Mike Vick was a once in a lifetime QB. I just stumbled onto this video and couldn't help but be in awe of what I was watching. I've seen countless highlight reels of him in his heyday, and being a devout Eagles fan has allowed me witness week in and week out some of the explosiveness he has still has, although his days do seem to be quickly coming to an end. But I digress. Watching Vick run around like a kid in a sandlot, fantasizing about the days I spent at Tech watching Tyrod do his thing, and all the greatness that came in between, I just can't help but wonder how long it will take before our offense is once again a force to be reckoned with. I just thought I'd share my thoughts, I'd love to hear what everyone else thinks on the matter.
And I figured any excuse to share a Vick highlight video is a good one.
Comments
I don't know if we've ever had a "top-of-the-line" offense here at tech. Most of our offenses have relied on talented quarterbacks and tailbacks in a non-explosive offensive scheme. As a result, we usually only have had a mediocre offense, that is only slightly above mediocre when we have amazing talent at those two positions. Loeffler is trying to change that by shifting our style to one that is more sound schematically, but so far we haven't had much success. We just have to put some faith in Beamer that he made the right offensive coach hires, and hope that the issues with the offense this year is caused by things other than the coaches.
I see what you are saying, but I would still say that the 99 and 00 offense were top of the line - #1 scoring offense in 99, #5 in 00, and top 10 total offense both years (EDIT: looking at wrong page - #9 in 99 and #20 in 2000, but still). Vick was not even featured that heavily IIRC - offense went through Stith and then Suggs. Here is the link to the NCAA stats site.
In the Late 90's, teams didn't average high scores as much. Only a few teams were dropping big points like seemingly everyone is these days. And Michael Vick featured himself. His ability to improvise was second to none.
Bustle once said something along the lines of, "With Michael there were two plays, what you called, and whatever he actually did." I was a student in 1999 and 2000 so at the time the way he played just seemed like something that was supposed to be. Only now can I really appreciate just how special he was by looking back at old film. When Tyrod 3rd and 31'd FSU my friend and I looked at each other in the stands and said, "That was awesome, but Vick would have housed it." He's just incomparable.
Yeah that is a big question for me. I know we had Vick and Taylor, and the best example of all this might be Vince Young. When incredible individual talents can make up for coaching shortcomings, you get big accomplishments.
Why, you're not in a hurry are you?
It will take time but I don't think we will ever see a top of the line offense here at Tech. I think what Loeffler wants to be a consistent ground and pound offense that doesn't commit turnovers or make silly mistakes.
I would kill for a single game without any turnovers at this point. Hey, Miami would be convenient timing.
Wow a very clutch zero turnover game! Imagine that!
The problem with thinking about a "top of the line offense" is that it always relies on the players "getting it". We'll never have a top 10 offense as long as Beamer is still coaching because that's not the philosophy of his football team. Could we have a team that puts up close to 400 yards per week? I think we could with the right mix of players and coaching. It seems that in terms of yardage, we've improved over last year, or many years...in terms of scoring we have not. Even some very prolific offensive schemes do poorly when the players don't get it.
If all goes to plan we will have a top 25 offense in 4 years. Of course, that requires us to land recruits, and then develop them.
exactly lets give the new o coaches a chance to get their player types and system in place and see.
I was watching the Stanford V. Oregon game last night. I think I'd rather have man football that Stanford plays then fast paced up tempo Oregon Offense. I think most of you also agree that Stanford's offense now is what we want to be like. Pound the rock and then play action with pretty simple throws while relying on the Defense to step up and control play.
This. If I had to choose an identity for my Hokies, I would choose the smash mouth, blue collar, 'win in the trenches', type of football that Stanford plays. The fast pace offenses are fun to watch, but I just don't think our team or fanbase identifies well with that brand of football. A mistake free, efficient, clock eating, and touchdown scoring ground game, with a lights out defense...that is the combination I am begging to see.
I'm with you. When I looked at the box score, the TOP for Stanford was what impressed me the most. I'd gladly see us score around 20-27 points per game (mediocre offense, by current "standards") and control the ball for twice as long as our opponent. If our D stays as stout as it is (or honestly, even if it drops off a bit) then we win most games easily.
See my comment below, Frank Beamer Football, and Stanford's team as well...all starts with their offensive line play.
Stanford has a top of the line offense.
They are ranked 31st in Yards Per Play and 19th in Points Per Play.
Total Offense and Scoring offense are all but useless metrics in determining offensive success. Oregon and Baylor both have top of the line offenses, as do Wisconin and Stanford. It has nothing to do with scheme, and everything to do with coaching and execution.
We've never been able to find the OL on a consistent basis to be a Stanford / Alabama.
Historically we've been able to find the mobile QB, top tier skill players (DBs, Ss) for defense, if we had an exciting offense we could likely recruit top tier skill players for offense, somehow top tier RBs
Everything else is a gamble at this point. Frankly a gimmicky offense is probably not a bad idea if you can't get a very good OL. Call it what you want but it would feature mobile OL lotsa cutblocks, putting athletes in space and letting playas play.
Call me old fashioned but you have to be realistic about what you can recruit and/or develop. Our S&C program used to churn out marginal NFL prospects on the OL... guys that needed that RS year but by the 4th and 5th years were ready to contribute. Those days have gone IMHO. Seems like we're recruiting lots of tall athletic guys who don't want to get too big and don't believe there is an NFL payday in their future.
Whichever program gets the 5 star offensive prospects from the state of Virginia will have a shot at the MNC. Not sure this Stanford slash Alabama light offense gets us there. All the 5 stars will go to Alabama (we can hope Saban goes to Texas but from there I can guarantee he still recruits Virginia) or the SEC.
Given what we can legitimately recruit every year, what is the best case scenario for our offense? What schematic approaches would allow our talent, given proper coaching and execution, to position the team to win? What style of offense pairs well with our style and quality of defense?
That was a great video, thanks for posting.
But I'm not sure I call that "top of the line offense." It was Vick doing his thing. We certainly didn't block many guys for him. We did have one of the best offenses in the country, at 41 ppg. When will we get back there? Maybe never, but I expect by Andrew Ford's 3rd season, we'll be pretty good. Unfortunately, that's pretty far away. Real chance our offense is worse next year with Leal or Ford at QB.
Offense should be better next year. Lot of returners, only QB will be the new component. We'll have offensive weapons meaning a QB could come in and kick it. Reference famous Jamious.
Before the Hokies get a top of the line offense, they'll have to get a top offensive line.
agree- the line that Vick had was unreal. Which allowed for a solid run game and a solid passing game - #1 in scoring offense in 1999 and pretty high in 2000 I believe (#5?), but the other years we've struggle to be consistent in the top 50.
In '99 we were #1 in scoring offense and #9 in total offense averaging 450 yds/game.
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/archive/fbs/1999team.pdf
Yea, i had an edit once I found the stat, but for some reason the edit didn't take.
Total Offense - Since 2000 National Rank
2000: 20
2001: 64
2002: 64
2003: 38
2004: 65
2005: 57
2006: 99
2007: 100
2008: 103
2009: 50
2010: 41
2011: 35
2012: 81
Wasn't Stiney OC starting in 2001?
also in 2009-2011 we had an embarrassment of riches that could overcome scheme...and I think we see that in the trend...
RMWF, Darren Evans, DMFW, Coale and Boykin...and Tyrod was coming into his own (aka run around and make something happen).
2002 I believe was his first season. Those numbers in the early 2000's can be attributed to Kevin Rogers, the QB coach, which are the years we had solid QB play and good execution. O'Cain started 2006 as well as our offensive decline.
Bigger reason, IMO, was the start of Newsome's OL coaching tenure in either 2006 or 07.
Note: in 2006 and 2007, we were ranked 90th and 82nd, respectively, in rushing offense.
What is considered a top of the line offense? One that consistently scores more than its opponent? With a defense like ours, we wouldn't need to score more than 20-30 points a game to consistently be in a position to win. I don't want 59-0 games (although they would be nice), I just want an offense that can put enough points on the board to ensure a defense that allows 10 points and less than 200 total yards isn't wasted.
Our defense is giving up 17 points a game on average, with only two games allowing over 21 points. If our offense could consistently score three or four touchdowns a game, allow no turnovers, and chew up the clock, how would that change our historical win-loss column? I would not consider scoring 28 points a game top of the line, but it sure would have an impact on our team with a defense like ours...
As wildturkey said, it isn't about having an offense that ranks #1 in every category (see a team like Baylor). It's about producing of top of the line TEAM. Yes, our defense is there and our offense is not, but we've actually had years in recent history where that was reversed. Look at a team like Texas A&M. Great offense, shoddy defense. Your offense can't win you every game as we saw with them against Auburn and your defense can't win you every game as we saw against Duke and BC. I just want the perfect combination of offense and defense to win us games. Would I like to see us blow every team out of the water with an offense that lights up the scoreboard and a defense that shuts the other team out? Absolutely! But it could be a very mediocre offense that does just enough to win us games and as long as we win, I'm happy.
side note here:
Vick was a once in a generation (maybe more) type of athlete in all of sports. People like to make comparisons to him all the time, but the truth is few are like him.
I'm not talking about him as a QB or even a football player. Rather I personally feel that he might be one of the greatest athletes ever to walk the earth, period. He had such a combination of speed, elusiveness, quickness, instinct... always a hair faster and out of reach to all the other elite athletes around him. His "athletic quotient" is equivalent to Tesla's IQ.
It was fate that he was from Tidewater and came to VT.
I couldn't agree more. One of the comments on the video labeled him as a glitch in the matrix, which I think is still putting it lightly.
THIS. Yes he is Tesla and Neo.
Considering that he is all these things just makes it more painful that he probably won't win a Super Bowl as a player.
it is a shame...is Michael Jordan an appropriate analogy for what Vick could have been? I see him as being a freak athlete with a freak work ethic...and 7 championship rings to go with it.
It works up to a point. Vick's time away from the game was for vastly different reasons than Jordan's though.
I realize a true top-of-the-line offense may be something VT has never achieved, and may never will. To give my opinion about what I would love to see out of our offense would be me literally repeating everything everyone above has said, I love it all. but when I think about what I was referring to in this post, I think about an offense that doesn't make mistakes, and can consistently score when given the opportunity. Something we did in the years past, and something we seem to have gotten away from.
Hearing Shane yesterday saying he wished the offense was like Boston College was revealing. That's what we all are wishing for too, coach. That, and being like Stanford where they line up and knock the bejesus out of you repeatedly.
Edit: The more I think about it, the more I recall that under Beamer, he has won 7 total conference titles with a boring offense (sans the Vick's era), a strangling and opporunistic defense, and fundamentally sound special team. BRING THOSE BACK! Never again will I complain about our boring offense, even if it drives me insane.
That's just good hard-nosed, snot-bubble, football right there- Now that Stanford team, they'll really get after ya.
'Bejesus knocking'...
...that should be our football team's goal. On both sides of the ball. For all four quarters...
BC and OL I don't understand it but I don't stick my head in the sand about it either.
I think the one caveat to the boring offense is that it has to be efficient as well as successful at finding the endzone. Our offense now, IMHO, is boring, inefficient, and doesn't score points. I'll taking boring, as long as it positions our defense to win games, not expecting the defense to win it for them.
I just walked into my bosses office and told her it was BeatMiami week therefore I will be leaving immediately after I leave "her office" since I have to drive to Miami from Orlando. Her response was" It's only 4 hours away, but anyways Muck Miami. haha little did I know she has a little HOKIE spirit in her! She then said Doesn't it suck to be the U..
So ready for this game!!
I read this as a little hokie in her...
I stopped reading at Eagles fan. :)
Ohhh come on now you can't hate my eagles! They've trotted a handful of Hokies out over the recent years actually. It does pain me to see David Wilson, and Jayron Hosley in NY though..I was super excited for them, but that was a sad draft for me.
Fellow Eagles fan here. I wish Macho had panned out better too...
I'm right there with you. Eagles secondary has been shit for a few years now, he had a great chance to come in and make a name for himself
I don't know, I think I saw a pretty good offense just play a heck of a 1st half.
It could be you see a top offense today.
Hopefully!
Totally different topic; but who else enjoyed seeing Derrick Hopkins as FB?
Skip and Rogers in at the same time? Now that's a SCARY backfield!
Let's call that "The Pain Train" formation.