Recent Comments
In the rain...
Lol, I wasn't really trying to be negative. I was under the assumption that dook goes to the acccg if they they win out...
So I believe our Hokies win the last two games, but I don't take any stock in Miami doing their part and beating Dook.
...I guess I do sound like a nay sayer, ...but not against us!!!! Lol. I swear!!!
... for clarity sake..
But little quips like "literate Tech fans" probably don't come across to others as very respectful and I doubt you'll be reciprocated with respect your used to from some folks. fyi
It's not a quip, nor is it disrespectful. It's grammar. Reading it as you state above implies taking the comment personally either for yourself or by others. It's not.
Another way to write my comment could have been:
I believe those Hokie fans who follow the team more closely than the average fan understand the value Stiney has and that he has given a hell of a lot more than most anyone else, including those fans you call "True" fans.
I chose to shorten "who follow the team more closely than the average fan" by using the word "literate". I'm not being disrespectful to anyone. So again, please stop taking and/or making things personally.
Where's the giant boot to stomp down all the haterz?
Again, never gave any indication that I took it personal (not sure where you're getting that from either). Simply stated that inserting little quips like that may not be considered respectful to some other fans. I don't respect Stiney in the end and I won't unless he comes forward and fesses all those listed items and then some up. I'm done with this convo...for now.
dude, "literate" written in this way simply means people that follow Hokie football. It's not a personal attack. Why do you take everything that way?
Stiney is definitely an above average TE coach. He was doing quite well prior to OC job. And again, while I understand the criticism of Stiney you can't say what he and Beamer spoke about privately. Maybe he did go to Beamer and say the offense is not performing and Beamer should consider someone else. I am not saying I believe that but again, I am not privy to all their private conversations and neither are you. However, just because he didn't say it in the media for us fans to hear doesn't mean it wasn't discussed.
No one said that the program wouldn't survive without Stiney either. What we said is that it's better off with him here. I believe that. He has a good reputation in recruitment in VA and VT needs him out on the trail as much as possible. Bringing in someone new that may have a similar level of in-roads would be quite difficult.
You don't have to agree with that. I am happy if you don't. It makes for good debates about the sport and team we love, but stop with the personal bantering. Don't take things so damn personal or make things so personal with people. We're all rooting for the same team man.
I agree, and there are some parallels that can be drawn between Logan Thomas and Michael Vick in that respect. When Vick is on his game, he is unstoppable. However, when he isn't, he's very turnover-prone and can cost the team the game. I think the same thing can be said for Logan Thomas. There are just some days where he doesn't see the field.
With that having been said, my thing has always been to start Logan as long as we aren't mathematically eliminated from the winning the coastal. My reasoning is that Logan Thomas has the physical gifts to give us a chance against FSU. Our offense almost certainly has a higher ceiling with him in the game than without him. If we find out that we're not going to play FSU this year, then I wouldn't mind seeing what Leal can do. Evaluating Leal in real game situations would be priceless to get a better idea of who we should start next year.
See When/If Beamer. Retires post.
So you're saying that if Stiney was completely gone this program would suffer and we wouldn't survive? I don't buy it. I think our program would improve. Stiney had been on the receiving end of much negative national attention (ie $ec$pn) for his "coaching skills." I'll grant that he's somewhat of an above average recruiter. But he NEVER had the integrity ONCE during his very undeserved tenure to admit that he was in over his head and say to CFB "hey, I'm really not the person for this. Why don't you go for someone like Kevin Rogers(first one that came to mind)". But he never had trouble concocting responses that usually ended up throwing the very talented players that made him appear to be a competent OC under the bus. That is why I can never respect him. Even a number of the offensive players to depart Tech and go on to the pros have exposed him. Still he refused to take responsibility.
Btw fern, I do respect my fellow Hokie fans. I certainly make an effort to. Even the ones that post disrespectful and degrading comments to other members and myself I try my best to respect or say positive or give gobbler legs. But little quips like "literate Tech fans" probably don't come across to others as very respectful and I doubt you'll be reciprocated with respect your used to from some folks. Just an fyi
We also had the Lewis brothers (Kevin and Jonathan) play DT back in the early 2000s.
Seriously... Joe, can we start seeing who down votes things? ridiculous. Or a leader board for down votes as well. Both who has the most and who has down voted the most.
Here is one to balance you out again VPIhokieME
It depends on what you want. Do you want a quarterback who can be absolutely great one game (e.g. LT3 last night), but will occasionally have those games where he turns the ball over four times and causes your team to lose to a team they shouldn't?
Or, would you want a QB who is nowhere near as good as the starter when the starter is on, but is consistent (i.e. Mark Leal)?
Personally, I choose the latter. Losing to Duke and Boston College should never, under any circumstances, take the ball away from you four times and beat you. Yes, we would not have won if it weren't for LT3 against Miami, but we would not have lost to Duke and Boston College if it weren't for him. Miami is one win. Yes, it was a big win, but BC and Duke were TWO losses that were pretty significant.
If Logan gets consistent, I will be for him 100%.
Who exactly are "TRUE" Hokie fans? I suspect you mean only people that agree with you.
I agree on the Stiney criticism and a sly joke here or there. He was a terrible OC. I called for him to be gone as well, but I also didn't want him gone gone. What I think more literate Hokie fans understand is that he has done more for this program than most, and a hell of a lot more than the "True" fans you are overgeneralizing.
Before Stiney was OC our recruiting was quite good in places like 757, then he became OC and had less time, now he is back and I for one am thankful for that. Beamer made the mistake of keeping Stiney in place for too long, however we were also winning 10 a season. As most fans know (yes, even your "true" fans), Beamer is about consistency and a stable boat in unstable waters. When that stable ship faltered he made the changes necessary. Was it too late? Sure, but we are a much better team with Stiney still part of the captain's crew than without.
So lighten up dude and show some respect to the coaches and your fellow Hokies.
that's some good research
VT is actually in decent shape tie-breaker wise. They have H2H wins over GT and Miami (and Pitt and UNC if things get weird) and if there's a 3-way tie they only have one divisional loss, whereas GT and Duke have 2. At most VT could have 2 divisional losses, and either Miami or Duke will pick up one more loss. Divisional record is the 2nd tiebreaker after H2H record against all tied teams. VT would win a 3-way tiebreaker at 6-2 against GT and Miami due to beating them both and against GT and Duke due to a better divisional record. I think they would win any 3-way ties at 5-3 as well though if someone can find one they'd lose I will stand corrected. Pretty much the only tiebreaker they lose is if they're heads up against Duke. I am surprised my computer hasn't exploded by typing that.
There actually is a 5-way tie scenario that's possible:
GT loses to Clemson to finish 5-3
VT beats MD but loses to UVA to finish 5-3;
Duke loses to Miami but wins out to finish 5-3;
Miami beats Duke but loses to Pitt to finish 5-3;
Pitt runs the table to finish 5-3.
The good news is that VT would win the Coastal- they'd be 3-1 against the other 4 teams, while Miami, GT and Pitt would be 2-2 and Duke 1-3. (Note: if Duke beats Miami then loses to UNC and UNC runs the table instead of Pitt while Miami wins out after losing to UNC, it's a similar situation, only Miami is 2-2 and Duke is 2-2.) It would be the most #goacc thing ever if that happened.
With 3 weeks left in the regular season no one in the Coastal controls their own destiny.
I looked sometime earlier, maybe before the Duke game, at ticket prices and they've dropped quite a bit. I guess Miami fans are trying to get rid of them.
AJ is from Indiana. He went to his camp:
http://www.ncsasports.org/football-recruiting/in/terre-haute/terre-haute...
I agree. Unlike baseball where stats are a direct result of positive or negative action on the field, stats in football are not very indicative. Furthermore, in football the sample sizes are inherently small, only a limited number of opponents, and players are extremely reliant on their teammates. Nevertheless, it's one of the better ways to look at QB production.
Precisely. It's amazing that so many people apparently need to have this explained to them.
And here we are a week later following the Miami game -
Agree 100%. The single biggest difference in this game from previous games, IMHO, is that Scot Loeffler took French60wasp's advice and fell out of love with the zone read a bit. We still ran it plenty of times, but we also ran a lot more straight handoffs from LT to the tailback. Not only do those plays not take as long to develop, but they don't hinge on LT making the correct read.
I was baffled why, after repeatedly gashing Duke in the first quarter with quick hitters between the tackles, we didn't run any more for the rest of the game. I've always been of the opinion that if a team isn't stopping a particular play that you're running ... then keep running it until they stop it! We saw that with Stanford & Oregon on Thursday. How many times did Stanford run that one play where all of their O-lineman slanted left except for the left guard who pulled over to kick out the right side defensive end? At least 12, I'd guess, quite possibly more. Oregon had no answer for it, so Stanford just kept running it.
To put it simply, no.
I never bought into the Leal over Thomas theories and it didn't take Saturday's performance to make me think that. Logan has shown the ability he has at times and he has also shown the struggles he can go through but that is something that has just come with where we are at. It would take something catastrophic to happen for me to honestly believe anybody else is better for us at the quarterback position than LT3.
True, and I think that was at least partly a function of him being more willing to take the shorter, higher-percentage pass. When he gets started with a lot of those short crossing routes, then when he goes downfield he seems to be a lot less apt to start sailing passes high. I only counted one overthrow last night (an attempted screen to the right to Rogers, I think).
I agree...if it ain't broke, don't break it