and occasionally reach the playoff. If our current staff can't get 10 wins out of the 2019 gift basket they have then do you really believe they'll be able to contend for ACC titles?
I didn't say we had less talent than ODU but a lack of talent created a situation where losing to ODU was a possibility. If we had the talent of the 2008 VT team, we could slog out an ugly win like the 24-7 game against Ferrum. However as I've pointed out with how few potential NFL players are on our team right now, our talent level was nowhere close to where many seem to think. A bad game, even against one of the worst G5 teams, essentially guaranteed a loss.
FFS.
VPIHokieME posted:
"But like I've been saying all along I'm on board with giving Fuente one more year to prove the doubters (myself included) wrong. If our offense doesn't take a significant step forward and this team doesn't win 10 games against possibly the softest schedule we could hope for then we really need to stop lying to ourselves and admit that we're not seeing or getting the results we expect at VT."
At no point in his post did he say what you said of his expectations:
"somehow the expectation is to boat race the Coastal and push Clemson to the limit or it's time for Fuente to go."
This type of response is unproductive and disingenuous. There is a middle ground between "Everything is fine, we're on the right track" and "Fuente is the worst. If he doesn't win it all next year then fire them all!" You do not need to characterize someone as having the latter opinion just because they disagree with you.
I am disappointed because it seems as though posters cannot express reasonable concerns without some other posters reacting as though those who express their concerns are crackpots screaming on a street corner to fire Fuente. People are allowed to have concerns, especially after a sub-par season. There is much to discuss. I personally am concerned that passive run blocking isn't going to get it done at this level. I am concerned that too much of the offense relies on perfect execution on offense combined with the hope that someone on the opposing defense makes a mistake (I hate influence blocks, especially if you are never going to counter the defense ignoring the influence blocker). I want the offensive coaching staff to scheme for their players to be successful, not just hope that they "make a man miss". I am very concerned about the DT situation and free-hitters being coached to be out of position. I am concerned about whatever is going on with Bud. Like I said, there is much to discuss and good discussions to be had. But, at no point am I calling for Fuente's head if next season isn't perfect.
So, can we have these discussions without acting like there are only two extreme sides to the discussion?
(end rant)
PREACH! If you just want to vent, go to somewhere else. TKP should be about productive discussions.
My comment was largely based on this post from another thread. VPIHokieME outlines his opinion that the entire Coastal is awful and that VT should win all of those games with only mildly competent coaching. Honestly I don't think it's a mischaracterization to interpret that as "we should boat race the Coastal."
In many, many posts I have outlined my concerns with the coaching and future of the program so it's not that I'm against reasonable concerns. I will say I try to provide object data and stats to support my statements as much as possible, but it gets frustrating as the growing mob opposed to Fuente rarely advances past the argument of "year X should means Z wins." VT has a solid reputation but we weren't an elite or even very good program by the end of Beamer's tenure. Our coaches aren't infallible but they aren't miracle workers either and I expected more careful consideration and analysis of the circumstances from fans of a program that prides itself on loyalty and integrity.
You'd think from the commentary here that Fuente inherited a powerhouse. He didn't.
He inherited a good program with a lot of potential, but it's not a three-year rebuild, and never was.
I would say he inherited a good program that had seriously regressed over the previous 4 years.
Thinking about the 2019 schedule . . .
Worst case scenario, we should go 3-1 in non-conference games. If we don't beat the two FCS schools and ODU, then we have some issues. Notre Dame is a toss-up.
In conference, we should be able to beat UVA, Duke, UNC, Wake, and GT. With GT having to rebuild, and no more head games to play there, it's time for the good Tech to win again. I'll leave Miami, BC, and Pitt as toss-ups.
Therefore, I'm seeing at least 8 wins next year. Those are the teams that we should beat.
π€
Notre Dame is not a toss up. There is literally no objective measure by which you can say that game is anything but an expected loss. Luckily for us, sports are funny in that sometimes upsets happen.
It really depresses me to see such poor and impactless (think in contrast to how our defense used to hit people) play. Our offense had quite a few good run plays, but overall it felt like we were barely putting it together out there. Alot of our success seemed to come from 50/50 balls in crucial moments. I just want to say while i am not proud of this season, our team went through alot and I truly think we grew. I'm not an apologist nor do I think our staff is flawless, but lets have some faith that after all the defensive attrition and overall turmoil we have a productive offseason, win the coastal, and get back to what we all love. Hard hitting, terrifying defense. And an offense that matches the expectations it came with. Alot of youth out there and it's a long offseason, lets get it next year.
the D hit hard today. Cincy O was on the ground all game long. The D just isn't talented enough to make enough plays 1-on-1 to get the sacks and hits behind the line and to lock down the receivers that we're accustomed to seeing.
Hit hard??? Seriously...??
Their QB ran thru 4 arm tackles to convert a 3rd and 8 or 9 in the 4th quarter.
This defense is a different level of soft.
there was several injury timeouts for Cincy players, weren't there? The backup QB, which was playing due to injury, ran through the defenders because they were arm tackles (i.e., not in position). They hit hard when they were in position (granted the D was way less often in position than we've been accustomed to with Bud's D).
Eh Ashby Dax and Floyd showed some punch but our defense is far from scary. Part of being in position is getting through the man blocking you.
And they reviewed for targeting a call simply because it was a solid, but legal, hit.
It's one play, but look at Mihota on the last TD we gave up. He was completely run over.
I hope QP emerges to play at a level close to the hype. Otherwise we will remain in the neighborhood of mediocrity.
We're not even in that neighborhood.
6-7 seems like the perfect definition of mediocre
So I guess it's totally subjective. My perspective: anything record below .500 is less than mediocre. To achieve mediocrity, it has to at least be at .500. 7-6 & 8-6 are also in my definition of mediocrity.
It's absolutely subjective. I'm thinking if you ask a random cfb fan what mediocre is anywhere from 5-8 wins is probably their answer. But you're also right, subjective and depends on expectations. For example, UVA beating VT would be a once in a lifetime season for many of their fans and future graduates.
I particularly like your last example. Only edit I would make is that "it's a NEVER in their lifetime experience."
Having watched the Belk Bowl and the Military Bowl this year, I wouldn't get too smug about all that.
VT has some serious work to do before next season.
having watched the commonwealth cup, I say I'll wrap myself up in a Smuggie and enjoy it
Having watched the commonwealth cup, I realize that we were one play away from losing it.
We won that one through sheer determination. While I enjoyed it, "smug" doesn't come close to describing how I feel.
My end of the season thoughts are:
1) Dang that was about as bad of 5 month stretch of Hokie football as I can remember.
2) I'm still unclear on what Fuente is trying to do with this football program.
3) I recognize that all of the people involved in VT football love it as much or more than I do. Therefore it is really stupid for me to be too emotionally engaged for a long period of time.
4) Its better to be a Hokie enduring the worst season in 30 years than a Hoo enjoying its best season in 10?, 15? years and still not be very far apart.
5) It will be no time before I jump back on the hype train and find myself anxiously waiting for the 2019 football season!
2 is huge, I don't know what the vision for this team is. Some have said we are being modeled after TCU. God I hope not.
In regards to four, I hate the Hoos as much as the next Hokie, but when you're routinely bad, you appreciate the highs so much more. This program got spoiled, and I don't think we appreciated how good we had it and how bad it could get. This stings like hell.
Fuente has been able to articulate his vision to this class of recruits so well that some have cited it in their commitment interviews, for what it's worth. What it is or if it's good I couldn't say, but there is one.
Final thoughts for end of the season:
Nothing more. No less. Any attempt to put a positive spin on it is just an effort to polish & shine shit. Bottom line. Oh, actually there is one positive thing. It's finally fucking over.
Quit crying
I ain't crying. I'm actually pretty apathetic at this point (it's possible I may have been longer than that, but whatever). I'm really hoping (I don't know about expecting) a better season next year. I think the mentality should be (& in this order): prepare for (anticipate) the worst, & hope (work + fight) for the best. That's how I see there being lesser of letdowns. It kind of covers all the bases.
Think about it: Batman's contingency plans have contingency plans. That's one of the main reasons he ALWAYS wins. Our program needs to get to that point (at least at this stage). Then we'll see more & better success.
I'm not sure about that. in every game thread Tech could be up by 30 and you would find something to complain about
So you're just narrowing it down to what I say in game threads?? Ok. And what, pray tell, is wrong or incorrect about criticizing/pointing out things that the team does that are wrong (even if/when they're up by 30)?? Better question: when was the last game the team was up by 30??? Go ahead... Btw, I'm glad you're still alive.
Hang on I'm gonna get the pudding
how can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?
Pink Floyd?
No it's Joy Division. /s
We expected nothing less from you than a shit gif.
Damnnnnnnnnπ²π²
I gave a more thoughtful explanation in my response to APrimus. That might be more palatable for you. But still, leg.
Not sure what's youth or coaching
Not sure whether I should have tempered expectations due to the offseason or not
Not sure whether some of the losses were because of the defense or offense
Not sure if the season was good or bad
Not sure what to expect next year
Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
Personally I think this season ended on a good series of notes and am very excited for next year. Defense took a lot of necessary steps and we've got a trio of potential starters at QB next year.
Winning seasons streak doesn't mean anything to me, personally. Next thing that matters to me now is Week 1 of 2019.
Life's too short and all that jazz. Have a safe end to the holidays, everyone!
Next year I think we'll see a better offense for sure. The defense is tbd. It's an unpopular opinion but I'm ready for Josh Jackson
I feel most skeptical if JJ is taking snaps next season & right behind him Willis as 2nd most skeptical.
Unless Fuente pulls a rabbit out of a hat, we won't have a good enough QB to see a dramatic uptick in offensive production. Ryan Willis isn't it, and before you say you're ready for Josh Jackson again, please take a minute to revisit the second half of his 2017 season. (Last 7 games: 184 ypg, 54.3 cmp%, 7 TDs, 5 INTs)
Presumably, he shouldn't have to pull a rabbit out of a hat.
There will be a lot of talent on next year's offense, and it won't be the first time those players are collectively seeing the field.
I would expect to see dividends just from having been in Fuente's system for a year, and having some field experience.
That said, this is a program rebuild, and will take time to get where we want to be.
I sort of agree here, but I'm not sure 100%
Josh is what he is, but he played the second half of the year with a serious shoulder issue and a broken bone in his foot. This affected everything including barely practicing in the 1st years a starter. I'm not sure I think it's fair to refer to those stats for a hurt redshirt freshman and say that's it. Before anyone says why don't we have more talent here remember we had to recruit Jerod so we didn't have to start Josh as a true freshman or Motley who we should have moved to safety (great HS athlete).
Ryan has the physical skills to be much better than this year if he puts the work in - he needs to 100% go after this as he could be very good. Why don't you think this can be done? Lots of college QB's make major production jumps from year 1 to year 2. It isn't a guarantee, but his arm talent is top 20% at least and he is a good runner when he makes the right play.
Also, we will have at least 3 QB's on the roster capable of winning games. This is a better feeling than 1 and nobody behind that person as this was the issue for many years.
I mainly think this is an issue for how much 1 of these kids wants to be really good.
I'm going to just throw this out there.. and being a faithful Hokie since the early 80's, and faithful to the bitter end.. it pains me to even bring this up. Also, apologies if this has been touched on already, My question to those in the forum who know way better than I (French, Joe etc.) Is Bud really in control of the defense? ..and I mean that primarily on an administrative coaching level I mean, seriously, in years past, when Bud had his own people installed in assistant positions, it didn't seem to matter how green or how raw the players were, they made it work. I'm thinking Torrian Gray as a case in point, but others as well. Is it even remotely possible that Fuente is pulling all the strings both offensively and defensively? Is it possible that Bud has just become a figurehead.. a prop for recruiting purposes and these new faces brought in are really running the show? I'm confused by what I see on the field and the only possibilities in my mind are that the game has passed Bud by, which I can't imagine... or he just isn't in control of the defense anymore. We've always lived by the mantra "In Bud We Trust".. but how can we trust someone who doesn't seem to be present? Seriously, someone tell me, how much pull does Bud have in the hiring of assistants? How much power does he have in overriding the decisions of those assistants? How hands on is he allowed to be and who do the assistants ultimately answer to? Bottom line, yes, I am venting and perhaps all of this is just drunken BS... but I really do have these concerns, this defense is without question the worst I have ever seen for a Hokie team.. they can't stop the run, they can't stop the pass, they can't tackle.. loads of talent, but who is wielding it?? and again, I have been watching Tech football for the last 30 years (pre-Beamer) What is the answer?
I've heard Bud has been going through some off-the-field stuff this season
Ding ding ding
I can third this ding.
I've heard of something afoot but have no idea what the scenario is.
Back to the point of the question, I think there may be some issues with the assistants. If Bud has his choice then one would think the engine would keep going even if there were some issues on going on off the field for Foster. If I recall correctly someone asked an open ended question what changes would one make if you were the HC, and Fench's response was to get rid of Nix. That may or may not be related, but at least one person with some smarts around here thinks we need to look at the staff on defense.
I have too from some #sauces and I really hope it's not true.
The really bad rumors from 247?
Are these behind a pay wall? If not, what's the rumor?
It's not good. I'm not gonna be the one to put it out there but from very reliable #sauces it's not good.
Can we categorize the not-goodness? Is Bud going to federal prison for the rest of his life or is he going through personal stuff?
Very personal stuff, but not career ending stuff.
This. Not criminal or anything like that. Personal things that are bound to take a toll on a person and can very easily not have your full attention in football.
Sooooo..... (hopefully not) cancer?
No
well thats good at the very least.
I'm not so sure of that.
Yeah I'm with ya, I was just addressing his prison comment, that's all. I'm trying to stay as vague as possible because everything is unsubstantiated rumor at this point, but if we're all hearing the same rumor...
Hmm. Sounds like you folks have some shared knowledge.
As long as Bud Foster doesn't become Joe Paterno then I'm content to let his private stuff be his private stuff.
Definitely not that. The way I see it is that this is private, but also the worst kept secret in Blacksburg.
That said, I'm not putting it in writing online because it may work itself out in the end. If it does, then good...if it doesn't, we'll all know why in due time. I respect and love Bud too much to air rumors about him out online, especially stuff I've only heard secondhand.
TL;DR
Don't freak out, just some private stuff.
Well f*ck. Now you've got me all anticipating the absolute worst so that it won't come as heavy a shock to me. I need another damn drink. F*ck.
Idk about off the field wise but defense wise there were three guys back with experience. One of them wasn't even a full time starter last year, and another played 70 pounds heavier at a different position after tearing his ACL. Ricky Walker was the only full time starter back that stayed healthy all year. Bud will be fine, the defense will be fine it just won't happen overnight
Ricky was healthy half the year. Had foot injury the whole first half of season.
Y'all can take knee jerk reactions all you want, Bud Foster doesn't just forget how to coach.
I'm actually pretty concerned he won't be back next year, I'm starting to run out of answers on why he should stay.
Well..
I may have been knee-jerk reacting too..I didnt realize our offense was ranked 48th in S&P+. The potential is there...
If our defense doesnt fall off a cliff our record would have probably looked more like 8-5, 9-4ish
Yes, and I'd argue it would be much better than that. We probably take care of ODU,BC, and Miami, and maybe even ND. We go from 6-6 to 10-2 and maybe better since we would be rolling w momentum. We go from the shittiest season in 25 years to another ACCCG appearance and flirting with the CFP (we can dream, right?)
The one negative that I take from this season is whatever the hell our running game is. I can't seem to find any consistency or logic from the coaching staff. Sure we're not running with David Wilson back there, but McClease was running almost 8 ypc before Fuente benched him for missing a block on a passing down. I get that blocking is important, but is that really THE most important thing Fuente wants out of a running back? How much passing do you really need when you're rushing the ball at 8 ypc? Why not just continue a ground game until the defense adjusts to the run more? I'm no football whiz and maybe it's not this easy but I fail to see any reason to bench the best thing going for the offense.
This kind of shit comes back to bite us in the ass later too, which is what makes me more mad. What kind of blocker is he expecting out of Chris Tyree at 5'9 170? It's so easy to see how Penn State recuits against us, just look at the numbers. Do you want to go to Virginia Tech and run 10 times a game or do you want to come to Penn State where we'll give you the ball
20+precisely 17.25 times per game? The decisions that Fuente and his offensive staff have bewildered me all season long. They harm the rest of the team by forcing even more pressure on our backup quarterback to carry the team on his back when he obviously doesn't have the talent to do so. We can't wait around until the next Tyrod or Jerod comes to do all the work for our offense. Fuente needs to figure out how to use runningbacks in his offense or else he will never be successful.According to a few people at the game McClease was seen by the trainers on the sideline so maybe he wasn't pulled.
Also I just looked at four of the bigger games PSU had this season. Miles sanders never rushed more than 17 times in a game and his low was 12.
That would make more sense, but this isn't the only game where something like this happens. The runningback rotation always just seemed random and poorly timed.
It doesn't really say much to just pick out the four biggest games Penn State had for this issue. Penn State lost in three of those games so it makes sense that they were passing more. The endgame is that at the end of the year Sanders had over 200 rushes for 1200 yards and Peoples had 150 for 750 yards, even though they had a similar YPC. Way too easy to just point this out and tell a 17 year old where he's more likely to succeed.
Went back and looked at every game he rushed 20 or more times twice. He has a game with 7 rushes as his low and his average is around 15. So not exactly what you claimed.
Peoples had one 20 rush and one 19 rush game. So yes while PSU's top back got more average carries per game it's not like Franklin is riding that horse alone. In fact a lot of games the QB had more rushes and almost as many yards.
I'm not sure exactly what you're arguing. Sanders has 60 more rushes on the season. If you'd rather look at it per game, Peoples has 5 games with 10 or fewer rushes, 6 if you include the bowl game. Sanders has one game of 7 rushes, then the next lowest is 14 rushes. To me it looks exactly how I claim, which is that we consistently don't give our runningbacks the opportunity to play their game.
This, this is what I'm taking issue with. That PSU/Franklin are some RB factory and all they do is hand the ball off to them. It's just a false narrative.
You're nitpicking. It wasn't a comment on Penn State's offense, it was a comment on ours. I don't really watch their games, I don't know what they're doing other than through stats. I do watch ours though, and there's nothing to show that we can let a runningback succeed in our offense. Penn State might not be the RBU that they claim, but we're sure as shit not, and that's what I'm unhappy about.
Eh, Moorhead is gone and McSorely is gone. They have talent but their offensive strategy will be changing soon, and I don't necessarily think it will be for the better. PSU may have peaked under Franklin already.
Interesting perspective. The "one" issue you have is the VT rushing offense? You watched a different team than me, and bless you for that! You probably have less gray hair
Aha believe me I watched the same defense and everything else this year, I meant the one issue I have that I haven't seen beaten into the ground yet. I'm not smart enough at football to really contribute to how to fix the rest of our problems.
It appears that McClease was injured from what I've read. That said, Fuente has shown what I consider to be an alarming propensity to bench good players on the Offense for single mistakes. If a player makes constant mistakes and is costing us the game, by all means give someone else a shot. Meanwhile on the D, players are allowed perhaps too much leeway (see ODU, and, ahem, we may hear more about that game and its fallout this offseason over precisely this).
I agree that Fuente need to find a balance between getting the best athletes on the field and his expectation of perfect execution. Right now it seems a bit out of whack.
I am of the opinion that the run game issues were partly due to the fact that Steven Peoples didn't get enough carries. The guy should have and an All ACC season.
Even if Peoples didn't play at an all-ACC level, we knew from the start that Willis wouldn't. It seems like a simple equation to run more when your starting QB goes down for the season. When Peoples is getting 7 YPC against Notre Dame, why the hell would you make Willis throw 52 times?
Bud Foster doesnt just forget how to coach or scheme. There was just way too much youth and attrition for him to put a quality product on the field. I think we took our lumps this year but next year (with the JUCO DTs to make up for recruiting misses), we should see a pretty good improvement and a pretty solid defense the year after. I do wonder if the new coaches are going to be good enough to live up to the Bud standard. I kind of wish he would reach out to former players to be on the staff somehow. I think that would help with recruiting and also get people that understand the scheme to help out the new coaches.
On offense, after seeing Willis a few games, I see why Josh was starting. Willis is a better passer than Josh was BUT he couldnt run the option well at all. Considering the whole offense is predicated on being able to run the option, I can understand why our offensive output wasn't nearly as good as many of us expected. I think Josh or Willis starting next year will be fine. I'm hoping a year and off-season under his belt could make Willis really dangerous next year. The year after that, I really hope that QP lives up to the hype. If he does, that 2020 year could be really really special.
I agree. VT will have more than one decent option at QB next year.
I'm not sure we'll see much of an improvement on defense next year. It's not a coaching issue IMO, it's a youth issue. I just think it takes 2+ years for most of our 3 star recruits to become effective (much less difference makers) in Foster's scheme (note - this statement is 100% subjective/anecdotal, and if someone can prove I'm wrong, I'm willing to change this opinion).
Regarding offense - I think we'll see an open QB competition next year. Willis had his moments, both good and bad, and if he's ready to be the starter, then I have no doubt that Fuente will start him.
At a glance I think there is some truth to what you are saying in that our 3 star guys that have been successful on defense usually didn't start until they were r-so, jr, r-jr. or even seniors.
I remember making a lot of preseason comparisons to reloading from our NFL losses after 2007 which was very similar to how many starters we lost after the 2017 season. However, many of those lower rated guys who replaced them in 2008 had been in the programs for many years. LB's Brett Warren and Purnell Sturdivant were seniors, CB Stephan Virgil was a Jr(rJr?) I believe. I can't remember how old DT Cordarrow Thompson was but I remember him being in the program a few years. We had a few sophomores step in, but they were big talent, future NFL guys like Jason Worilds and Kam Chancellor. This year we had multiple first and second year players on each level of the defense by the end of the season. In hindsight I believe my comparison to 2008 was way off base because of the discrepancy in experience in the system and youth.
Agreed. I'd be curious to compare 2017 defense to the the 2010 defense. That's the second worst defense I can remember Foster fielding. If I recall, our secondary was super young, getting torched every week, but they were athletic enough to force turnovers, and give a talented (albeit poorly utilized) offense a chance to score.
Yep, we had some similar issues in 2010, but a much less extreme version. Our secondary was good, but we had little pass rush and struggled against the run really badly in several games. Lack of pass rush can make a secondary full of NFL players look mediocre, much less an already young and inexperienced bunch.
Did this season disappoint me? Absolutely. But after the loss of so many players to injury, the draft, etc., it was still heartening to see the guys playing hard, if not well. I truly think getting so many young players all this experience this year led to some serious growing pains, but will pay off big time next year. I am going to say it right now, I'm expecting at least a 9-win season next year, and to back it up, I just dropped another $50 on the Hokie Club.
Go Hokies!
This line reminded me of the signs at College Gameday that say, "I just want both teams to have fun"
Thanks for this write up Chris - I think you did a really good job of summarizing the season and what an emotional roller coaster it's been, while providing level-headed, realistic perspective.
I think Jollyman summarized it really well above:
There were so many variables at play this year - expected attrition, unexpected attrition, last minute coaching changes, injuries - it's tough to isolate the problem(s). It's a fascinating puzzle to dissect. At this point, I can say I have faith, but limited confidence, in our current staff.
I think that's the right attitude, and sums up the way I feel about it as well.
I do admit to getting fairly irritated at those who pick out one factor (coaching) and make the claim that it's clearly the only factor, and that it's impossible that the team will improve next year.
It seems to me that Fuente knows this is a long-term process, and he seems to be confident that we're still working towards the plan.
Yep, so 2018 VT Football is summed up as:
I hope Hokie Nation pivots to basketball,..., and quickly. Both the men's and women's teams are playing great right now. Let's enjoy that and the offseason will seem a LOT shorter.
What if Bud says its not fun anymore or more like "Fuck it"?!! Where is Tech then? Not that I think it would happen but wow if it did.
He may very well think that.
Then will get Stinbergerspring as DC. /s
Well Stiney sure did know how to slow down an offense.
I wish I could just go ahead and give you a hundred legs for this post.
One leg for every yard gained in an average game
It'll be interesting to see how this off season plays out based on what people are saying on other sites. Bud needs to be the one to disclose his personal business, not others. I am grateful for his dedication to Va Tech.
I see a lot of people comparing our 2012-2015 seasons to this season. On the surface, it looks fair given how three of those four seasons we went 7-6, but I think they were very different, especially 2014 and 2015.
The only game I can think of from 2014 and 2015 where we never had a shot was the 2014 Miami game. In 2015, we easily could have been 9-3 or even 10-2 with how close some of those games were. I think Frank would have had similar success in 2016 that Fuente had. I think we would have lost the Pitt game, but I also think we would have won the Georgia Tech game.
Fast forward two years later, and there were multiple games this season where we never had a shot. The defense was horrendous, and I'm not sure Bud is on the same page as his secondary coaches. The offense couldn't sustain drives consistently or hit enough big plays despite having a solid receiving corps and the best run game we've had since JC Coleman turned it on at the end of 2014. For a coach who was hired to bring an offensive mindset to the table, I am not impressed whatsoever. During the Stinespring days, it just seemed like we couldn't move the ball whatsoever at times. If a team scored late on us but gave us enough time to drive the ball, I kind of just figured we wouldn't. My concern now isn't that we can't move the ball or pick up yardage because we get first downs and gain more yards than we did in the Stinespring era. My concern is that I feel like we're leaving too many points on the field because of questionable play calls on individual plays. That and we make seemingly no good adjustments at halftime. We drive the ball to the 30 yard line, pick up 5 yards on first down, launch a fade on 2nd down, and suddenly we're in 3rd and 5, and the defense knows we're going to pass. Then, when they get the stop, we trot out a kicker who struggled this season to say the least. One thing Stinespring did well was if something was working, he kept doing it. This staff adds unnecessary wrinkles for no reason at all. And I am in no way saying we need Stinespring back. I'm just saying that if even he could make something work and keep doing it, these "offensive geniuses" should be too.
I'm not in full panic mode yet. I don't want Fuente fired. I want Corn fired, and I want Fuente to take a serious look at what's happening on the defensive side of the ball. If Bud goes but Mitchell and Nix stay, then we have a major problem.
Disclaimer: I typed all of that on my phone and didn't bother to check for typos. I apologize in advance if/when you come across an error.
Motley would have been our starting QB if CFB had stayed another year... and we almost certainly would not have had similar success
I think I addressed that. I'm certain we would have lost the Pitt game with Motley. We had three receivers go over 100 yards that day and still barely won that game. I'm also pretty certain that we would have beaten Georgia Tech though. That was not one of Paul Johnson's better teams. That would have been one of Frank's better teams, and he only lost to CPJ twice. Frank simply had his number in my opinion. I don't see any other games that we won where we would have lost with Motley at QB. Keep in mind, Motley had some very good performances in 2015.
I'm guessing you were lucky enough to miss the 2008 Orange Bowl?
Seriously though, I struggle to remember anything working during the Stinespring era.
I remember all too well. I think he panicked and wanted to comeback all at once rather than chipping away at that 17-0 lead. I'm thinking about the seasons like 2006 and 2008 especially when the offense struggled mightily but found success running with Ore and Evans respectively, and that's what they did.
4 ACC championships, 3 ACC Offensive Players of the Year, and 2 single season rushing records broken. Along with the number 1 and 2 total career offensive and receiving yards in Tech history at that time. I'd be cool having those years and that running game back.
We won the ACC championship in 2008 and the 2009 Orange Bowl despite losing to ECU 27-22, putting up 24 points at home against Furman, and not scoring more than 23 in a single regular season ACC game. I'm glad we won those ACC titles and the other accolades are nice too but the ACC landscape is completely different now with Clemson being consistently elite. It's unfortunate the playoff didn't exist because we would have gotten in at least once during those years. Also we certainly had some extremely talented offensive players but our ACC offensive POYs largely seemed to be "best player on the best team" situations (Jerod Evans had comparable stats to Tyrod Taylor and far better than Bryan Randall).
Anyway, my original comment was somewhat TIC and I'm not sure where I'm going with this. The running game was extremely productive for many of those years and it would be great to get back to some of that success. I think that is a legitimate concern and area for improvement under Fuente. I don't attribute much of our success during the Stinespring era to the offense and would point out that we fell well short of the same metrics that many people are using to say Fuente needs to go, even in ACC championship seasons.
We have to accept the fact that Nix was a late, possibly desperation, stop-gap hire that just hasn't worked out. He didn't come to VT until May after Scott's surprising exit. He wasn't exactly a hot commodity among coaching circles at the time. He wasn't even a coach at aTm in 2017, he was an "analyst". Add to that the fact that he was brought in to coach safeties despite the fact that he hadn't coached DBs since 2000 and most of his coaching resume has been focused on LBs.
It is quite telling then when a former VT DB is asking on Twitter why Floyd (the hero of Pittsburgh) is lined up like an LB instead of farther back like a safety when a huge run play gets sprung against VT. In Foster's system, the ball carrier gets funneled to a free hitter, but when the free hitter is being coached to be out of position the whole defense goes to shit.
Here are some things to consider about winning seasons. The following are the last losing seasons:
Alabama - 2006 - 6-7
Clemson - 2010 - 6-7
Georgia - 2010 - 6-7
Notre Dame - 2016 - 4-8
Ohio State - 2011 - 6-7
This is just a small sample, but programs we would like to be in the same league with. We as a fanbase have been sitting pretty for a while. It's not the end of the world to have a losing season, and based on some of the reactions I've been seeing out there, it was probably long overdue. Definitely needed to brought down to earth.
Those teams repeatedly bring in top 5 recruiting classes. For a program comparable to VT, the only one that comes to mind in Mich St 2016 going 3-9, then 10-3 the following year.
However, they weren't recruiting top 5 classes before or during the slump. I would suggest that something changed with these programs that helped with recruiting. For example, Bama was struggling but then Saban came in.
We have seen many times that Dabo struggled for a while and then started getting higher recruiting classes. Now that Clemson is set up to meet Bama for the NC each year, recruiting is up for them as well.
I don't see Notre Dame, Georgia, or some of the other top 10 teams as perennial top 5 recruiting classes.
Notre Dame made HUGE changes to that staff from 2016. They had 17 total changes including strength staff. 5 of 9 new position coaches and 3 of 5 new strength coaches.
3 coaches (Denbrock, Gilmore, Longo) had a combined 35 years coaching with Brian Kelly but he knew difficult changes had to happen.
I appreciate your 'the night is always darkest before dusk' attitude, but these numbers don't at all support your claim:
All of these programs had at least two top 15 classes before their year of drastic improvement, most had even more talent. VT has never had a top 15 class. I get it, winning helps recruiting, but recruiting also helps winning. You need good players to help you get those first wins.
You kind of made my point. You said they are repeatedly bringing in Top 5 recruiting classes, however you then go to show that the majority of these teams had only one Top 5 class during the time, with a variety of non Top 5 rankings.
We seem to be trending towards the paths that OSU and Clemson had before they started to rattle off being contenders.
Another big catch here, is that all these programs have won national championships in their past. So I'm sure that gives them a slight edge over a team that has only been to one.
Last I looked, we were 30 something for 2019. Clemson was not ranked in the 30s after their 6-7 season. Another issue I've had with recruiting is how we've overrecruited the wide receiver position almost to a fault and have left gaping holes on the defensive line and in the secondary. I get that guys were unexpectedly dismissed or injured, but if we had guys unexpectedly dismissed or injured at wide receiver, we'd still be fine. We lose Trevon Hill and Ricky Walker gets hurt and suddenly our defensive line can't generate any pressure. We lose Mook, Adonis, and Webb, and suddenly we can't cover anyone. The wide receivers already lost Savoy, and if they lost two other guys, they would still be a serviceable. Unfortunately, I feel like they're not even meeting their full potential because of Cornelsen.
My main point about the losing seasons was that even the top programs have had them. Many do not consider us inline yet to the programs I listed, however people are losing their sh!t because they expect us to not have a losing season in 25+ years.
There are many other things at play other than recruiting obviously, as those programs have more resources, funds, and have a trophy under their belt. It's had to compare VT with it's short history to a program like Bama who has 17+ Nattys (varies depending if you go with claimed versus unclaimed) under their belt.
Programs that we are actually more in line with have far more losing seasons before they have a great one. I would say a lot of programs go through a 2-3 year transition. One example is WVU, as they dragged for a bit, and now with a bunch of seniors were able to be more competitive.
Anyway, it's all about realistic expectations. Can we be up there and start bringing in top recruiting classes, sure, but it's not something that a baby (again, comparing us to true blue bloods) of a program like VT should be expected to make happen right away.
I agree that we'll never be some of those programs like Clemson and Alabama. Our athletic department has been running in the red in recent years, and next year's non conference schedule isn't going to help that. I honestly do think our ceiling is higher than WVU though.
WVU is not in a state with fertile recruiting grounds. The best players from WV tend to go out of state too to experience something else (with the exception of the Stills brother on their defensive line). They don't recruit any of the bordering states with the same aggression and success that VT does with the state of North Carolina. We have a recruiting advantage over them, and we also don't have to travel halfway across the United States to play conference games.
I believe we're more on par with a program like Washington or someone similar. Given a great head coach and a good situation, we can make something happen. But there's a very fine line there.
I completely disagree - I think these numbers prove that there is a big difference between each of these programs prior to their comeback, and where VT is now. I'm not so pessimistic to think that we can't improve and possibly have a breakout season in the next year or two, but those schools you mentioned were not accurate comparisons.
A better pick would be Michigan State's improvement from 2016 (3-9) to 2017 (10-3). In 2016, they were playing an absurd amount of freshman and true sophomores. It took them a year and a couple off seasons to figure it out.
I've looked through this before, and if you are using composite for before 2010 you will get a lot of wonky results. The composite wasn't around back then and they have added a lot of strange backdated grades and failed to add grades for many prospects. For the 2000's Rivals was premier recruiting service. That 75th ranked class for tOSU is an error I'm pretty sure because by Rivals their class wasn't ranked nearly that poorly. Yeah just went through 2006-2010 on Rivals team rankings and they were never lower than 25th and usually in the top 15 or top 10.
Other than that, I agree that those schools were recruiting better than we are in the lead up to their explosions. For example, Clemson's 2011 class who came in after the 6-7 season alongside Chad Morris had three, out of state 5 star recruits in Sammy Watkins, Tony Steward, and Stephone Anthony.
Some people are too optimistic and there are people who are too pessimistic. I fall in the optimistic category. With that being said, I've begun to worry outloud during this season.
I listened to people worry about how this roster was being managed since Fuente arrived. There is no doubt in my mind that those people were correct. 1. We have got to manage the roster better so we aren't playing catch up constantly and 2. We need to hit on 1-2 more targets per year. That's it. Not 5 more or 6 more. Just 1 to 2 more. The secondary was young and inexperienced to say the least but this time Bud didn't have a line to bail them out with pressure. The recruiting misses showed up in a monster way this season.
Fuente's staff has been a very mixed bag so far.
1. Vice came in and worried everyone. Since then he's done nothing but close on just about every one of the targets at or near the top of the board.
2. Wide receiver recruiting has been excellent
3. Things were amplified this season by departures and other events.
Bad.
1. Roster mismanagement has destroyed any hope for consistency.
2. Other guys on the staff seem to still be struggling with regard to recruiting
3. Cornelson (whom I have stuck up for non stop) has earned almost no confidence and has lost mine.
I dont want to hear about money. We all know the program could use more. But there are answers and solutions in the mix that are within our budget. The Hokie Club is growing, and I firmly believe that if Fuente's staff can over achieve then the money will increase as excitement rises.
Diagnoses: there have been some things that are out of the coaches control but there have also been failures in areas within their control. If the corner isn't fully turned by the end of next year I will be very worried because a 5 year window is very reasonable to change the direction of a program, and that will be the end of year 4.
If a five year window is reasonable, why be worried at year four?
I was a bit unclear in my wording. Let me see if I can articulate it. If the timeframe for a new coach to be fully established (his players, his culture, his methods, time to process out the old guard, etc) then the closer you get to year five the clearer and more improved things should be.
No one expects perfection year one or year two. The coach is trying to get his players in, establish his identity and all that. Year 3 you'd like to see a corner turn but there is still time. End of year four? The trajectory is pretty clear at that point. Yeah I'm going to fucking worry depending on how year 4 ends.
Now, if end of year four shows some of the same problems and the program explodes year 5 and does very well? I'll gladly stop worrying, however the odds dont look super high for that now. And if year four ends poorly the odds go down even more.
The window is 5 years? True, but you dont have to be sitting at the end of year 5 to see what direction things are going.
I will chime in at least one positive thing.
A month ago, people were convinced that the program was going to lose all of its streaks and finish 4-7. This team manned up and beat a (sadly) better UVA team to keep the first streak alive. They then manned up and beat a Marshall team that had already beaten 8 teams that year and wanted to have a 10 win season. That kept a second streak alive.
They went into a bowl game at better than a TD underdog and came within a bad bounce or two away from winning the game.
We, the fans, might have doubts and concerns about this coaching staff. The players DON'T. They never gave up, they never quit, they kept working to be the best they could be.
I want to see improvement on both sides next year, but I am willing to let this staff sink or swim with the team. If Fuente wants to make adjustments that is his prerogative as head coach. I see positive signs with a team that was beset by injuries, and badly by attrition.
In the end, all I can say is GO HOKIES!
Feel the same way! Great post!
Yeah that's why my post had pros and cons and was roughly balanced out. Trust me, if it looked like the team was quitting on the coaches then the comments from a lot of people would be very different.
What's happening now is what happens in any program or business, identifying what is suboptimal or going wrong and discussing how to improve it. I'm on the clock at my job and there is no forgiveness for inadequate results. They show me the door. It's the same for this staff, and everyone is talking about the good, the bad, and the future.
quality post +1
You said this well. I watched the UVA game and was totally excited knowing that the streak was alive despite the struggles throughout the year. When I saw the score for the Marshall game and knew we were going bowling again made me feel like this season wasn't as lost as it appeared just two weeks before. I went to watching the bowl game wanting a win, but would've been satisfied with a close loss because of how the season went. I saw the team fight through it all and feel it can lead to better things next year.
The subtext of a lot of the "attrition" and "youth" discussion is that some experienced players left for reasons that were never clearly stated. Without knowing the details, I put a lot of that down to the change in culture. When Fuente arrived, he made a big show of continuing the Beamer culture, and we had a great season, and he won ACC coach of the year. But obviously, we hired a new coach because we needed a new coach, and the new coach just can't be the old coach reincarnated. So, yeah, we had a normal amount of graduations and a normal amount of injuries. Then we had a couple of players who declared for the draft who really could have made a difference. But the difference between a reloading year and a rebuilding year, I think, is the departures that were culture related.
I have no way of judging whether Fuente was 100% right, 50% right, or 0% right in the way he handled those guys, so I won't even guess. But I hope everyone who couldn't play in Fuente's culture is gone, and I hope we don't have any more of that kind of attrition, or any more of that kind of distraction, in 2019.
If I'm right, and the culture conflict was a major part of the story of 2018, and if it's not a major part of the story of 2019, we will see a significant improvement in results even if we don't see significant improvement in either coaching or talent.
Happy new year.
I found myself last night thinking about VA Tech football and realized I was mourning an era that is gone forever. It dawned on me that the Beamer era is completely over with and we have entered into uncharted territory.
What I came to understand in my thoughts is that wishing and expecting Top Ten performances like I experienced when I first enrolled at Tech in '99 is really hard to achieve and most likely will not be something this program experiences again for a long long time or at least in that form or fashion.
I hope this program does not turn into mediocrity, struggling to compete in the coastal and the bar to achieve is the coastal championship, indefinitely. However, I hardly see the path to success right now and given today's game and how programs succeed, it is clear to me that the old Va Tech (Terror Dome) is DONE and a new form of Va Tech football has been ushered in that appears to be SOFT, complacent, average, and lacking true direction. I am not liking it...
The '99 team wasn't repeated in the 13 years after by Beamer either. I think that era ended long before Fuente got here.
I don't think this is a good take at all. "long before Fuente got here" is surely a subjective statement, but I don't think that downslide started until 2012. In the 12 seasons following 1999 we won 10+ games in TEN out of those twelve seasons. We were ranked in the top 10 teams of the 2000's decade by pretty much every publication who cared to make one (I've linked all these in previous posts on TKP during unrelated discussions).
We finished in the top 10 in 2005, We were one game away from a national championship in 2007 (really any one of several games being different, Tennessee doesn't throw a pick 6 to LSU in the SECCG, We don't lose to BC, etc.) And we finished as high as 4th by S&P+ in 2009. We won a bunch of conference championships as well.
We may have never literally repeated 1999 in the sense that we didn't make another title game, but we were a top level program in the 2000's and had a string of 8 consecutive 10 win seasons, for reference that is how long Clemson's current 10+ win season streak is. There is a demonstrable difference between where we are at 2012-present than where we were in the 12 seasons after 1999.
His take is that Fuente has lost the terror done feel to the team. I'd summit that kind of mantel was lost when the team lost to Kansas in a BCS bowl. Or 4 win Syracuse, or lost to 3 eight win teams in one season or JMU etc etc.
That would again be a bad take because in 2008 (after Kansas OB loss) we turned around a won an ACC championship and the Orange Bowl the very next season with a vastly, vastly less talented team with all freshman wide receivers.
After JMU we won 11 straight games including the ACC championship and Tyrod finished as the ACC POY.
Also losing 1 individual game doesn't ruin an era of football. Clemson lost to a 4 win Syracuse team last season lol, barely even a year ago and they are playing for a national championship. After we lost to 4 win Syracuse (I assume you mean 2002), we won 4 ACC titles in the next eight seasons.
We had certainly lost some of our "terror dome-ness" before Fuente arrived (though I think that distinction is odd and subjective by itself), but I don't think anything you mentioned is a good example.
So your saying that Fuente having a down year doesn't mean the end of the program or that the culture has changed to soft? Man I wish more people thought like that. Including the person who started this thought process that Fuente has made the team soft.
The end of an era and the terror dome cannot obviously be placed on Fuente as anyone who has watched the team over the last years saw this disappearing before he arrived. I was simply stating almost a subconscious, personal perception of a program that I had to reconcile within myself.
Va Tech football recruits differently, generations and demographics have changed, and again, how programs succeed and within those constraints has shifted. However, I do not see how anyone can reconcile the downward spiral in the offense and defense to purely performance, execution, scheme and the otherlikes always brought up. There is simply something different going on with this program, and all appearances are to me it seems soft and lacking grit of the past.
We saw glimpses of Va Tech football, of which I had not seen in years, during the FL St. game -- the D flying around the ball on EVERY play no matter what the occasion. 3-8 guys to the ball every play. Almost the same personnel later minus T-Hill and H-Gaines and we turn into the cream puffs set out there at ODU, Ga Tech and Pitt? OBVIOUSLY, FL St. turned out to stink but the aforementioned teams were on the margins not that much better.
This is something more ingrained, intangible vibe, culture, whatever you want to call it that is permeating the program now. I am not saying Fuente has ''lost" the team, only that things are different and look to be average or a little above for the long, foreseeable future.
Again, what's with the negative votes?
Whoever is doing that needs to knock it off.
People go through and downvote lots of posts sometimes, they usually get corrected by another TKPer within a few minutes. I almost always upvote -1's that aren't breaking any guidelines.
The irony is someone also downvoted your post.
Maybe it is like the people that use the wrong turn signal. I dont even know how that happens.
I offer a story:
We are all correct in how we feel about the 2018 season elephant...
Moral of the story: don't take a blind man to the zoo
I think i got that right. Thanks!
No, no, no, you missed the point!
Don't go anywhere with other blind men if you're also blind.
On second thought I think it's:
all elephants will let you and your buddies feel them up.
We also learned it clearly was a female elephant.
Ah! So grab em by the....
Nevermind...
Have you ever seen a male elephant, no way a blind person doesn't run across that.
"This elephant has 5 legs everyone"
- blind man in parable.
"Which side is the head? Both ends have a trunk and terrible breath?
Certainly explains some opinions, as an handful of posters have apparently climbed into the rear end and gotten stuck there.
Is that Elizabeth Olsen (asking for a friend)???
Since your friend is asking....
It's Ashley Benson
Gotcha.
We need to start recruiting larger athletes. We are over powered often on the field. I think it is a big issue on defense, especially in the 2nd half. Team impose their will on us with larger athletes.
Been doing a lot of YouTube "research" lately on diet & nutrition, something that science is woefully behind on (beholden to epidemiological studies, due to bias, ethics, time, money, etc).
One word that keeps coming up in the battle of studies is "confounders". Things we can't control for that get in the way of proving a link between two events.
For this season and even the past three, there are so many confounders to analyzing VT and CJF's performance, not the least of which are early departures, injury, and a new QB every year.
It is easy to say it's all on the head coach, but a more thorough analysis with the observational data we have is difficult.
tl;dr: π€·ββοΈ {shrug emoji}