Illinois Hokie's Recent Comments

I remember when wrestling video games were the best thing on N64. I missed significant class time because of WrestleMania 2000. It's a shame what 2K Sports has done to what should be a fun gaming experience even for people who don't give a shit about wrestling.

Yup. Seems like 3-6 months is the standard delay for a third party game to be ported to Switch. But it's worth the wait to be able to play it on the go. (For me at least.)

Ever play Super Mario Bros? Imagine if you had to pay Nintendo real money to unlock the fireball flower.

He's gonna have a losing record after losing the job, too.

This game should put the red herring that is play calling to bed. With each change of QB, the calls changed to suit whoever was behind center and put them in a position to be successful. You can still believe Corny isn't a good OC, and there are facts to support your argument. But play calling isn't one of them.

ThIs TeAm FoLdS aT tHe FiRsT sIgN oF aDvErSiTy...

All the people who love Bud (I do) and hate Fuente (I do not) need to realize Bud as a head coach would talk and act a lot like Fuente.

As does yours. The defense sucked hind tit against an FCS offense.

When it's our starting QB's second start, I want him taking every snap.

I mentioned in another thread, Fuente's loyalty to Willis was more concerning to me than his loyalty to Cornelson. It seems like a 180° turn from Fuente starting Paxton Lunch over Jacob Karam at Memphis. Giving the benefit of the doubt, I'm hoping Willis said and did all the right things in practice, and appeared to have fixed his issues in the zone read. Sometimes perceived improvement in practice doesn't translate to in-game performance. But the whole thing is just very bizarre.

Regarding the "loyal to Cornelson" criticism, Fuente's response to that has been consistent: he insists that the playcalling isn't the issue. A lot of people have dismissed that out of hand, but I have never agreed with the assertion that the main issue with our offense has been playcalling. In the era of the zone read and the RPO, playcalling matters increasingly less, because any "play" called can wind up with a multitude of outcomes. You can have the same playcall two downs in a row and never know it, because the first play will be a jet sweep and the second will be a pass, based on the reads.

Playcalling was the albatross around the neck or our offense under Stinespring because the formation we were in telegraphed what play was coming. (And also because a lot of the plays in the playbook were single predetermined outcomes that didn't require a lot of reads.) In Fuente's system - hell, even in Loeffler's system, for that matter - the design of the scheme and having a QB who can make the right reads is way more important than what specific play is called at any given moment.

I believe Fuente when he says playcalling isn't the issue. I also don't think for a second he's deflecting blame when he says the issue is execution, because if he can't coach his players to execute his scheme, that's on him, not the players. Fuente knows that, and has said as much, basically verbatim, repeatedly.

I'm much more concerned with Fuente's loyalty to Willis than his loyalty to Cornelson. It should not have taken four games this season to diagnose the issues Willis was still having after basically a full season and an off-season as the starter.

Let me clarify: the defense isn't good. I don't think it will be good at any point this season. But it was improved against Miami as compared to Duke. Statistically, maybe not so much, but as far as the eye test? Big step forward. If nothing else, the hella effort we saw for 2 or 3 series against Duke, we saw for the first half against Miami. And even after adjustments by Miami had the defense on its heels, there was a "want to" against Miami that the defense did not show against Duke.

I'm not saying the defense was good against Miami. I'm saying the defense improved against Miami, and that's all I care about.