Recent Comments
I don't think so... Jarrett had a punt return against Pitt... That's the only other KR/PR TD I remember us having.
The answer to these types of questions is almost always "20 hours a week". That's how much college football players get, if you don't cheat. So you don't do hitting drills until you really think you need it, because that takes time away from coaching up the young guys on zone coverages, and then you end up playing man most of the time because it's simple, and upperclass QBs eat your lunch. You run the middle drill because it promotes toughness, and then you have less time for your running backs to do blitz recognition and pass blocking. You do X, you can't do Y.
This is one of my major complaints about our practice of visiting pro teams in the offseason to pick up ideas. Something that takes 40 hours a week to master is useless if you only have 20.
That said, it was certainly time to spend time on this, because tackling is now a major pain point, but you don't get it free.
it is optimistic but being negative isnt going to help, and i know how our teams play down the stretch
Seems a little ambitious given the present state of things. Just sayin.
You're right about Hite. He's walking up and down the sideline with a headset on for chrissakes!
Desk job my ass.
im preparing for the worst, but i think we can pull this together, make the acc title game and make a bcs game. and i honestly think we will beat either fsu or clemson in the regular season
and... cancel my room....
How epic would that be if we won out? Frank would probably win coach of the year for saving the season and we would all look ridiculous for even considering getting rid of him or anyone else from the staff.
But... I'm still mentally preparing for a loss to Duke this weekend.
Have faith. Don't give up yet.
Respectfully disagree: losing to Temple in 1998 was way way worse. Until the JMU loss, Temple '98 was the game that shall not be named.
foster will not be getting the keys to this car. have you seen that man in an interview, there is no way he will be a head coach
but, then I remember four things:
1. He was dealt a crappy hand. Not only are these guys not experienced, the talent level is very poor. Holmes was handed the starting spot, he's in the Burnell/Oglesby category, not the Evans/Suggs category.
2. The OLine has been atrocious, even by VT standards. I mean, awful.
3. Hite is still there, its not like this is a "We lost Hite, and Shane can't coach RB's" situation. Somehow, we were able to reassign Hite to seemingly the same job he has always had. I'm shocked UVA et.al. aren't complaining to high heaven to the NCAA about us having too many coaches. Hite on the sideline seems like a sure sign of that.
4. Pretty much our entire future is wrapped up in Shane. Sure, maybe he's not the next HC, but he has the best (only?) direct link into creating true change in this football program. I know people complain about his coach speak, but he's creative, smart and willing to voice his opinion.
I hope this is right, because I'm hoping losing like this brings a sincere change in attitude and a return to our true identity more than a change in the coaching staff. Watching our team lose sucks, but watching players compete seemingly without the heart, passion, and discipline of our teams from the late 90's is devastating. Beamer and Foster developed blue-collar teams with guys that were hungry to win and beat the living crap out their opponents for a full 60 minutes. I don't see that this year and I want it back.
I understand the calls for Beamer and/or Weaver to make staff changes, it's natural these days, and I think it'll pass. It's frustrating as heck to lose. But I think Beamer deserves the opportunity to walk away when he's ready, not before - and I believe he'll do that with integrity. The last 26 years demonstrates he won't let his ego become a thorn in the side of the program on his way out.
I'd like to see Beamer finish his career at VT by bringing us back to the foundation he started establishing in 1987. I'd like to see him pass to Foster, the keys to a team is the best in the country at taking care of the little things and plays with a passion to beat the other guy on every single play and then beat them to a pulp until the whistle blows. That's our team and I'll stand beside that team regardless of what the W/L column says. Maybe staff changes will happen, maybe they won't, but I believe Beamer will get it done.
Sure, it would have been better to play him, but would it have made any difference? I'm also glad he's redshirting, but if he's redshirting at RB instead of LB, he's still not in an optimal spot. I believe he could have been THE TAILBACK (TM) for this team, but with Reid and Harris coming in next year, I'm not sure we need him at TB anymore than we need him at LB. Here are the options for Trey Edmunds, in order of my perception of his effectiveness:
1. LB of the future, redshirt him this year and let him start platooning with Tyler next year at Mike.
2. TB of 2012. If we had played him to start the year, I believe he would have won the starting role by now. Then, going into next year, he would have been the returning starter and Harris/Reid/JCC would have been complimentary pieces. We could have redshirted Harris and/or Reid to space them out from Edmunds.
3. Redshirt this year, switch from TB to LB in the spring.
4. Redshirt this year at TB, August competition with Harris/Reid/JCC/Holmes for starter, move to LB if he doesn't win that job.
5. Redshirt this year at TB, August competition with Harris/Reid/JCC/Holmes for starter, stay at TB for 5-10 carries per game.
As Shane Beamer put it: "Looking back at Saturday, it's hard to fault the tailbacks. You can't go back and say, 'You should've done this on that play.' I think they made the right cuts and the right reads on all of them.
I can't remember another time when a position coach at Tech absolved his guys and passed the buck (to Newsome).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/hokies-journal/post/virginia-techs-r...
I'd say losing Homecoming to Miami of Ohio my freshman year in 1997 was much worse....so sad
WHAT'S A HOKIE? 🦃
|
13 years 9 months
# | Finish the sentence. If we lose to Duke on Saturday then I will. . . ... and then get shitfaced because I won't be able to deal with reality. Will have to sober up before I drive out to the concert that night, though... Fortunately it's a 10:30 AM MT game...
He's housed two kicks, no?
I agree, though, I really think he and Fuller ought to be out on the field more
Being a fan of a truly consistently bad team is impressive to me. I'm a Hokies fan first and a Pittsburgh Steelers fan second so both my teams have experienced fairly consistent levels of success. I definitely believe that I would not be a fair weather fan, but I've never really been tested. This season is interesting to me, because I want to prove that even when our team is down, I can stand for four quarters screaming my lungs out, pouring every shred of hope I can find into turning the game around.
That said, we have to beat Duke. Come on, it's Duke. Seriously...
The fact that we have stiffer competition makes those big games losses matter more. In order for us to steal away the talent from those traditional powerhouses you mentioned, the recruits have to feel that they're are going to a comparable program that will put them in the national spotlight (in a successful manner, not getting blown out in the orange bowl or losing the sugar bowl because of the dumbest fake punt ever). Don't want to be too negative but it's the way it is. If I was a recruit with VT on my radar but getting offers from those others, I would probably choose the others over VT too (not factoring in playing time, distance, redshirt, etc) because VT just hasn't shown me that they will put me in a position to go on the field knowing I have a shot to win every game. We get mid level talent because we get mid level wins.
To the contrary, I guess one could argue that it's a classic catch 22. We lose the big games because we don't have the talent to compete, and we can't get the talent to compete because we lose the big games. However, I feel our talent level is good enough to compete, not as good as the big 10 and sec powerhouses we compete with for recruiting, but good enough to compete. The x's and o's side is usually where we fail, especially on the offensive side.
And just to be clear, the "I would probably choose the others over VT" comment was an objective statement being made as if I was a recruit. As a Hokie alum/die-hard-fan, I would never choose anything over VT.
PUBLISHER
|
13 years 9 months
# | Finish the sentence. If we lose to Duke on Saturday then I will. . . ...turn a very full bottle of Makers Mark, into a very empty bottle of Makers Mark, quickly.
I honestly think we're going to lose this one. It's just a matchup thing. The coaches have been struggling all season to find the right mix in the secondary, the d-line doesn't pass rush well. I think Duke's quarterbacks can throw the ball very well and honestly Boone scares me more than Renfree.
If we win, I expect these three things to have happened:
1) We get 3+ sacks and take Duke out of their comfort zone
2) Have a big defensive or specials teams play
3) Logan facilitates the run game by effectively running the zone play.
rush the field, find O'Cain or Stiney, and punch them in the face.
when we lost Homecoming to Temple. Seriously, if we lose to Duke at home then CFB needs to do some serious soul-searching about the men he has coaching this team. Our talent level in football is about as high above Duke's overall as theirs is above ours in basketball. Duke's record is a testament to cupcake scheduling, they could easily lose out from here. We had better win, or my kids are going to spend all day trying to cheer me up. (They are too young to understand)
What was the rest of the offense doing? Learning to block, I hope.
I agree that we need the depth at linebacker, but the guys you're talking about that will be coming in during the offseason (Harris, Reid) are just as unproven as the backs that we're playing right now.
Also, as many people have said on the site in various other posts on Edmunds, we promised him in his recruitment that we would give him a shot at tailback. That's why he's here. We at least have to give him the chance to win that job in the offseason and perhaps give him playing time. If not, he might transfer.