Recent Comments
Disclaimer: This is completely half-baked.
Mandatory 2-point conversions, but you are only allowed one skill-position player (you get the choice of RB/WR). More smash-mouth, more fat-guy touchdowns.
And yes, it handicaps spread-based teams, but tough s*#%. Man up.
Good ta see ya, Buggz!
The board is quite cordial and inviting but, new guys should possibly lurk for a bit and get the feel for the board and what's been done, in order to avoid reopening a contentious topic that was just rehashed a couple times during the season and then again last week.
You won't find it in the title of any threads, it got buried inside another topic.
So, Welcome, stay, lurk and get a feel for the way things are done here, we take pride in the decorum (the drapes are new) Orange and Maroon DO look good in floor to ceiling drapes.
In the meantime, you must agree, pie > cake.
What's your favorite beer?
My favorite part of this thread is seeing how "Bostad" and "Searels" get auto-corrected.
You forgot the last one:
-kill it as a head coach
That was a definite "No Trespassing Allowed", in my crossing pattern, type of a hit.
That's legal and makes the opposing team not want to take advantage of that high % short pass.
That's good football there. Only thing I'd like to have seen out of that was wrapping up. But then, wrapping up in this kind of situation helps the receiver keep the ball so, maybe not.
And allow the kicker to decide how far back he'd like to place it, like rugby, to make the angle possible.
Wow! I asked what I thought was an innocent question, because I think Frank Beamer is the best thing to ever happen to Virginia Tech football and I am curious how much longer we will be fortunate to have him as head coach. Instead of an answer, I get nothing but personal attacks, and am accused of gloom and doom.
This is my first day on this message board. I came here because I didn't like what was happening at TSL. Instead I get asked to stop "asking the same fucking question over and over again". I'm sorry I posted anything at all. Obviously this message board is not the cordial environment I had hoped it would be.
I am coming over under a different handle. Tired of the negativity on TSL. You post something and get a beat down by the people who are on the site 24/7. Makes people not want to post. It's like internet bullying.
F'reals.
I'm much more concerned with the post-TSL transition of TKP than VT right now. It feels like we are in the last life boat and every TSLer is hanging on the side trying to scurry on board. You're going to sink us all!
The Stick it In chant is/was awesome. It's a piece of our identity that was force-ably taken from us. We want it back.
That's what I meant in saying the touchdown call would be more interesting. You would want the TE over the middle more than the fade to set up the extra point. Or if you do end up out there, you might just go for 2 over kicking it.
And you would have to set up an outer bounds to how far east-west you can go. You can't line up if you're on the sideline. Hashes would be a logical place to start, but I would push it another 5 yards just to make it more interesting.
Damn, my question was going to be about pass pro, since that was one of the reasons I kept hearing was keeping Caleb off the field. Now we have to badger Andy Bitter to ask/observe that during spring ball.
and that's not to mention that it's actually easier to score from slightly further out. From the 2 yard line the defense has a lot less space to defend. ADV Defense.
It'd also have the advantage of making those fade throws to the corner of the endzone which are impossible to defend less valuable - the 1 pt attempt would be impossible. Quick question - how far East or West could you go? All the way to the sideline, or are you stopped at the hashes? And does that hold for a 2-pt try?
Yeah. You just move east-west depending on where you are tackled in the end zone.
What's the deal with the "Stick It In" chant? Is it just a running joke, or do people really care that much about it? I mean, it's better than the Hokie Pokie... but I don't get why every other poster is seemingly butthurt about them removing the chant. And yeah, I get the sexual metaphor.
Cereals
That's not bad. I like it. Would it still be from the 2?
The only problem with this plan, is that you figure the 2-pt conversion from the 2 currently is about a 50% conversion rate (see below):
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-two-point-conversion-statis...
Over the years, the average success rate of two point conversions in the NFL has been around 50%
That means that your expected value of a TD is still 7 if go for 2 every time currently. If you drop the 2 yard attempt to only 1 point, and you assume the % stays similar, then now your TDs are only worth 6.5 points on average, which means FGs are more valuable (relatively).
Play it like rugby. Wherever the ball is "touched down" in the end zone is where you have to kick from. Maybe set an outer limit, but you would be kicking from near a sideline at some crazy angle. That would spice things up a bit, and make the touchdown a little more interesting with the player trying to get to the center of the field while already in the end zone.
I love it. Just eliminate the 1 pt attempt and make everybody go for two. Statistically, about 50% of 2-pt conversions are good, so you aren't impacting the value of a TD, but you're adding way more excitement to the game. I'd also argue that FGs are too easy - teams should not be making 60 yarders (that means they're barely getting past midfield!). Maybe narrow the goalposts significantly.
Anybody that expects to play 3+ games against the likes of Kapernik, Wilson, RGIII, Newton next year needs to give him a serious look.