Illinois Hokie's Recent Comments
|
11 years 1 month
# | Throwback Thursday: Photo of Virginia Tech Defensive Coordinator Bud Foster from 1985 is Glorious 
Please tell me I'm not the only one.
|
11 years 1 month
# | Throwback Thursday: Photo of Virginia Tech Defensive Coordinator Bud Foster from 1985 is Glorious Is Bud Foster for the children?
Dare we say, a mike/roverwhip hybrid? A rikewhike? A movermip?
EDIT: Got my ILB positions mixed up, and was stuck in our 2003 defense..
I'm high on Reavis. His open field presence is Fulleresque.
Imagine Tyrod behind a competent O line.
Seconded, though I do have some concerns at mike.
If Facyson comes back healthy, he might be a dark horse for some major awards, just because QBs will be throwing away from Kendall with all this national press he's getting.
I honestly don't know if it was you or someone else, and I can't remember the context. I just remember reading it and thinking, can we give Beamer credit for guiding the program through a crisis he himself created? And I'm all for saying Beamer did make changes when he had to. What I'd take exception to is the idea that we say Frank led us through this rough patch without also acknowledging that he was under one who led us into the wilderness to begin with.
None of this is to say that Frank is a bad coach. He's a legit first ballot hall of famer. But he should have seen that changes needed to be made before the deficiencies in the offense and recruiting caught up to us.
Yeah, ten wins a year so everything must be good, I get the mindset that spurred this decline in the program., I just find fault with it. I guarantee you if Nick Saban, Urban Meyer or Jim Harbaugh saw their offense do what our offense did under Stinespring, the win total wouldn't mitigate anything. The offense was not contributing to overall program success.
Frank gets credit for making changes when he had to, and in that regard has preserved his legacy more than Bobby Bowden or Joe Paterno were capable. And he genuinely is a great coach. I just don't think it should be glossed over that he created the crisis he is now leading us through.
But like you said, the culture of loyalty trickled down into the fanbase. There was a time when questioning our coaching staff was sacrilege, even when our offense stunk on ice. In that regard, this tanking (and I use that term loosely as we have yet to post a losing season yet) has raised expectations and accountability within the staff. If Loeffler posts a third consecutive year if unacceptably bad offensive numbers, he'll be gone. As he should be.
Suggs ran behind much better lines than RMFW did. I'd like to see what Williams could do behind some of those lines from the turn of the century.
|
11 years 1 month
# | Bitter blog - A closer look: Virginia Tech athletic department revenues hit $73 million in 2013-14 I'm really, really interested to see the numbers from Whit's first full year. I'll actually be a little surprised if he stayed in the black year one, as aggressive as he was right out if the gate.
As much as everyone loves to pile on the offense for the Wake Forest game, BC was its reciprocal. The defense was atrocious that game and cost us what should have been an easy win with how well the offense was working.
Absolutely there is no shortage of fans who believe we could never compete with the upper echelon, but if Weaver had been here another 3-5 years, he would have put us in a position where we never would have. Right now Whit just has to fight perception and play catch up.
THIS.
I want no part of this line, especially if it is indeed regular season only. Way too high a chance for a push in my mind. At 7.5, I'd be really tempted to bet the over.
This, and also, Searels is building camaraderie among his linemen. That's something Newsome never did. His lines never played as a five-headed hydra the way great lines should. The fact that all our OL players are hanging out, goofing off, just being bros together pays intangible dividends when they put their knuckles on the turf together.
It... It almost sounds like you're saying we'll have an honest to goodness O line instead of a clusterfuck.
I will say, he was a terrific bean counter, and his frugality has put Whit in a position to be able to spend aggressively. However, it has also put Whit in a position to have to spend aggressively just to play catch up to other elite programs.
Weaver was the architect of the "VT isn't elite, and we can't compete with elite programs" mindset. A few more years with him at the reigns, and it would have been a self-fulfilling prophecy.
If you hire a friend, you have to be willing to fire a friend.
I do agree there was some complacency and resting upon laurels that occurred, due in large part to the culture that Jim Weaver fostered during his tenure, but there was also at noticeable "turtling" of the staff after Kevin Rodgers left VT for the Vikings. After that, hiring decisions were made with the thought in mind that we were only going to bring someone in if they planned on staying at VT. And thus was the O'Cainspring era born.
Curt Newsome is at fault for decimating our OL, Frank is at fault for keeping Newsome around when it became obvious he was a poor fit.
Someone mentioned somewhere else in the forum the other day that if VT returns to a winning tradition, Frank should be credited with guiding the program through a rough patch. This seems disingenuous to me, as the rough patch came about specifically because Frank valued loyalty higher than performance for a stretch of too many years. Frank pulled a Mack Brown, and if the program rebounds, Frank should be credited with being able to change before it cost him his job. Frank came really close to diminishing his legacy by having it end on a sour note.
This part jumped out at me:
Ideally, Addazio hopes to carry a minimum of 16 offensive linemen on scholarship, enough to field a full two-deep while leaving a handful of redshirts, scout-teamers, and injured bystanders to spare.
So I checked HokieSports.com, and it turns out we have 19 offensive linemen on roster. Certainly we have our fair share of redshirts and scout teamers, but from a pure numbers game, in two seasons post-Newsome we seem to be in a situation of developing talent rather than looking for it.
My take on it is, if someone produces content, regardless of what that content is, even if it's just recording something and posting it online, and they ask that you cite them as a source if you use their content, common courtesy dictates that you cite them.
On the other hand, if someone fails to cite them as a source in using their content, common courtesy dictates that you reach out to the person who used your content and make a good faith effort to ask for citation in a professional manner. In this regard, Phreak came up short.
Also, if someone fails or refuses to cite you, at some point you have to accept that such is the nature of piracy. Either that, or throw a Twitter tantrum.
Poorly worded, perhaps, but not ignorant. Your comment seemed to dismiss the possibility than an unsung hero could be the best option at a position (and further, be a very good option period) and I think that's what he was referring to. By your logic, we'd be in a world of hurt to start a two start converted quarterback at safety (Kam Chancellor) or a walk on at fullback (Sam Rogers). In general I believe it's accurate to say that starting a true freshman at tackle bespeaks greater desperation than stating a senior, regardless of the path that senior took to they position prior to this season.