Some stats from the athletic:
- In 4 games this year, the Hokies' defense has allowed 42 points on 11 turnovers.
- On 7 of those turnovers, we turned the ball over in our territory.
- Opponents have turned those short fields into 35 points, converting 5 of the 7 short fields
None of this surprising, just tells us how much turnovers are killing this team.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Can't measure the momentum and emotional shift on some of those turnovers too. They're like poison.
Someone could make a graph showing score vs. time with turnovers superimposed, but that's not my area of expertise
Not very good at making graphs, but here's some data.
BC turnovers:
Fumble, Game tied 14-14, 8 minutes left in 2nd, recovered on VT 17, BC scores TD on ensuing drive
Interception, 28-14 BC, End of Half, Touchback
Interception, 28-14 BC, 9:42 left in 3rd, Touchback, BC punts on ensuing drive
Interception, 28-21 BC, early in 4th, BC ball on VT 41, BC throws interception on next drive
Both teams score TD's later in the quarter
ODU:
Fumble, 31-17 VT, 8:06 in 4th, ODU ball on ODU 42, 3 and out
Fumble, 31-17 VT, 6:25 in 4th, ODU ball on VT 25, ODU turnover on downs on ensuing drive
Furman:
Fumble, 3-0 VT, 3:41 in 1st, Furman ball on VT 41, Furman scores TD on ensuing drive
Interception, 7-3 Furman, 10:51 in 2nd, Furman ball on VT 42, Furman scores TD on ensuing drive
VT stops turning the ball over, outscores Furman 21-3 over rest of game
Duke:
Fumble, 3-0 VT, 11:25 in 2nd, Duke ball on VT 16, Duke scores TD on ensuing drive
Downs, 24-3 Duke, 3:38 in 3rd, Duke ball on VT 43, Duke scores TD on ensuing drive
Interception, 38-10 Duke, 11:07 in 4th, Duke ball on Duke 43, Duke scores TD on ensuing drive
Looks like they really cost us against BC, we were fortunate that ODU was unable to capitalize, Furman was really only ever competitive because of them, and they were especially killer against Duke, as every time we started building any sort of momentum it was snuffed out by a turnover and Duke answered immediately.
The saddest part of those stats is that they all happened against BC, ODU, Furman, and Duke.
And we're now going to be facing the #13 Defense in the country this Saturday.
We're going to turn it around this game!
I will never not upvote the glory that is the butt fumble
But that #13 Defense is from the likes of Bethune-Cookman (163 yds, 1 TO), UNC (389 yds), and Central Michigan (248 yds, 3 TO).
Also, their offense wasn't productive, at home, against a team that is way bad and gave them the ball 3 times.
And we have the #99 scoring offense and #100 yards/game offense against the likes of ODU, Furman, and Duke...
Still better than CMU.
I mean I have no real hope our offense is going to improve... We are probably going out of the gate Saturday with QB/RB switching every other
playdrive, hoping that something sticks and we will never get anything done because no one can get into a rhythm.Hope they prove me wrong.
By 3 yards a game and 5 points total on the year.
Our top 2 QBs are hurt (of course), Turner is not going to play, I'm sure 8 other guys on offense are "hurt" as well. Take Miami and the points. The under is a decent play here as well.
In SP+, which adjusts for quality of opponents, their defense is #21 and our offense is #88. Slightly better but still not great.
Where do you find SP+ ratings these days? I've been looking and been unable to find them since Bill C joined ESPN. Are they hiding behind a paywall now?
Preseason
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5 (current)
When Bill left SBN for ESPN, he said ESPN would be taking over the SP+ rankings and running them alongside FPI, but it really seems like they're trying to keep them as hidden as possible while still publishing them on the site. You can find them through the built-in search bar, but it's easier to find them through Google. Makes me wonder if ESPN actually hired Bill C to effectively kill one of the biggest competitors to their in-house FPI rankings.
all of whom are probably better than us on offense right now. sadly.
Considering that our offense could literally be stopped by a few blades of uncut grass, I'd still have to put my money on the 13th ranked defense in the country.
Considering that our defense wasn't productive and gave up 45 points, at home, at night, against the 69th overall offense in the country, I'm not feeling too great about that unit either.
Yeah, that was awful. But what do you expect when your offense can't be productive after getting every opportunity to be? Our defense held Duke to 1 first down and 17 yds in Duke's first 3 possessions. Gave the offense starting positions at the 50 and Duke's 40 and you punt, get a FG, and then turn the ball back over to them. That would take a lot out of any defense.
Most of this teams issues lie in the offense, which is why it surprised me when Hazelton said it isn't as bad as everyone thinks. If our offense can actually show up to a game, we might be in a decent spot. Not a great one, but at least I wouldn't be thinking we are going to end the season 3-9.
yeah. I wanna be up at least 13-0 after three drives that start on their side of the field. Would love to be up 21-0, but I'm not gonna get greedy. 3-0? That's just leaving the barn door open and hoping your defense can keep their finger in the dike #MixingMetaphors
Ya, one of the telltale signs to me that Fuente has totally lost control of this program is that both units seem to give up on each other too easily. I was so impressed with how the defense looked against Duke up until our offense stalled continually, turned the ball over, and then it just seemed like the defense threw in the towel too. I do think our defense has the talent, but just loses motivation too quickly after the offense folds. The 'offense relying on the defense' was a trend in the Beamer era too, but instead of our defense giving up when the offense sputtered, they tightened their chin straps, pinned their ears back, and won us games. Anyway, talent levels aside (because we were more than talented defensively and had the opportunities offensively to beat Duke), coaching is clearly the common denominator in all of this.
Did the defense "give up" though? I saw Duke not being afraid of our offense, so they played ultra vanilla in the shadow of their own goal. Once they opened up defense had no answer. Being bad is different than giving up.
In regards to how we went from looking so good defensively early in the game to so bad, I'd say some of that was Duke making great offensive adjustments and us not, but to me it looked like a completely deflated unit that threw in the towel too early. Being bad is indeed different than giving up, and this obviously isn't one of our better defensive units we've fielded, but the complete collapse from playing complete lockdown defense in the first quarter up until that fumble is more reflective of confidence and effort to me. Just my $0.02.
And that #13 defense has had a bye week, they're in hunt for the Coastal, and they're gonna be jacked and licking their chops after watching the Duke game.
Meanwhile, the Hokies fold up like a t-shirt at the Gap as soon as the opposing team puts on their angryeyes.
Why do you always have to outclass everyone with your analogies?
I don't know, the whole a few blades of grass stopping our offense thing made me spit up a bit ahahah
I will always agree with Belichick and Gibbs... Penalties and Turnovers are a result of poor coaching- Not luck.
There is some aspect of luck to it, but good coaching will certainly reduce the total number of turnover opportunities. Kind of a "make your own luck" situation.
such as yanking out everyone who turns it over and not putting them back in unless their name is willis? man imagine how many turns overs that good coaching has saved. if we had played king after every fumble we would likely have 6 more turn overs.
Been discussed ad nausiem, but 'turnover opportunities' (loose balls and pass break ups) are not luck. How many turnover opportunities you successfully convert is (statistically) very luck based.
Exactly my point. Good coaching can result in fewer loose balls and fewer dangerous passes, but once the ball is put in an unsafe position the end result is essentially random. You can "make your own luck" by limiting opportunities for the defense to take it away.
That makes CFu's asinine fumble policy even more head scratching. He has preached ball security from the mountain top since day one but it only applies to certain players?
We have seemed to have had a problem with fumbles and muffed punts from day 1 of the Fuente era.
I'm still waiting on that all-important "coaching turnover" to happen.
Our players play scared and timid, instead of loose and free. Their mind is thinking instead of letting their God giving abilities show. Turnovers have happened because we play scared. We have no alphas on our team, because of the culture Fuente has build. We need coaching turnover and we need it now!
WhenIf we turn the ball over on Saturday, I think Miami's defense should run over and put the turnover chain on Fuente. I'd find it funny.I have come to believe that this is the reason for everything that is going on right now in VT football. Fuente seems so focused on minutiae. He doesn't believe in the intangibles, like 'confidence', 'rhythm', or 'frustration', and the impact that those can have on a team, game, season, or program culture. He only believes in predicted outcomes and job descriptions. This country loves college sports because it is so much fun to watch and experience some of the intangible things play out in games. If you don't foster that within a program, and the team doesn't go out and play with confidence that they are going to make the game changing play, then you start to play timid and scared. The result is big time losses and all the fun and life being sucked out of the program.
Just look at UNC. We all know how TKP feels about UNC, but damn if Mack doesn't have that team believing. A team that was as bad as they were last season, is not all of sudden winning and going down to the wire with Clemson because they suddenly understand predicted outcomes. Nope, they got a QB who can throw a good ball and they got a coach who told them they can do it. He doesn't tell them every day that they aren't good and need to work hard to improve.
Agree. Mack also hired some big time assistants and knows how to let them do their job. I said it was a great hire at the time. He won't be there 10 years, but he will win there in this division, especially. They will win the coastal before he leaves there is my bet.
The Heels may win the Coastal with this QB. Howell is inconsistent right now as a true freshman, but that kid has the goods... NFL goods.
I know some folks very close to the UNC program and they tell me that Fuente's tenure (winning/losing, recruiting, and culture) has followed a similar pattern to that of Fedora while at UNC. At least that is how they perceive things from the outside.
Agree. Fuente's ball security first stance is forcing guys to play scared.
I don't think there's a problem with making ball security a priority. However, when you throw a guy on the bench (not named Willis) immediately after he turns the ball over for the rest of the game, you effectively have taken their confidence out back and given it the Ol' Yeller treatment.
Scott Frost had a great bit on Gameday last week where he said something to this effect. Basically that the most important thing for young players is not to be playing afraid of making a mistake, they have to play fast and loose and the polish will come in time. I think he's 100% right and Fuente needs to pay attention.
I don't worry about turnovers because Fuente will always bench the offending player, solving the problem for that game. /s
**Does not apply to Ryan Willis regardless of play**
And the remainder all seemed to be in the endzone or while we're threatening to score, which may be even worse.
It's also the timing of the turnovers, in that most of them have occurred in the second quarter. So far we've been outscored by 42 points in the second quarter of games. Even if you remove Duke, we've been outscored by 21 in the second quarter against BC, ODU, and Furman combined.
hey, everyone's missing the silver lining here. By turning the ball over in our territory so much, we're improving our chances of winning the ToP battle /s
We should try a new strategy...
And five of the TOs are fumbles which statistically are much worse than interceptions
This tells me that they are not teaching proper technique to the Kids at Practice. If the coaches say they practice ball security at practice and then it keeps happening over and over again, you gotta wonder what the heck they are practicing.
Nobody's hitting them with the boxing glove on a stick.
Andy Bitter tweeted this image this morning:
So, through 4 games, we've allowed more points off turnovers than the entire '17 and '18 seasons.
Also, shit, we turned it over a lot in 2016!
The scariest part of this is that in 4 games we have nearly as many turnovers as we did all of 2017.
I think the fact that we only have 3 takeaways is equally, if not more concerning.