Recent Comments

We would've been #2 of most viewed regular season if not for those 1,000 people who didn't watch the game.

edit: It also speaks volumes to our scheduling when you look at the fact of us having #1 and #2 of the top viewed opening weekend games in history

Hopefully everyone just watched the second quarter.

I agreed with everything you wrote here French...(Thank you sensei, you have taught me well)...I too expected a 5DL look...last year we ran the bear with nickel personnel, I guess bud figured, nickel worked good, dime should be even better (where RVD's coverage skills basically make him a safety). Any thoughts on WHY we didn't have the 2 DEs and 3DTs look?
Motu...motu...motu...I hate to say it but, can anyone remember a time when Foster was clearly the weak link in the coaching staff? Major issues / lack of demonstrable improvement- defensive scheme and MLB...that's all on Foster...wow, I guess everyone has to have a bad game every once in a while.
I think our best chance for improvement is to move someone to MLB, or burn the RS kid's shirt, and get them all the reps for the next two weeks...I also expect Alexander to replace Frye sooner than later, not because we want him to, but because he has superior tools to succeed, and that was translating in the game.
All in all, I think this D is young and inexperienced at MLB and Rover, get the right guys in position to succeed and get them reps, we'll start dominating people then...oh and use the damn depth at DT to wear down opposing O's..don't bench the biggest advantage of team <-----this was frustrating.

I don't know what to say about AM54. I tried to watch him closely the whole game, and to my very inexperience eye, I didn't see him do much of anything except get caught up in the wash. To me, I think he's in the game because of several reasons.

Huelskamp is on the smallish size for a Mike LB in Bud's system.
Carson Lydon is too green to call out the set as per the Mike LB responsibility.
Edmunds is probably in the same boat as Lydon.

In my opinion, if the Hokies put in a guy at Mike that can't set the defense, it's just going to exacerbate any issues in the secondary. Looking back at Monday night, the secondary has a few issues.

Like French said, AM54 needs a big week this week. If it were me (Thank God it's not) and AM54 starts hitting the wall again, I'd like to get a look at Huelskamp if that ACL is good to go. He seems like a heady guy, and he's been around for a couple of years. I know that he's about 20 lbs lighter than what Bud usually has at MLB, but really, MLB just needs to be a big motor, rude- attitude guy that knows how to play football.

As far as secondary, I'm a little worried about Facyson, especially Coach TG's comments about how he hopes he's OK. I would not be surprised if the secondary gets shuffled around big time in the next few weeks... like Kendall and Chuck stay where they are, and everybody else gets a new job.

That's how a QB should block. Not like the uncalled blocks in the back QB#12 from that other team was throwing.

I just saw your edit.
Yep. And they racked up 185 yards in the 1st qtr, so 32% of their yardage came in the first 25% of game time too.

This is Motley's job until Lawson takes it from him. Now, I didn't think Lawson would leap him if Brewer was still healthy, but now that we're in this situation, we need the best guy on the field at all times. Right now, that's Motley. With the extra practice he'll receive over the next few weeks, would not be surprised if Lawson becomes the better option by the end of the year.

Everybody else stops listening when the sentence starts with "Yea, well we only lost because..."

Thankfully, I never started a sentence like that.

There's excuses, which I'm not making, and there's analysis. You seem to be dismissing both.

I didn't realize watching in real time that some of our RBs were missing the hole.

Tad bit off topic but not at same time, but I didn't realize watching in real time at Lane that one of our RBs was rocking a gold watch during the game. Took me until yesterday on Twitter to ever even hear about that. Pretty silly stuff.

Everybody else stops listening when the sentence starts with "Yea, well we only lost because..."

The excuse that the weaknesses in the defense were a result of Brewer's injury isn't supported by the game film. That excuse would hold more weight if it had been a 7-point loss, but it was an 18 point loss, and it was more than just that.

This game exposed some weaknesses in the game plan, and possibly in the defense itself. Better to accept that, and to use it to prepare for the rest of the season. You don't get a "do-over" for that particular game.

While it's certainly understandable that losing Brewer affected VT's ability to win, it's just an excuse at this point. The only way you can "prove" that you win is by actually winning the game.

No amount of statistics is going to change that.

With any luck, he'll play well enough next year and the year after that we won't get the extra year anyway.