Recent Comments

Bah! Fuck tha aNoles and #fuckaccunlessvtistopdawg.

I find this argument very out of the box and just what we might need. Personally I would not mind scratching in the corner pocket a few times if we can make a decent run in the 2nd half of the season, possibly going to the ACCCG and building (and seeing) the future. It might not be fair to Leal but I don't really want a 1-year QB.

I get what your saying, and I certainly wasn't in the meetings, but I don't think the question of Leal starting over Logan ever came up in the coaches meetings.

I get that you are not talking about a literal question being asked but if no one actually asked the question literally, is it really a question? Sure we fans can debate anything. I've seen several Pie v Cake debates on TKP as well. Just because its a forum topic doesn't mean it was a necessary one.

I'm not sure why Bucky Hodges is still being discussed as an option at QB. Here's an excerpt from a post from another board that everyone needs to read -

"Was talking with some of our just departed seniors about up and coming players left behind. First guy out of their mouths and unanimous agreement on Bucky Hodges at TE is going to be a major player. "First Round NFL at TE" if he keeps working and improving like he did this past season."

Additionally, from a post several weeks ago, Hodges apparently tweeted that he is now about 6'8".

He will be a MAJOR target next year at TE. With Cline (getting bigger and stronger in the weight room), Malleck (returning from injury), Redman (primarily a blocker), and the incoming Burke (who played very well in a recent All-American post-season game), the future of our TE group looks very bright.

Leg for the BTTF reference. I like it. But yes, that question was asked, probably for the last time after the Duke game (let's face it, there was only 1 mistake you can reasonably put on Logan in the BC game, although it was definitely a bad one). My point is that I don't see there ever being a time when I would have said "yeah, might be time for a change now." We all saw that Leal is not immune to bad mistakes, like it seems lots of people in the bench-Logan camp assumed he is. I never once saw a time when I thought Leal gave us a better chance to win than Thomas. When the answer to the same question continues to be "no," eventually you have to stop asking the question.

If you can't make a solid argument that the backup is better, there's no question you wouldn't bench the starter.

And this is just where we fundamentally disagree, which is fine to me. I think it's a case of circular logic - you're using the ultimate conclusion to change the interpretation of the decision making process, and I just don't agree with that.

"If you can't make a solid case that the back up is better, then you go with the starter."

Absolutely, I agree with this.

"It's no question."

Well, no I don't agree with that. There was a question. If there were no question than this wouldn't even be a discussion topic, and this thread wouldn't have 50+ replies in it. My take is that there indeed *was* the question, the question was there, it was very obvious, and it needed to be asked. Just because the answer to that question was "No, let's ride it out with our 3 year starter" doesn't mean the question never existed.

I don't feel that the answer to the question retroactively elminates the question from existence like Marty McFly's family photo.

/parenthood makes offseason the longest ever

I actually would love to know exactly how much of the playbook Logan knew to how much Leal knew. Also I really think Loeffler played with what he had. You can't worry too much about next year early on so he had to find what Logan/ supporting cast was good at and go from within his offensive plans.

If you watched last nights game you could see a "loeffler" type pistol formation with a tweak having the TE or H back line up in backfield and a Wr/ JC, Carlis, Mangus type player to run the sweep/fake. That was Auburn's go to play then add in the PA. It looked very familiar to the play we ran in the redzone where Logan faked the sweep and threw it to a wide open coles for the td against GT I believe. I believe french did a review/ key note on this

Congratulations to FSU, I am very very happy that the ACC got a championship.

This fills me with hope as a fan. I think VT is in a good position to compete for ACC Championships again and earn a spot in the playoffs. Newly broken-in coaches, a conference that owns the trophy, and increasingly improving recruiting classes are setting things up. I just hope that the team, coaches, players, fans, and boosters take advantage and go out and get some of the glory for themselves.

I have never said, nor implied that Leal would be "Better."

Here's my biggest problem with your argument. If you can't make a solid argument that the backup is better, there's no question you wouldn't bench the starter. As has been said before, Logan was/is flawed and shares a good deal of Leal's shortcomings. However, he also has a lot that Leal doesn't. He has a stronger arm, the ability to stretch the field and the ability to make big-boy throws that require the ball to be on a frozen rope. He is a threat on the IV series and a threat to scramble for decent yardage. He's strong enough to shake off arm tackles in the pocket and stay upright. Overall, the offense was more difficult to defend with Logan on the field. He's the most talented offensive player we had this year and it would've been a horrible idea for the staff not to use him.

Maybe, and if Leal is our QB (since he would have been exposed to Loeffler for a full year going into next season) we'll see some faster paced alignments next year. I know his playbook is ten thousand pages (exagerating) so it should be easy to throw in a formation and reduce any 'tendencies' he creates with formations/alignments

You're inferring emotions that aren't there. I understand that it's tough to gather tone from text. I was just trying to be clear since it seemed like you were convinced I was making an argument that I wasn't making.

I really don't think the result of this season would have been that much different with Leal. Certainly not 2-10 different. Our defense was *Way* too good for most of the year for that.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the situation isn't grey,

Awesome, then we agree.

Leal isn't demonstrably "Better" (by your own admission) then what I said about choosing the constant should be the correct decision as a coach. Go with the devil you know, Logan not Leal.

I understand the thought behind this statement. All I have ever argued is that it's not as cut-and-dry of a decision as a lot of people make it out to be. It seems you don't actually disagree with me on this.