Let me preface this by saying I thought the players did pretty well today. But today's game left me with a lot of questions of the coaching/game plan.
Offense: Was that really the best we could do coming off a bye week? No wrinkles, no new looks. It was three yards and a cloud of dust or heave and hope...I understand it's QP's first start but the game plan coming off a bye week was straight garbage.
Defense: Played pretty well most of the game, but why do we insist on rushing 3 on the final drive. What happened to Bud's aggression? Multiple stoppages/timeouts where he could have changed the look and he refused. The soft game end defense lucked out against Miami and failed us here. Why didn't we learn?
Special Teams: Hated the "fake" on the return after the ND touchdown but it reminded me a gripe I've had all season...how are we the only team in the country that hasn't figured out you can fair catch a kickoff anywhere inside the 25 for a touchback. We constantly try to return from inside our own 10 and start our overly conservative offense back. Take the free yards and save the clock.
Bottom line is that coaching failed us in all three phases. But more than individual issues/mistakes from the coaches, it seems this team has a mentality of playing not to lose rather than getting after it agressively and playing to win. Unfortunately I think that mentality is coming down from the head whistle...
Comments
Buds been faulted for prevent for years now, see BC and Matt Ryan, once they got past the 50 we should've gone back to being aggressive. This result left me feeling Bud's time is coming to a close at a good point in time. The defense has been our Achilles heel all season. I just think the game has passed him by. Anyone could see that qb run for miles away. Feel so Dain bad for those kids. I will always love Bud. But for me, this game have me closure about his retirement.
Two very notable and painful examples, but it's really not as much of an epidemic as it feels in the moment.
Agree on your prevent point.
But Achilles heel all season? Not sure we win the Miami game without the defense. They stopped UNC in OT to give us the win. In terms of overall stats between the offense and defense, it's pretty much dead even.
ND ran 91 plays, the defense was going to wear down sooner or later.
Yeah, I know what you mean about Bud. I just didn't see the typical Bud energy today, like maybe he was under the weather, and I realize the weather was cold and miserable today. But a little variety in defensive looks probably would have made Book a little less comfortable in the pocket. Our 3-man rush was pretty pathetic - that's fine if you have three guys who can get after it, but we don't have that. I'm proud of our guys, but I think they got short-changed a little in the coaching department today, and the biased officiating didn't help matters.
As I recall, we ran something similar toward the end of the game the last time we played at ND, but Ekanem was getting after it in that game...demanding two blockers and still getting pressure...
The 3-man rush is driving me f'ing nuts. I'm fine with it every now and then...like in the middle of a drive to throw the QB off with more guys in coverage. But for an entire drive? I texted someone at the start of the drive with "not the 3-man rush!!". It allowed Miami to come back in the game earlier this season and it allowed ND to win the game yesterday. You cannot allow a QB that much time to throw the ball. The secondary can only cover for so long.
I know that the defense was great yesterday. It played extremely well and was the reason that we were in the position that we were in. But the strategy at the end of the game allowed ND to win. When we pressured the QB he got rattled and we stopped doing that for some reason.
Yeah, I thought the same thing.
I just wondered if he thought it was too tough to switch back and forth. Unfortunately, predictability is bad for our defense.
The defense were studs for most of the game.
No QB pressure = Accurate throws.
Bud has been destroying me emotionally with that prevent for all 15 years I have actively watched VT football
Am I crazy or didn't he used to at least mix in some blitzes? Even the 3 lineman seem to be kind of half hearted in their pass rush like they don't wanna get burned by a scrambling QB. I've hated the look forever but seems like something is making me hate it even more this year...
This loss rests on Bud's shoulders in my opinion. That 3 man front was a mistake, but to not mix in a single 4th or 5th man? No matter the down and distance we stayed in it. It was disgraceful and the players deserved better than that. If Notre Dame beats us then they beat us, but to allow the QB to set up a camping chair in the pocket and wait for someone to pop open was madness.
The final drive is on Bud but the game was more than just the last drive, and the offense and play calling was awful all game long. We can't ignore everything leading up to the final drive and then only ascribe blame as if the final drive was the only thing that impacted the game.
To further demonstrate your point, if the defense didn't force those two turnovers in ND's end zone, ND would have had a 28-7 lead in the third quarter, and the last two minutes of the game wouldn't have mattered.
Also the offense scored 13 points. We lose that game without the defensive TD whether they score on the final drive or not.
It's absolutely baffling that someone can ascribe sole blame to the defense/DC in a game where the offense scored 13 points.
I get all that. It's actually the point I'm making. The defense played its balls off. They put together their best performance and even stood tall after some really unfortunate penalties. Only to have a terrible plan to defend that last drive and that is on the coach not players.
The game funneled down to that final drive. And what did Bud do? He beat himself. I recognize I'm putting it under the microscope but Bud has got to be better on that. He's been doing this too long.
Rests solely on Fuente's shoulders. Did the head man in charge not tell Bud that the defense wouldn't have to keep VT in games any longer when he was hired, and Bud retained? Did the offense ANYTHING to keep the ball moving and the defense off the field when it mattered most? No. They did jack s#*t and forced the defense to keep the lead with a ton of time on the clock. Cornelsen is Fuente's guy, so this loss is 100% on Fuente. He gave ND hope, and that was all they needed.
Well, the offense did burn some time off the clock, drew some Notre Dame timeouts, and got some first downs.
So no, they didn't do nothing.
Yes, everything the team does is on Fuente, and the offense could have done more, but the prevent defense was the nail in the coffin in a game that still had life when the defense got back to the field.
I do think Fuente held back on Hooker, and he did it to give us a better chance in some games that count for more - mainly Wake Forest.
Alternatively, goddamn did that defense play well perfectly all game. Gave up 21 points against a great offense.
Dax blew a couple of plays if I remember correctly. I agree to go away from what we were doing to have Book pissing his pants all night dumbfounds me.
This is like blaming a basketball player for taking/missing a bad game winning shot when his team went 5-20 from the free throw line. If we did the little things right the whole game, the final moments wouldn't be an issue. ND tried their hardest to give up this game, and we just wouldn't let them. French mentioned it in another thread, but QP left a lot yards on the field.
My guess is that Bud doesn't trust his young players to not miss a tackle and give up a game winning big play (although in hindsight, that would've been preferable because it gives our offense more time to drive down the field). Will be interested to hear his rationale for his decision.
Whatever the case, I hope this was a moral victory for the players, something they can build on as they enter the most important part of the season.
This is my problem with the final drive, and the coaching of the team as a whole. The defense was balling out the entire game and had Book, who wilts under even the chance of pressure, on his heels. Then Bud turtles up for some reason and allows Book all the time in the world to dink and dunk his way down the field, eat up all the time left in the game, and score to win. If we played a normal D and got beat for a long TD, at least we would have had more than 30 seconds to get a FG. We didn't even need a TD! Just a FG!
The coaches not trusting these kids just drives me crazy. We keep talking about how we're a "young team", and that's true. But you're going to remain young if you're not allowed to make mistakes on the field in real game action.
I believe the expression is "no guts, no glory".
We played a certain defense all game, and though it wasn't perfect, we definitely had some wins on defense.
Mixing it up a little bit, and we might have been a contender.
Coaches were saying that there was a lot of different personnel on the field. Waller was out, Farley was out towards the end a little bit and a little injured when in. Other guys, too, I suspect.
Maybe if the entire first team defense is in there they are a little more creative and a little more dangerous, but they did what they thought gave them the best chance at the time with the guys they had. IMHO
I'm certain this was the case.
Still, was painful to watch.
That could be due to this being a non-conference game, and still having 4 conference games left. Why put anything on film in what is ultimately a meaningless game?
Idk if Corny is capable of adding anything for the remaining conference slate. I've lost all confidence in him at this point. Even if they didn't wanna show any new looks I woulda hoped the playbook a little more for QP with 2 weeks of preparation.
The fact that this was meaningless in the long run is the only reason i am not more upset. The last drive defense was horrible play calling.
To say this game was meaningless is a mistake. In addition to helping with bowl eligibility, it would have helped our overall confidence going into the stretch drive. Just because it wasn't an ACC game doesn't mean it was a meaningless game.
Yes, a win would have gotten us one game closer to bowl eligibility. It still wouldn't have clinched it.
But if the team and fans believe that we can win the division, then we're gonna have to be able to do better than winning 2 out of the next 4 anyway.
This is why Hendon didnt play today..i think
Thank you. If a game against one of the most esteemed programs in college football history, who was ranked in the top ten a week ago, is meaningless, then everything is meaningless. I would much rather beat Notre Dame than Pitt or Wake Forest. Who gives a crap about winning the shitty coastal?
Can't win the ACC without winning the Coastal. Clemson was upset by Syracuse 3 years ago, Pitt 2 years ago, and squeaked by UNC this year. We won't be favored but it's not impossible. Plus I think it's valuable for our players to get a taste of what it's like to play in a championship game so that even if they don't win the first time, the goal feels more tangible and can motivate them to get back and win. I think mental toughness is half the reason we dominated the Coastal from 2005-2011 and have continued the streak against UVA and winning the Coastal after such a terrible start to the season would be a clear step in the right direction on that front.
I mean, I know I do.
This. 100% this.
I've played on teams that were more talented in year 1, but not quite ready for the big stage. Then, in year 2, the team has less talent returning, but is not paralyzed by the big stage, bright lights, etc. We need those trips to Charlotte to become somewhat "routine" again, so that if/when we do get there after a nice regular season with post-season aspirations, we don't get caught up in the moment.
If its between us winning the shitty coastal or UVa winning the shitty coastal, I want the damn trophy and I want to parade it around their damn stadium while we teabag their collective fanbase in a game they thought would be their moment of backness
Why put anything on film in what is ultimately a meaningless game?
To beat ranked ND at ND and show the fan base we are a team fighting for an ACC championship, not bowl eligibility.
Even though this game has zero impact on the ACC championship
We ran a trick play where Tayvion Robinson threw a pass against Rhode Island. But we're going with the vanilla playbook against Notre Dame?
Yes, trick plays in a tight game can go either way, so better to limit the negative possibility.
The vanilla playbook was
minutesseconds away from a victory, so it proved it was a good game plan IMHO.A few extra yards for a first down, a catch or two, another play on defense and VT wins.
I don't think so. This sounds like a game plan version of "Corny is setting up the defense with these 30 zero-to-one yard plays every game to pop a big play or two when we need it." Nah, at some point it's just shitty ball, just like this is shitty coaching.
I'm sorry, I must disagree. I thought the game plan was spot on and the defense played great all things considered.
We didn't go to south bend to lose, on the contrary, the gameplan that played out had us within 29 seconds of beating the #16 in their house. I assure you they were ready to play coming off their whipping from Michigan.
Four weeks ago none of us would have thought we even come close to beating Notre Dame.
Why show new wrinkles in a game that is meaningless in the ACC? Especially with a third-string QB.
You don't want to beat a ranked Norte dame in their own stadium? Ok i see
huh?
He didn't say that.
Notre Dame is ALWAYS overrated, and they were very beatable today. I always think we should have a shot at beating an overrated team like ND. I think our guys came out here to win, and would have won with a better gameplan from the coaches.
yes and we nearly did that with a backup QB.
I mostly agree. But I found it strange how much they threw in the first half and never really gave QP any easy, rhythm building, confidence throws. It felt like everything was downfield or slants. Felt like they could've been a little more creative, moved the pocket, something. Compare that play calling to the plays called for Hooker against Miami in his first start. They had some specific things schemed for Hooker to Keene. Why nothing like that for QP?
My guess is that QP is working with a very limited playbook. Remember - not only is QP's playcalling limited because he was getting third string reps; it's also limited by how few reps he got in high school compared to most 4+ star QB's (his HS football team only had two coaches on staff, QP didn't get much one-on-one training, and as Fuente said 'he's take a couple thousand less practice reps than most of his peers')
The next obvious question is 'But why couldn't they install more of the playbook in the bye week?' - My guess is that the coaches thought that HH would start, and were giving him first team reps all week leading up to it, and the decision to bench him was made a day or two before the game.
Of course, this is all speculation.
My first thought was, "Isn't a slant a rhythm building confidence throw?" I'm not sure what kind of easy throws people are wanting, but the first thing that comes to mind are WR screens- and if that's the case, it's very weird to think people would advocate for those considering the usual intense hatred.
Anyway, it appears to me that QP struggles with touch on his passes, as I recall most passes being the low-arching "line drive" type. I could easily imagine that there have been issues with QP throwing too hard on shorter passes, leading to bobbles and creating a significant turnover risk, especially over the middle of the field. Honestly I would characterize QP's throwing as non-harmfully wild, as he didn't put the ball where DBs could make a play, but it didn't seem like our WRs had much of a beat on them either.
Absolutely 0 reason to not play to win no matter what. Are you saying we held off from running a few "wrinkles" that could have won the game as not to tip off our ACC opponents?
I'm not making judgments on playcalling, what I'm saying is the gameplan worked perfectly until ND scored with 29 seconds.
Speaking generally about the gameplan and I'm paraphrasing, but coach Fuente said coming out of the half on the radio that "we want to have a shot to win with 5 minutes left to play"....I'd say they achieved that and then some.
I think it is very short-sighted and disingenuous to suggest we were "playing not to lose".
How do you know we didn't run some wrinkles and ND blew it up or read the play? I certainly don't.
I was directly referring to this.
"Four weeks ago none of us would have thought we even come close to beating Notre Dame.
Why show new wrinkles in a game that is meaningless in the ACC? Especially with a third-string QB."
I considered these statements short sighted and lackadaisical is all. Your statement inferred that we should keep these plays in our pockets for conference play instead of using them to win this game. I'm just saying we should plan to win every game regardless of conference play. There are repercussions for every win and loss regardless of conference that are very wide reaching ESPECIALLY now. Keep in mind, I've said nothing about play calling. I think that for QP the play call was bland but was working for the most part. I disagree with the take, but I do agree that we have some people scared in conference now. I do not agree to skip over this OOC game as meaningless.
you are correct, this is poorly worded. lol I simply meant "meaningless" in terms of winning the coastal division. All games have meaning and I want nothing but 1-0 every week.
I can dig that :)
We did have a wrinkle. We played Quincy all day. He now has a full game of on-field experience.
Had this been an ACC game, I think we would have seen another QB in there at some point, if not starting. We need the wins against ACC foes more than a win against Notre Dame.
I disagree that it was a wrinkle. I think if HH was ready to play he would have played against a ranked ND team at their house. Just my opinion. I don't think it was meaningless. I think our whole team is fired up and ready to destroy in conference teams now after this game though.
Offense does dick in the first half and the receivers couldn't catch a cold and the only reason this was a game was due to the defense playing excellent football for 3 and a half quarters
But sure let's blame Bud for the loss... FFS
Bud gets some blame but the bigger blame goes on corny and fuente.
Why does there have to be blame? Could everybody not see what QP is working with? I love him and future may be bright but Peyton Manning he is not. This was a masterful game plan that came down to a play on the road in south bend. We (this we is the team obviously) need to shake this bullshit attitude in a hurry and focus on a winnable ACC slate.
The game plan was catch multiple interceptions and return a fumble 95 yards for a td and rely heavily on a young defense that had no business playing as well as it did?
Would you rather they lean on QP who was completing around 30%? We had no business going toe to toe with these guys with QP. Make the stop and I guarantee the leprechaun message boards are oozing with "VT just out coached us"
I'd rather run a screen, slant, or other high percentage pass to get a playmaker the ball in space than repeatedly bulldoze QP into the back of the line after a low percentage toss goes incomplete. The designed QB power on 3&8 isn't getting it done.
And to your second point, it just seems defeatist. We had full business going toe to toe in that game, and with more competent coaches, would have won.
I think we had like 7% chance of winning coming in. But yeah lets make it about coaches sucking again. I'm not being a defeatist by saying QP was outmatched...he was. He also excites me for the future.
We had the ability to win today. With a competent staff, we win the game. We've been running the same easily anticipated, slow-developing plays for 4 years. At some point, it's not just going to magically click on the offensive side of the ball. It's the same thing week in and week out for the last 25 weeks. Another moral victory in year 4 isn't helping us win an ACC championship. Cornelsen isn't getting it done.
You will never be happy if your takeaway from this game is the coaches suck.
Lol. We gave the offense 3 TOs, scored 13 points off of a bye, and the offense was really not markably better or worse than our offense has been for the last 3 years. Our offensive coaches suck. Yes - that is a takeaway from this game. I'll be happy when I see progress that leads me to believe we're on our way to competing for a conference championship.
It really came down to putting the ball where the open receivers could succeed. QP was wildly inaccurate and there were multiple opportunities missed. And yes the coaches seemed to be getting gun shy toward the end but I can't blame them.
I think both of you are right. There were some really bad drops by the WRs, some bad throws by QP and some really head scratching play calling. I'm terribly disappointed in where the offense is in year 4.
Is if QP is inaccurate we shouldn't have decided to have him attempt difficult throws
This gang of grousing TKP posters will in fact never be happy.
Hard disagree. Coaches got us very close to winning. They weren't perfect, but not the train wreck you appear to be claiming.
The coaching comments are wild to me. We are on our 3rd QB. What do you expect?
Yesterday demonstrated why you have to have your best QB to win big games - we almost won anyways. There were many missed reads in the run game, several missed open throws, a couple of drops etc. I could argue some the situational calls (ex. 3rd down throw vs run or 3rd down run cs throw on fg drive).
To claim the game plan was crap without the context of understanding when you have the right play call and the fact you are playing your 3rd QB just is oversimplifying a dynamic situation.
This isn't a knock on QP. I'm a huge fan. Let's be clear, to have to come in and get your first start on the road at ND a year before you are realistically gonna be ready is a crazy hard situation and to his credit he mentally was in charge of the offense and right there. He just needs time and experience.
I have said his before, but with Hendon we win this game by 2 TD's.
This group has wanted to run Corny, Fuente and even Bud out of town for 2 years now. It Durant matter what happens in the game, this is where they go.
Spot on. And for people complaining about offensive play calling, what do u want? Patterson- while he did leave it all on the field and put everything he had into this game; was 9-28 passing..... his throws were all over the place, and his receivers had some drops. It was his first start at a ranked ND. If you run the Hooker playbook with him with having very limited 1st team reps, it prob won't be goodly results. To add to it, King was out.
FTR I do agree we should have mixed it up defensively on the last drive, Book couldn't do anything when he was pressured
2nd half third down playcalls were often go routes with 1 on 1 coverage and one telegraphed read, even on third and 3 or 4. Not really a recipe for success with a young qb imo. Maybe go for the long pass on 1st or second down and have shorter routes on third.
Exactly. The defense scored 7 while the offense scored 13. I think 6 of the first 8 drives were 3-and-out. Yep, that's Foster for you. He cost us the game.
Yep. offense scored 13 points. That is not good enough to win in modern football.
There is nothing to be pissed about today. Unless it's the refs, but both sides deserve to call them garbage.
I think there was about 4hours of pretty serious disappointment but it turned once perspective and sobriety seeped in.
For the record if we're doing a blame pie on the coaches/coordinators I'm going with 55% Fu, 30% Corny, 10% Bud, and 5% Shibest
50% Fuente, 30% Corny, 15% Shibest, 5% bus. The fact that our kick returner s don't know to fair catch inside of the 25 is pretty unforgivable.
Let's put this in perspective, we should have beaten ND in South Bend with our 3rd string freshman QB who is clearly still a project.
With Hendon playing QB we win by 2 scores.
That was my problem. QP has been in the program for 2 years, and we can design a playbook around a couple of telegraphed run plays and desperate passes.
Not sure what you mean. QP missed LOTS of open plays. He is a good kid and will be very good given time and played well in many ways. His passing ability just isn't ready yet. He has been in the program for 1 year basically as this is the start of his second year and that timeline is NOT the timeline anyone with any knowledge would have given him to be ready.
He was a 2-3 full year project period. This play design was very good today and we missed opportunities on offense. You have to take a game like that - you can't wait for it to be given to you. Bud owns this one for not adjusting at the end.
In college it's usually better to be the last team with the ball. So pressuring a lot and allowing a quick TD would have given us a better chance.
Bold strategy cotton.
Allow me to clarify - pressuring a lot and potentially stopping them or allowing a score with more time left to drive for a field goal may provide for a better total chance of winning the game. But what do I know, i'm just usually right about everything, usually.
I don't mind playing some Prevent, but when its not working and the other team is crossing the 50 to score the winning TD, you HAVE to adjust.
Like I said, Bud has learned this lesson before. We largely brought only 3 DL for most of the 4th quarter vs. Miami and damn near gave them a comeback win.
There is really no excuse for continuing to do this at the end of games.
The Bud-vent D...snatching defeat feom the jaws of victory since 2007.
John Madden once famously quipped that "the only thing the prevent defense does is prevent you from winning." We've seen this story before, people.
If you've watched Hokie football for a long time, you've seen it a lot.
Just not as much lately.
It goes a LOT further back than 2007, my friend. It's been since my frosh year at least and that was 1990.
I don't want to make it seem like I am making excuses for the offense...but I wonder when was it determined that Hooker wasn't healthy and couldn't go.
If they spent the bye week game planning for Hooker and had to pencil in Patterson at the last minute...maybe I understand the awful first half. Not sure what I think about all of the drops. Does QP get many reps with the receivers?
He got at least some of the 1st team reps in practice this week.
I heard earlier in the week he was getting at least half of the first team reps. Idk if he was getting even more the previous BYE week while Hooker was probably even farther back in his recovery.
Agreed completely. The coaches lost this game. Corny called a terrible game, and Bud coached scared in the last drive. Prevent defense works when there's 45 seconds in the game, not 3 minutes 45 seconds. Once Book realized he could dink and dunk his way down the field and Bud refused to switch things up, I knew the game was over.
Proud of our kids though. They played their guts out and showed that they're really coming together.
Quincy looked like SHIT.
Quincy looked fine when the play calling allowed him to build some rhythm. The problem was the play calling rarely did allow that.
But we saw today why Hooker is the QB if he's healthy, and Quincy still needs polishing
I agree that he could've executed better, but I do think it's a little unnecessary to say that an amateur athlete who's been in the program for about 15 months 'looked like shit.'
Might get into more details later this week but a lot of offensive players were very vocal/upset in offensive gameplay 2nd half.
1V1 matchups were ignored and those guys took that to heart and were somewhat hurt by lack of confidence.
Very interesting. I'm still just perplexed that the offense we saw was the best they could come up with for QP coming off a bye. It just inspired little confidence or creative thinking. And as French mentioned, Patterson wasn't even making the right reads in the run game most of the time. It's almost like they didn't plan to win the game but just play things as conservatively and safe as possible for QP. I don't know but that right there sealed the deal for me that we need an offensive overhaul.
-the Justin Fuente/Brad Cornelson tagline
I don't know....Quincy was just missing throws and reads....
The two fades before the final field goal, either would have been a TD with a better thrown ball. One was a missed PI. We were definitely attacking 1v1 matchups.
The drive before we gave the ball back, Patterson missed reads and a wide open receiver on 3rd down (Keene, I think, who had 20 yds in front of him). Our OLine struggled on the drive.
They might be upset we weren't aggressive, but I don't fault the calls today.
I'd argue they let QP throw more than I expected the timing seemed off though and some bigger drops in the first half didn't help. Personally it felt we didn't run enough and went for the jump ball more than we should have at times. Just my 2 cents
If hazelton was upset I hope he watched his own film. He had several important drops. (And yes a few clutch catches)
So Hazelton was pissed we didn't throw to him more?
Everyone who has played QB at any level knows every WR thinks they are open every play.
If this is what a pyrrhic victory feels like I hope we lose all our games from now on
We have a legit shot at the Coastal.
TRUE! Could be peak Acc Coastal this year...chaos rules!
I don't know why people are saying this was some masterful game plan and what not. It was a "let's hope its good enough" plan. It basically the same conservative nature we've seen out of Fuente and Corny. Pick a game, they just aren't going to push the issue. It's always just enough to see if it works, never more than enough knowing you left it all on the field regardless of the final outcome. They did let QP pass more, which was an improvement over the week before, but they weren't exactly setting him up for sustained success either. A lot of his passes were deep throws where that long ball is the 1st option. It would have been nice to see them attempt more screen passes or shorter, simpler throws to get some kind of a rhythm going for him. Stuff that is in the playbook that we've seen but isn't overly complicated and advanced (I mean its not Hooker is super advanced checking at the line, snapping the ball and going thru all progressions either). Just anything to sustain some drives. QP was a mixed bag throwing what he did; missing some throws and also having WRs drop some catchable balls so it wasn't all on the game plan but there was room for more. The run game got to predictable with QP read action as well. The looks we've used in the past with McClease and especially Keene, even last game, didn't really manifest their way onto the field today the way it needed to. It was just missing a tiny sprinkle of variety.
The game was close because the defense played very well for the most part, the best game they've had all year imo. Except for whatever reason, Bud had them turtle up at the end of the game which was a bummer. It's not an frequent with him, but is something that happens with him from time to time. Maybe its just all part of the larger atmosphere among all the staff, they're just too conservative and it creeps into their mindset in situations. Just be more trusting that those players will make the play if you give them the opportunity. I think they're viewing the team's youth too much as an obstacle to overcome. Open it up more. If they make a mistake, coach em up and learn from it. I'd rather lose going all out than having questions at the end of if I could have done more.
Those refs sucked though
My problem is that on the final offensive drive, knowing that we were only up 6 with a lot of time left, we weren't actively looking to score and instead tried to run down the clock by bullying a bigger and more talented team. YOu can't just run down the clock, you have to score on that drive to make it a two possession game. I'm ok with playing prevent defense the last drive IF you rush 4 instead of 3. I am very disappointed that we basically gave away a very winnable game and I don't accept the argument that this game was "meaningless" or "doesn't really matter" because it wasn't a conference game.
I think the best strategy in those situations I go prevent downs 1-3, force them into a 4th down passing situation then bring the house
People always gripe about the prevent when it doesn't work out. Yet, it is frequently employed by most coordinators at all levels in this type of situation. Bud also explicitly stated in the post game that he thought they needed to drop a couple guys back to compensate for Farley and Waller being out. We got them to a 4th down and they made a play. It was very close to being a successful strategy.
It can work when you can get any sort of pass rush, sure. We can't get a reasonable pass rush with our standard personnel, so taking a DL and maybe a LB away and going 3 is just conceding the QB will have as much time as he wants to throw, while we're hoping for an incompletion. Add in that our 2 corners are out and we're relying on backups to cover men for 5, 6, 7+ seconds. It was the epitome of playing scared and not playing to win.
We needed tactical blitzing - one guy - delayed - from the slot - or linebacker. That may have gotten book rattled.
It isn't employed as an every down scenario at the college or pro level by anyone. The purpose of the 3 man rush is not to give up the "big" play, not to stop first downs. When the opposing team doesn't have time to drive the ball, yeah, throw in some 3 man rush. However, when the opponent has plenty of time, it is a terrible strategy.
College offenses today are way too good at passing and college rules facilitate conserving the clock. You can afford incomplete passes when it is easy to get a 10 yarder for a first down. ND got the ball with 3+ minutes with one TO and ran 18 plays in 2:53...yes, 18! Abandoning the base D significantly increased ND's chances to win...and they did. TFL's and penalties stop drives...you get very few of either in the prevent.
Fair points all around. In hindsight I agree, and wish we had brought pressure because zone coverage is not a strength of the team. If you go back and watch the last minute of the Miami game, Bud called things the same way. Actually they made a huge gain on nearly an identical crossing route to keep the drive alive. I guess like you said, it all comes down to timing. However, that 4th down play was under a minute I believe and they still had a little ways to go. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Ultimately we tend to complain when it doesn't, and I personally don't feel that Bud's strategy was egregious.
My only gripe is the 4th and 10 3man rush. Your D is really gassed and if you don't get that stop everyone knows the game is over....you have to call your best blitz package for that specific play....
I just got to watch the game. Not sure why so many people are bitching right now. If you thought we were going to win this game coming in you were lying to yourself. I mean could we, sure, but likely no. I was just hoping to not get embarrassed on the field. They did much more and almost came up with the victory.
No idea about the Hooker situation, but my initial thoughts were lets make sure his knee is ok to go for ACC play. Lets get QP some reps and serious game experience. If we win this game, awesome; one game closer to bowl eligibility and we are still in the race for the coastal. If we lose, we are still in the race for the Coastal. Was a little surprised we started moving the ball on them later after how the first half went. The defense played amazing. The last drive wasn't their fault that's on the play-calling imo. As soon as I saw three down linemen I knew we were going to at least let them get into FG position. We were getting good pressure all game and then pull up when we need it most. A little frustrating.
QP is who he is right now. People want him to come in and be Justin Fields or something but that's not where he's at right now. He may have been in the program for 2 years but he's barely gotten snaps with the 1st. I thought he played well for where he's at right now. We know he's not an electric passer. Could they have opened up the playbook more? I guess, I don't know. But to me there weren't too many head scratching calls on offense. A couple but nothing that had me yelling at the tv.
I thought the team played great and a 1 pt loss in the final minute is about as good as you can ask for outside of a win. This defense improves by the week. I have a lot of confidence in the team going into WF.
QP is big strong and fast. Can he block? Can he catch?
In all seriousness, if he falls down the depth chart next year with Braxton being eligible, he could legit be a good tight end.
Enjoyed the positive post and feel the same way.
A fan like you is why tech is gonna be a second rate team for eternity
Yes boo the person who is telling the truth. The truth is alot of people would love going 1-11 if that 1 win was against uva
I want ACC Championships NY6 bowls and National championship playoff not 3rd teir acc bowls and medicory
I want an 8 figure salary, a Bugatti Veyron, a spaceship and Christian McCaffrey's athletic ability.
ITS NOT REALISTIC THIS YEAR. STOP BEING A CHILD.
We might get there soon, but it's really clear it won't happen this year. Don't tell people they are bad fans for being realistic and happy with achievable accomplishments.
Stop making it like its all rainbow and flowers when its obviously not
Give me a competent OC and a DC who will change their strategy when its back firing OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN
That's when this team we be good until then i see 6-6 every year until changes are made
Im sorry for ranting the game hurt me bad yesterday
did you think that was a realistic outcome this year?
With this schedule i thought we go 10-2 9-3
A) While that was certainly a possibility, Vegas set the line at 8.5 for us, meaning only about 50%. Far from a guarantee.
B) 9-3 is still on the table.
I know but i don't think tech wins out
Even before the season, I didn't think Tech would beat Miami, or that Tech would come less than a minute from winning in South Bend. After the Duke debacle, I figured it was almost certain both would end in ugly losses.
You never know what's going to happen. That's why they play the games.
Agreed thanks for setting me straight
you know what, nevermind
Just because your opinion differs from another poster doesnt make your version the truth
Y'all opinions are like the coach's playcalling at end of the game yesterday. It has no BALLS
You seem to be on a bit of a Bender. You may want to take a bit of a break.
So y'all can spread y'all bullshit positive energy? No i aint gonna calm down until Tech starts finishing games they had in the bag if the coaches had some BALLS
You seem to be on a bit of a bender using "a bit" as an adjective. Jusssst messing with you.
Please insert girder?
Bingo.
My man. Woman.
Turkey.
My two points to be a world class program: 1. Getting and keeping enthusiast fans (I can tell you are one, so am I); Having the entirety of our fans (looking at you student section) stay for a whole game; Turning that great enthusiasm that you have into something positive and visible like packing the corners of the east stands... in short-- looking good in front of the camera win or lose. 2. (and most importantly). Money: Donations, money, facilities. I'll be the first to admit I vent on here but it likely won't do anything (other than keep me sane)--- but making a donation likely will or at least give an AD more shots at it.
The D kept us alive all day, but as soon as we started going prevent victory on that last drive, I knew we were toast
QP basically playing with training wheels on really grinds my gears. If your going to start him give him some easy throws to start with and don't just run the QB lead. I get he doesn't have the full playbook yet, but I'm surprised what few passing plays we did utilize.
Several points from yesterday that have me worried/hopeful for the home stretch.
1. Corny is incapable of calling a creative game. Where are the 4-6 yard passes for a young QB? Run the tight ends behind the LBs and get 4 or 5 on first down.
2. Not blitzing on 4th and 10 is inexcusable. Bring the house and dont let anyone get past 10 yards before the qb is on the ground. That has a much higher probability of working with inexperienced players than having them track receivers for 5 seconds.
3. I am hopeful we see Tajh Gary down the stretch. He looked great earlier in the year and may be the bowling ball we need. Keene needs to be catching passes not running into a pile.
4. The offense must find plays that everyone in the stadium hasn't seen before. Field goals in the red zone are not going to beat wake, pitt or uva.
I am hopeful we see some changes, but worried this staff is incapable. Not trusting young players is no longer gonna cut it. They are your players and you must run an effective game plan. What message is that showing young recruits that want early playing time? What message is that showing your current players? Playing not to lose is only going to make you lose.
Multiple posters in here are saying they hate it when Bud goes into prevent defense because it doesn't seem to work. I'm not sure that's what I see. Keep in mind that he goes into prevent in a very specific situation: when the opposing offense is on their last drive and is throwing the kitchen sink to get that final score. At that point it's a totally different ball game as the offense is going for it on every 4th down, and has special plays drawn specifically for that situation. I suspect most teams give up more points in that situation than any other random drive during the game, and the prevent defense isn't necessarily the reason.
The prevent defense almost worked in this game, I seem to remember them needing 4 downs to convert multiple times on that last drive. Plenty of counterexamples exist where the strategy allowed us to hold on (WVU '17, Miami '11), but the times when it doesn't are also memorable.
Edit: another point: I remember us going into 3 linemen sets multiple times during obvious passing downs, and it worked then most of the time.
UVA 2014 and 2015 are some other examples.
You're right, we were covering well all game especially when only rushing 3-4 guys. The other factor was we were missing Farley and Waller so Bud did not want to get beat on a 1v1. With that said, I wish on one of those 4th and longs we had sent Ashby or Ladler. We had nothing to lose!
Agree with this. Notre Dame went on an 18 play drive. They had to execute 18 plays in order to win the game, and that probably gave VT 8-10 more chances to make a play, get a turnover, etc. Up until that point of the game, had ND really shown that they could sustain that long of a drive without shooting themselves in the foot? If Bud had been more aggressive and ND had a huge chunk play, that would have also been a fail, no?
Bud had to play zone. He doesn't have elite edge rushers or a Tim Settle in the middle now. He had no choice. His best chance was to get a pick or hold them to a FG. With Darryl Tapp and Kyle Fuller on the field, you can be aggressive. He played to his personnel
^This.
And, they got the pick they needed in prevent D that was negated by a bonehead late hit on the QB.
Diablo had a great game, but he is out of position A TON and was so tremendously on the final TD run. He holds the edge and there's at least a hit on Book.
We were in zone, he was in his zone, Book and the ND caught it, called a one read pass play, or run if there was an opening, our zone covered the pass, the run was open
I agree. They were in zone, but DD gets sucked in and gets picked by the WR who was already engaged on a cb. there were 3 guys to the inside to shut that door.
If DD stays outside that block, hell, or even even with the block, Book at least has to make a move to get into the endzone.
Book is at the 7yd line when he jabs inside. DD is still at the goal line and took that jab hook-line-and sinker and has zero chance of recovery.
He had inside help. He should be playing to spill to the outside shoulder of that WR block if no inside help. Zone or not, that's a gamble you can't afford to make in that situation.
May be said somewhere above, but CC at TSL brought up a good point. We had to play rush-3 to protect the DBs. We were seriously in the hurt box. Waller was ejected. Farley was out hurt. Chapman came back in (from injury) to replace Farley, etc. we weren't getting rush from 4, so you might as well rush 3 and drop the extra man to help, with better odds to block them). Bud said as much in the post game (but coach speaked it)