Recent Comments
"Frank Beamer's program hasn't lost its identity. However, it is trying to reestablish it." My only concern w/ this statement is that, for the most part, our identity has been an average offensive team led by a dominating defense that won field position and contributed to the scoring. In today's game both the offense & defense have to be above average.
My confusion w/ yesterday's game, other than the poor tackling and multiple penalties, was no apparent spy on Hundley, when Foster had said he'd do that.
I saw the same clip and felt like punching them in the face. It's quite easy for commentators to go on about a team losing their identity while totally ignoring the number of injuries. We're missing a workhorse tailback? Trey Edmunds is hurt. Kalvin Cline wasn't too shabby stepping in for Ryan Malleck considering he was a freshman (though he could learn to block). And freshmen Brandon Facyson and Baby Fuller were a refreshing tandem who both led the ACC in interceptions at points in time.
Commercials after every punt, timeout, score, or kickoff. Game stretched out to 4 hours. CBS couldn't wait till half time to talk about SEC. Statler and Waldorf up in the booth announcing. It sucked.
In my opinion there's nothing classy about taking a hit like that from a player like that and not returning the favor in some way. Not suggesting anything illegitimate but the "stay classy" response doesn't impress me.
You know, the crazy thing with recruiting is this: the recruits don't get onto the field until they actually attend the school. So all this improved recruiting doesn't mean that suddenly we get a bunch of new players halfway through the season. You have to wait for the students to actually get here first. So that may explain why you didn't see this years 'recruiting success translate to improvement on the field.
Totally agree with the comments. We do not seem to be prepared in many of the bye week / big bowl game scenarios. Might it be too much conservatism...... We have to at least try and punch it in on a 4th and 3 with 3 key starters out and with all the momentum.
Against UVA, how many times with a trick play/ onside kick / 4th and .... going for it did the coaching staff surprise even those of us die hard VT fans with play calling????? That is the attitude we need in all future bowl games... Have fun, believe in one another and go for it. UCLA was favored and we looked to be predictable and tight during the early part of the game. After the LT truck experience / run, the VT sidelines was going crazy and we seemed to be really pumped. At that point, maybe a physical running game with some beef is required.
Bring on the new recruits. We will return to 10 win seasons again. This new staff will be fine, RIGHT?
In many instances, Foster had the perfect playcall but the guy in position to make the play whiffed on the tackle. If Kyle Fuller was in, I bet a lot of those plays would've ended in a sack rather than a 20 yard gain. It's particularly devastating if you miss a tackle on a quarterback, because usually the QB will have tons of space to run beyond the line of scrimmage with cornerbacks and safeties trying to defend the pass.
I'm pretty confident Trey is still going to be the guy next year
I think Durkin is way to raw to start next year. Durkin is bigger, has a stronger arm, and is faster, but his highlight video is full of scrambles and jumping throws. I believe Ford is the smart/cerebral game managing QB that Loeffler desires, and has a greater chance of being game ready come next fall (He's also enrolling this month unlike Durkin)
Not only can schools place restrictions, they can also refuse to release the student from their scholarship and block any school they choose which can also include schools that were formerly recruiting the student before they accepted the scholarship
That cracked me up when he said Coleman weighed 181 yards!!!!
Because VT is classier than that
Trey's TD run versus Bama!
I agree, not that it matters now but at the time when it was like 4th and goal at like the 3 or 4 and with pretty much an entire 2nd string offense in I thought we needed to go for it while we had the chance to score a TD, but of course we went the conservative route and kicked it. I didn't trust a Thomas/Edmunds/Cline-less offense to keep us in the game if we didn't tie it while we had the chance.
2014 is the most intriguing year for VT that I can remember. Every position on the team is completely up for grabs (sans DB). I have no idea where this team is going, or if they'll recapture that dominating form of football, but I'm excited to go along for the ride.
I view it as more of a mentality that comes with those playcalls
Fair enough, that's a valid point.
We NEED to land more of the big names we go after. Obviously we won't get all of our top recruits, but we need to start landing Kendall Fuller's more often. If we do that, it would put us at that next level, and maybe even give us the championship.
I agree completely. A class of 9 or so four stars is nice, but it's not good enough to get to a national championship unless one of them turns into a once-in-a-generation type of player (think Mike Vick). However, I do think that the staff in place could start pulling in that type of talent. I'm not sure that the type of replacement coach that Tech's limited national relevancy could attract would be able too though.
The first drive was terrible, but up until the 86 yard Hundley run, it was a pretty even contest. And after that VT got the ball deep in UCLA territory with a chance to tie. We needed to punch that in, I think it would have been a difference maker pychologically to punch that one in; maybe wouldn't change the outcome of UCLA winning.
I really thought after Logan's diesel run that the tide was turning in VTs favor, then well, that whole helmet to the head hit.
Here' something to muse: Why was there no retribution for the Zumwalt hit that took LT out of the game?
Let's put it this way, in the history of bowls in which CBF is DC, the D has been the more consistently prepped facet of the team.
I think this is right. The NCAA doesn't have the authority to deny a transfer, but the schools can place restrictions on where a player can go (in-division is usually out, in-conference is usually out, and future opponents are usually out). Some schools aren't that strict on it, though, as I seem to remember Beamer allowing a safety of ours to transfer to GT because he had legit family health issues that meant he really needed to be closer to home, which was outside Atlanta. Forget the kid's name, though.
Haha, I thought we offered him. Great point, though.
Not sure if the NCAA can, but the school usually works in stipulations in the scholarship agreement that in-conference transfers are off-limits. I think the NCAA can overrule in case of hardship (family circumstances, usually). Not 100% sure, but that's my recollection.
Sure, that's true. But just be clear, the 5* Hackenberg isn't worried about our 3* QBs.
Indeed, this has been overlooked. We had heard all pregame about how Anthony Barr was going to be a difference maker and that we had no answer for him, but they forgot that we had a freshman left tackle and a Rogers. Even Jack wasn't all that impactful (aside from catching shot puts). All in all, the only guy we didn't neutralize effectively was Hundley. That turned out to be a big deal
This is just my musing while I sit on my couch reading TKP and watching the UCF/Baylor game and not necessarily something that has to do with Beamer's status as a coach. One of the things that I have started pondering after reading everything that has been discussed lately on this site is this offense that Lefty and Beamer are trying to implement the right offense for Tech? I believe it was you or French not entirely sure but someone said that the point of the spread offenses such as Baylor's or UCF's was to spread it out to make the field almost an equal playing field against superior athletes. One of the points being made was that there isn't necessarily the national pull at VT to get a coach who will immediately get a National championship doesn't that maybe apply to recruiting as well? Obviously our class this year is ranked and etc so maybe not that so much but it has been well documented that prior to this class and maybe the one preceding it has not been that good and has lead to a lack of talent that was on display against UCLA. If that were the case doesn't that mean that perhaps Tech should go to a spread offense to equal the playing field? I'm just curious about your opinion on that after watching this game and the overall trend in college football.