Recent Comments
this is great to see, hopefully it'll light a fire under marcus and dyrell
"The president doesn't have people killed!" "Who's being naive, Kay?"
As much as I don't want to admit it, Miami most likely did do a lot of the things alleged in the Yahoo! report. The beauty is most haven't been able to be corroborated, and I think the entire cfb nation is in for a shock when the sanctions come down and there isn't the blood lust everyone is pining for.
Ultimately, boosters are going to pay players, schools are going to cheat, one way or another. Oregon paid for "scouting services," Auburn brought in a guy who's dad tried getting 200 large for his son, Penn State refused to report a serial rapist to preserve their culture, the list can go on and on. And there will be another blatant scandal everyone gets all worked up about in the future. All Miami did was cheat and get caught (or turned in by a jilted ex-lover felon). No one piles on those other schools because they don't have the history Miami does, between the school and more specifically the drug culture of the city in the early '80s.
But saying "it seemed to fit in with "The U"'s culture" is pretty off base. Butch Davis cleaned the entire program up after the previous scandal, and Golden is doing the same after the discipline was allowed to wane outside of the classroom, as Jerry mentioned. Now, that's not to say you're not correct in saying it fits in with the horrendous stereotype of a bad Hurricanes fan. Those guys are beyond reprehensible, and we can definitely agree there.
Great experience for next year + has the skill/knowledge to play now + 4-4 = play the young man
Corey is an absolute Man....
It's great we have that school to put things in perspective when things get really bleak in BBurg...
3 plays x 3.33 yards / play = First Down Hokies.
Averaging 4.8 yards / screen seems pretty decent to me. If we didn't drop the ball all the damn time and our WR's could block worth a damn it'd probably be much better.
Welp, that was a delusional interview. Does that dude really think prostitutes, yacht parties, bounties, et all are found in "more major programs then not"? C'MON MAN.
Clearly Miami had a cultural problem, and still may. The problem was / is that they cared more about swag then actually playing tough football.
The U will be back by the time this freshman class is seniors? Those freshmen may be "back", but they will have left about 5 scholarships per year and any bowl hopes on Nevin Shapiro's yacht.
I'm happy to see Demitri is going to get more snaps. He needs the practice for next year when Cory, Marcus, and Dyrell leave. He can burn just about any DB and is just another explosive play threat. I'm also happy to see Cory get more attention too. He has definitely earned it.
GET SOME!
|
13 years 8 months
# | Get Bookholders to donate "Stick it in" proceeds to Marching Virginians Those were the days, Evan! We built that place from the ground up! But in all seriousness, the owner is a pretty big jerk that sees nothing but dollar signs. I can't imagine him donating very much cash to anyone. Just sayin
I have to respectfully disagree. I am from Virginia and I do have family/friends that went to/go to UVa; however, I find nothing but pleasure watching them flounder (and flounder they do!). It's as easy for me to root against the likes of Al Groh, Mike London, Pete Gillen, Dave Leitao, Tony Bennett, etc. as it is for me to root against the Pittsburgh Penguins (#GOCAPS). Witnessing the likes of Jameel Sewell get put on the turf by Kam Chancellor, laughing at the sideshow that has become Tiki Barber's career, and hating anything that looks/sounds like Zeglinski is a hobby of mine.
I understand where you're coming from but there is a very large portion of Virginians (I'd say majority) that are current students or alumni that would scoff at the idea that they should root for UVa unless they're playing Tech. There isn't a bone in my body that cheers for UVa in any respect. And if you are in that minority that finds yourself cheering for UVa, watch this video and come back from the Dark Side.
I've never seen a team look worse trying to execute a RB screen then we have over the past decade. We have zero sense for the timing required to run one, and more times than not I come away feeling good if it didn't result in a loss of yardage or turnover.
how can you not enjoy watching uva lose?
Thanks for the time and effort to gather this data! The most telling thing for me is that with a good sample size of screen plays, we are gaining 4.8 yards on average when we need 9.5. Obviously we don't have a play that averages 10 yards, but it would be great to quit using a play with such low odds of making that distance.
I don't know if I speak for everyone, but there seems to be arguing over whether screens are good or not. I don't know that any of our fans think screens are inherently bad. It's that this year we are obviously not capable of executing them and yet we keep trying, which is frustrating. So screens aren't bad, but VT 2012 screens are bad.
I agree with the general premise that our screen game is over-used and in many cases ineffective this year. But in reality, the screen play is usually used (as part of the VT offense) to set up a more reasonable down and distance for the next play; NOT to get the first down. So I disagree with the early focus on the plays failure to generate first downs. For instance, we have only called screens (per your data) 5 times on 3rd down, or a little more than once every other game. Clearly, it's a not a "go-to" play in that situation. By comparison, we have called screens 19 times on 2nd down and 15 times on 1st down. Of those 19 calls on 2nd down, it has been 2nd and 10 or more yards to go on FIFTEEN of those plays. The intent of the play in that scenario is not "lets get a first down", it's "lets put ourselves in position to convert a more reasonable 3rd down".
What disappoints me the most about our screen game is not that it has such a low percentage of first downs (18% is actually pretty good, I think); it's that it has such a high percentage of 3 yards or less (21 of 39, or 53.8%). If you are getting 3 yards or less in those "and long" situations, you are not achieving the desired goal of getting the team into a more manageable down and distance.
That being said, it looks like O'Cain & Steiney don't have a clue as to what is the proper time and place for a screen. However, I think cds7c has a good point, in that our WR blocking this year has been atrocious, which is a key component in springing any run downfield, but especially WR screens.
With regard to RB screens, these are much more effective with an effective balance between ground game and passing game, and used in situations where a run or pass could be called (as an example, 3rd & 4-6 or so, when the run game is productive). We are not as balanced this year as in previous years, and the rushing attack has been less than effective, so I would expect that RB screens would neither be as effective, nor used as much.
One thing that I noticed, was that one of our worst screen performances in games was against UNC (the other was against Clemson). Is it possible UNC was scheming against screens since they were burned by them in our game with them last year?
UVa is my second favorite football team. Don't deny it - if you went to Tech and/or are from Virginia, you have friends and/or family that went to UVa. Therefore, I do not enjoy watching UVa lose unless it is to Virginia Tech.
With that disclaimer aside, this clip is quintessential UVa (the only one more so would be the woman in the stands trying to get the rest of the crowd into the game...or the scoreboard after the VT/UVa football game last year)
The 2nd to last chart intrigues me, because I would have though there would be a spike at 0-2% bin for all teams, even the top 20. I would think, at some point, all teams would predictably need to pass. I guess this means these teams are not getting behind the sticks and not getting behind in games. The top 20 offenses are dictating the defenses, not the other way around.
Really nice stats. It's nice to see the actual facts to show what we already believe.
For VT to correct their tendencies, they must stay ahead of the sticks, get leads, and then continue to mix in the pass, especially on 3rd short.
when he starts his first game, unless Leal gets hurt. Leal is a pretty good QB. I really don't think Bucky can win the QB battle against Leal, but we'll see once Bucky gets on campus.
Priceless, perfect, poignant and predictable. Does it make me a bad person to enjoy watching UVA lose? I hope not, cuz I do not intend to stop.
And to think that I could have gone there instead, but for grace of God I chose Tech. As an old pilot friend once told me, "I'd rather be lucky than good."
1. Why is the D-line being more aggressive now? It seems like their strengths are beating blockers and making plays in the back field.
2. Why didnt we use a pass rush to disrupt the back field and give our defensive backs some help in coverage by forcing quick decisions and short throws?
3.How much can we put on the Duke and Clemson games as well. Arent their offensive lines less talented/ younger / (whatever word for unprepared)?
4. How radical has Foster's defensive realignment? Is this something that our O could do as well (theoretically)?
I know some of these questions you can't answer and I am asking alot. Again great write up and thanks for your and everyone else that makes it possibles time.
We have been a successful WR screen team for years. (I remember scoring on one in the red zone vs UVA in '95. Why isn't the WR screen used more in the redzone?)
This year, our WRs are awful blockers. Truly awful. Unfathomably awful. And....we drop a lot of WR screens on top of it. This has been a big reason for our Offensive shortcomings, his is a bread and butter play for VT.
The RB screen has sucked for a decade. We have shown no intuitive timing. This was a bread and butter play for Bustle, but Stiney as never had it work. Not only is the timing poor, but we seem intent to make it a very dangerous play. Actually, the 2 or 3 JCC has succeeded with are about the only ones that have used successfully in a decade.
French can correct me if I'm wrong, but the WR screen and RB screen fundamentally do different things. The WR screen is a stretch horizontal play, obviously. But the WR screen should help stretch vertically by managing blitzing LBs.
So you agree with O'cain that the players aren't executing the plays he is calling?
Thanks for the time and effort I have enjoyed them.
Eh, it's a joke. I think that's pretty obvious to everyone, and honestly I laughed and it didn't affect my overall appreciation for his work.
When used properly, screens can be a very effective tool and some teams, both in NFL and college, make a living off of them. This season, we need to all but eliminate them. Last year Danny and D.J. Coles did a terrific job both running and blocking for them. The guys this season aren't aggressive or effective blockers, and O'Cain tips his hand too much.
Like French has said before, Tech has had success in previous seasons outside of the diamond running screens, but even if we used more successful formation, I don't think the personel at WR is there to execute.
The weakness is one deep safety. If they are aligned in a true 4-4 (meaning the nickel is playing run first along with the rover). The ends tend to crash inside with the 4-4, so the rover and nickel (or whip) must squeeze. If they don't squeeze and the back breaks through the front line, there isn't anyone there to help, because Cole is playing 15+ yards off the ball. It also means that there is limited deep zone options. In most zone situations, you would see the rover and nickel either playing an umbrella zone or man under with the two corners and Cole playing a cover three deep.
+ 4.28 speed* = Play the man