Illinois Hokie's Recent Comments
Is it just me, or does Jon Hamm look a lot like Christopher Meloni? Never noticed it until I saw this gif, oddly enough.
|
11 years 1 month
# | Bitter blog - A brief history of time of the Hokies' indoor facility (in pictures) Also, if they find this does actually become an issue, couldn't they replace the turf on the practice fields with an artificial surface to make it more resilient?
|
11 years 1 month
# | Bitter blog - A brief history of time of the Hokies' indoor facility (in pictures) Couple of things...
1) Do we do two-a-days now? A while back I remember a story about two-a-days in college football that pointed to us as one of the few BCS conference programs that has never done them. Did Frank adopt them recently?
2) How short are the outdoor fields now? If they're both 50 yards I could see what you're saying. If they're both 80, I don't see us wearing them down like you're saying, because we probably didn't really use those other 20 yards much anyway.
3) We do now have THREE practice fields, don't we? Why wouldn't we rotate into the indoor facility to save wear and tear on the two outdoor fields? Wasn't that partially the point? And isn't that really the hidden benefit of us locating the indoor facility right beside the outdoor fields?
4) I'm bad at math.
|
11 years 1 month
# | Bitter blog - A brief history of time of the Hokies' indoor facility (in pictures) How often do you need a full field for practices? Not a rhetorical question. Aren't practices more situational/formation-oriented? Or do they actually simulate an entire game during practices? As long as a practice field is long enough to have to different squads working on opposite sides of it, it's big enough isn't it?
Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ. I have never felt less confident up three goals with under four to play.
Bring on Tampa.
They have a good sense of humor about it right now, and about this season. I'm not sure any of them realize yet what this final, money-saving season under Mike London is going to do to the program longterm. He just brought in one of the worst recruiting classes in the ACC, and now he's hemmoraging veteran players. There's leaving the cupboards bare, and then there's burning the house down.
I find both equally unlikely starters.
By what logic? Wade played tackle in high school, so he has those years of of playing offensive line that you're valuing in hypothetical freshman recruit's resume, but you're dismissing them in Wade's. On top of those years of experience in high school, Wade now has experience playing that same position at the P5 level. So I fail to see the logic in your statement that both make equally likely (or unlikely) starters.
I actually do agree with the statement if you're starting a true freshman in the O line you're in a world of hurt. The logic behind it being, there is probably no position that requires more development from the high school level to the P5 level than offensive lineman. Freshman mistakes can hurt you at every position, but freshman mistakes can derail an entire offense on the O line. So that statement makes logical sense to me.
What didn't was the counterclaim that if you start a senior D3 transfer converted defensive tackle, you're in a world of hurt. That just doesn't ring necessarily true to me. There's nothing that says a player is bad or mistake prone or that your program is hurting if that's your starting right tackle. It could just as easily mean he won the job straight up and is the best option.
Doesn't the GT scout team play a traditional offense?
You have just described:
- The West Coast offense
- The Air Raid
- The Spread Option
- The Pistol
If you're going to hate one system offense, you should probably hate them all.
Have you gone on record with your own prediction yet, Andy? Or are you abstaining?
After enduring years of neutered coachspeak from Beamer, I find CPJ's assholery kind of refreshing. I wouldn't want to have a beer with the guy, but he's entertaining to listen to.
Wow. I don't get the GT hate.
I want to beat them every year. But I want to beat every conference opponent every year. Outside of the Techmo Bowl, I always hope GT does well because it is good for the conference. I pulled for GT hard in the Orange Bowl, and one of the best media moments of the college football season IMO was in the post game interview when Paul Johnson said, "Maybe now we don't have to hear about the SEC."
Oh, gotcha. I thought you were counting it as a conference game the way I read it. My bad.
With the notable exception of Bucky Hodges' move from QB to TE, the position a player plays on the scout team usually doesn't really bear on where he'll play on the roster, if he's able to make that jump. Wade came in with DT experience so we used that on the scout team. It doesn't mean he was ever going to cut it as a DT in Wile's scheme. Searels wanted Wade as soon as he got his office unpacked. Wade was given his shot on the DL just like Teller and Nijman were, but wound up where he was better suited on our team. I feel equally confident saying Teller and Nijman were never DL for us either.
Goddammit, man, you're making it hard not to turn this into a mutual admiration society.
The thing on Stinespring, his first two years as OC gave the indication he was going to be good. I would LOVE to replicate our 2003 numbers on offense. But come 2006, 2007, it was obvious he was in over his head. The tough decision came five years too late, and that delay is specifically what kept us at the 10-win level with an empty trophy case.
Also, Alabama was a mess when Nick took it over, and Stanford was the Duke of the west coast until Harbaugh arrived. Urban was really the only one who stepped into a program built for immediate success.
Notre Dame has no bearing on the divisonal championship. It's a nonconference game.
Perhaps, but you then went on to make what was reasonably considered a blanket statement about pedigree. You admit now, though, that wasn't your intent, so I withdraw my Kam and Sam comparison.
As for position switches, it's prevalent throughout all of college football, so much so that CBS Sports wrote an article about it a couple of years ago. And we follow the norm in switches: mostly it's the freshmen or redshirt freshmen who switch spots, upperclassmen like Redman when the need arises.
Also, you're just straight up wrong about Wade being a DT. He may have been listed at DT on the roster when he sat out his transfer year, but he never played a down on defense for us. He's only ever been an O lineman and special teams player for us. So I don't understand your last sentence at all.
They draw both Clemson and Florida State in inter-divison play, so we might not even have to beat them head to head to win the division. Even though I think we will beat them.
Nicely put. Probably also why we see so many "project" recruits at the skill positions come out of Virginia. And an emphasis on why we have to continue to expand our recruiting footprint.
That's why you see a kid who played QB, Safety, and kick returner all in the same game. Or TE and DE.
Don't you think that has more to do with roster size? I'm guessing ideally every coach at every level would want to be able to have one player play each position exclusively, just to be able to rest his players. But some schools just can't field a team deep enough to do that. I don't think that it's that the players aren't as developed, it's more that there aren't enough players to go around.
All GT has to do is find adequate A and B backs. When you have a QB as good in that offense as Thomas is, the supporting cast doesn't have to be perfect. He might be the best triple option QB since Eric Crouch.
I took his comment to mean "the rest of us talking part in this conversation don't care as much about pedegree," not that you are literally the only person participating on TKP who cares about it.
As for your logic not being broadly applicable, why not? Your claim was if we were starting a player matching his resume, we were in a world of hurt. Not that it was anything in his play that concerned you (though you have stated those specific concerns elsewhere, credit where credit is due), but in this case you were speaking generally about starting a player who matches a certain history. If you are concerned about pedigree of one player, it stands to reason you would be concerned about player pedigree generally. If that's not what you meant, then I retract my statement. But it's what you said.
As for being recruited for a specific position, I think you're underestimating how fluid football positions are. Players change positions all the time, when moving from high school to college and even in the middle of their college careers. Safeties become corners or linebackers. O linemen become D linemen. Tight ends become everything. Already this off season we've seen a tight end and a D linemen become an o lineman, and Torrian Gray has basically said Chuck Clark will play every defensive backfield position at some point this season. There is a lot of overlap to the positional skill sets. Players are recruited every year with the notion that the coaches are going to give them a look at various spots. So where Wade played at his previous school really shouldn't matter.
This probably doesn't deserve its own thread, but I was browsing r/cfb after checking that poll out, and apparently the president of UAB is holding a presser tomorrow and might be reversing course on ending the football program. What a cluster.