It's Sunday morning here in Abingdon, and after a night of grinding teeth and muttering curse words in my sleep, I awoke to find the film of the Duke game sitting in my inbox. The loss was not just critical in the current chase for the Coastal Division title, but is perhaps even more damaging to program perception. Even though Duke is a vastly improved football team, nationally they are regarded as a traditionally weak program. The Hokies giftwrapped the game on a silver platter even though Duke gave them every opportunity to, not only win the football game, but win in a comfortable, albeit not pretty fashion, similar to wins over Georgia Tech, Pitt, and UNC. It was a perfect cauldron of injuries, bye week rust, distractions, suspensions, bad decisions, bounces, fundamental breakdowns, and an opponent that fought like hell.
Watching the film, I was overwhelmed by numerous breakdowns by players who have produced critical plays all season, and at the same time I was left scratching my head at some of the game planning and decisions. Throughout the bye week, we heard that the running game would be cleaned up, and that players on both sides of the ball had an opportunity to heal for the stretch run. Instead, the offensive playcalling often seemed to play right into the strength of the Duke defense, and some defense senior leaders delivered quiet performances. Even when the Hokies dialed up the perfect call, things seemed to go Duke's way. Accordingly, this week's film review will require two parts. The next installment will feature the offensive game plan and coaching, and I want the extra time to really take a good look at the read option game and understand the diminishing returns. As for today, I want to focus on the breakdowns by some of those experienced players. I pride myself on trying not being overly critical of players, and instead trying to focus on technique and the application to the success and failure of the plays. I want every player in the Virginia Tech uniform to succeed, and nobody is happier than me when one of the players who I have been critical of comes back to make a huge play. I will gladly eat that humble pie.
Often this season, I have discussed how a lack of experience has caused Virginia Tech to play close games, and not put away opponents. The loss to Duke represents not the result of a lack of experience, but a failure to make the plays you expect by talented experienced players. The letdown started before the game as 5th year senior J.R. Collins, whose story of redemption and terrific play was one of the best narratives of the early part of the season, managed to get himself suspended. That further hurt a defense already weakened by the loss of Kyle Fuller and Brandon Facyson. Foster's defensive line rotation became scrambled and forced Charlie Wiles to utilize an inexperienced Ken Ekanem (who was sucked inside on the Anthony Boone touchdown run). Once the game was underway, experienced players made mistakes on fundamentals that have been reinforced since Pee Wee football. It was difficult to watch.
D.J. Coles Non-Touchdown
Receivers who motion are taught that they must come to a complete stop or can't be moving towards the line of scrimmage. Again, this is taught by coaches and enforced by officials from the time Pee Wee teams start to utilize motion as part of the offense. Receivers can be moving as long as no other receiver is in motion and the motion man is moving backwards or laterally. Any movement towards the line of scrimmage without resetting is by rule a penalty.
The proliferation of the spread and the associated concepts of multiple motions include rocket motion and jet-motion have pushed the boundaries of those rules. Numerous teams feature techniques where backs and receivers appear to be moving towards the line of scrimmage before the snap, and often teams feature skill position players "bouncing" up and down in anticipation. By rule, this should be a motion penalty, but most officials use their discretion to overlook the widespread practice. I have often noted that the Hokies and their opponents have gotten away with numerous motion penalties at critical moments.
The non-touchdown pass to Coles is another example of a beautiful play call that works perfectly against Duke's set. Thomas motions Coles across. Coles starts as if the play is a flood pattern with him going to the back pylon, and Willie Byrn goes to the front pylon, but then Coles plants his outside like and slants back inside. Not only is Coles wide open, but Byrn is wide open at the front pylon.
00:08:06–00:08:13
Sadly, Coles clearly did not stop his motion and get set (required if he turns to face the line) and he was moving towards the line of scrimmage at the snap. This may be the easiest procedure penalty a Ron Cherry crew ever called, and it really did not give Coles any kind of advantage. Even if Coles does get set, based on the reaction of the Duke defense either he or Byrn would have scored anyway. Nobody has been a stronger advocate of D.J. Coles than me, and the Hokies need his ability to make tough catches in the red zone, but sloppy alignment and pre-snap motion is the kind of mistake that Aaron Moorehead was crushing freshman Carlis Parker for in preseason and is unexpected of a veteran.
Thomas Does Too Much
On the next play, Logan Thomas made his most egregious error of the game. While most post game complaints about Thomas focused on accuracy, it was his game management that cost the Hokies most dearly. Following the Coles' penalty, Thomas threw an interception that defies explanation.
Let's review the situation. It's late in the 2nd quarter. The Hokies have dominated time of possession, but have failed to score and trail 0-3. The Virginia Tech defense has forced several Blue Devil turnovers. The Hokies are facing a long 3rd-and-goal following a penalty that has taken a touchdown off the board. The Hokies need to come away with points on this drive. This is a situation where an experienced quarterback needs to understand the game scenario. Late in the game, trailing and needing a touchdown to tie or win with limited additional opportunities for possession, the quarterback must be a playmaker and take a risk. However, in the 2nd quarter in a low scoring game with the defense playing well and the wind creating some havoc, he has to respect the possession and protect the football.
Loeffler doesn't help Thomas either. He follows up his brilliant original 3rd down call with a rather strange one. On the left side, Trey Edmunds runs a curl and Stanford runs a corner route from the slot, which is a combination known as a smash route. On the right, Cline runs a curl then goes vertical. This is designed to pull a zone defender out of the middle so Willie Byrn can fake going to the flat and then cut back inside on a crossing route. D.J. Coles runs to the back pylon.
Loeffler guesses that Duke will play zone, but the Blue Devils play man and nothing is open. Thomas seems to initially look at either Coles or Byrn, and comes back to the smash route where Duke has three defenders covering Edmunds and Stanford. The Hokie receivers go into scramble drill mode, with Byrn breaking open for a brief second off of Cline's double move. Thomas is still looking left and starting to run away from his throwing strength and doesn't see Byrn.
00:08:23–00:08:33
Now it's decision time for Thomas. He likely isn't quick enough to run for the touchdown as the Duke end has a good pursuit angle. Edmunds runs away from Thomas' throwing strength, and both Byrn and Cline (who is now crossing the back of the end zone) are out of Thomas' line of vision. Even worse, Edmunds, Byrn, and Cline are all running at each other, which is creating a traffic jam of receivers. There is only one throw available to Thomas where he can throw into the path where he is running, and that is Josh Stanford, but Stanford isn't coming back to Thomas, making such a throw risky. If Stanford comes back to Thomas, he should be open at the front pylon.
Given the lack of options and the game situation, Thomas should throw the ball into the stands or take the sack. Instead, he throws perhaps the most high risk ball possible, against his running direction to a receiver running away from his motion (Edmunds). Duke has several defenders in the area, and makes an easy interception. Duke then goes down and kicks what ends up being the field goal that results in the difference in the game.
Risk Averse
I have defended Thomas to the hilt, but that play was inexcusable, and from then on Thomas seemed to be risk averse. He threw additional interceptions, but both came on deflected balls where his receivers should have made the catch. But, time and again, Thomas either threw to his check down receivers and overlooked wide open receivers down field. Even after he should've restored some of his confidence on the long touchdown drive that began with the bomb to Knowles, Thomas seemed to be dazed and indecisive. On the final interception, Willie Byrn was wide open on a post route and it seemed as if Thomas looked right at him, but he didn't pull the trigger. Instead he froze, and came back to Knowles, who was in heavy traffic on his crossing route. Knowles, as he did early in the season, made a hesitant effort to catch the ball in traffic, and Duke caught the deflected ball for the game clinching interception.
Another play stood out in my mind. In the 3rd quarter, Thomas made a short throw to Demitri Knowles on a crossing route, and that ended up garnering around 7 yards. Something bothered me on the play. I noted the time, and went back to look when Billdozer completed the film package. My jaw dropped when I watched the play again.
00:14:40–00:14:47
Loeffler has called a combination route, with Knowles as a wider slot running a delay crossing route while Cline runs off the safety with a post. Thomas should read the middle linebacker, who jumps Knowles on the crossing route. The safety, who should have Cline on the post route, spies Joel Caleb running a short crossing route from his left split end spot, and takes a step forward. Take a look at Cline on the post.
My goodness, I am not sure how much more open you can be. I counted at least three plays where Thomas had receivers wide open on deep posts, including the final interception, and not a single time did Logan air it out.
4th-and-1
The defense isn't immune to scrutiny either. Let's examine the 4th-and-1 play that sent me into a Twitter tizzy on Saturday. Duke brought in Brandon Connette, and Bud Foster countered with a 46 defensive alignment, featuring Kyshoen Jarrett at an inside linebacker position, Chuck Clark as a whip outside linebacker, and Tariq Edwards as an outside linebacker on the opposite side of the whip. Foster guessed correctly that Duke would run the straight power lead instead of the inverted veer, and called a stunt that freed Jarrett up to make the play unblocked right where the QB wanted to go.
On a game where seemingly every critical bounce went against the Hokies, Bud Foster dialed up the perfect play call on the game's final critical play.
00:20:35–00:20:39
Both defensive tackles attack the inside shoulder of the guards to establish a gap fit. They need to maintain a wall in the center. Both ends Dadi Nicolas and James Gayle stunt through the inside gaps with the intent of drawing each tackle to block down. Tariq Edwards and Chuck Clark have contain responsibility on the edge. The critical stunt combination belongs to Gayle and Jarrett. Gayle's stunt to the inside should either suck that tackle inside, freeing up Jarrett to burst through the seam created on the outside shoulder of the tackle, or on a lead it will cross up the tackle and the tailback who is serving as the lead blocker.
The defense works so well, it actually may have worked too well. The tailback leads inside to where Jarrett would be if the defense played straight ahead gap control, and the tackle goes to the inside with Gayle. With both blockers going inside, Jarrett is unblocked coming through the outside tackle gap in perfect position to make the tackle. Nicolas beats the left tackle cleanly to the inside and gets contact on Connette, which seemed to throw Jarrett off. Jarrett dove at Connette, who was off balance and was essentially a sitting duck.
At this point, Jarrett and Gayle, two experienced and talented players who have had excellent seasons, had a breakdown in their fundamentals. Jarrett should stay on his feet and deliver a form tackle into the already stumbling Connette. Ninety-nine times out of one-hundred, he makes that tackle for a two-yard loss. This time, he gets overeager to make the play, and Connette keeps on his feet.
Gayle executed the initial stunt magnificently, but the final component to the play is his gap fit. In the scheme, if Jarrett can't make that tackle, he is still creating outside leverage to force Connette into Gayle. Once he draws that tackle inside, he can not continue to be driven further inside, or he widens the space that Jarrett has to fill. Gayle has a breakdown in his fundamentals, standing almost straight up on the play as he forms up for his gap fit. Linemen are taught low pad level since Pee Wee football, and low man wins is a fundamental that cannot be forsaken. Duke senior right tackle Perry Simmons, a three year starter who played an excellent football game, was initially beaten inside by Gayle but kept his legs moving. As Gayle got high, Simmons had both hands firmly under Gayle's left armpit, and his head in front of Gayle's chest in perfect blocking position. Simmons was lower than Gayle and kept his leg drive, and drove Gayle an additional yard inside before Gayle was able to cross his face and get back in the play.
Again, let's look at the defensive design and Connette's lack of balance. If Gayle can hold his gap fit, Connette would have stumbled right into him, or at the very least Jack Tyler, who was playing a spy and following the ball, may have been able to scrape across and make a play. But when Gayle was pushed back, he also shielded Tyler inside.
Gayle is a terrific player, and he has made two critical game saving plays already this season (the forced safety versus East Carolina and the sack versus Marshall). Because of flawless execution in the past, I'm accustomed to both Gayle and Jarrett making that play.
Still, even with these breakdowns, it was clear that the Hokies should have won the football game. Later this week I'll take a look at the offensive gameplan and play calling to determine how both impacted the offense's inability to sustain drives.
Comments
This was me on Saturday, ...except it was a bottle of Gentlemans Jack, ...and the glass was my mouth.
This. I am by no means an expert, and rarely catch things the players should see from the stands, but there were several times, including the one you cited, where I was jumping up and down wondering how on earth Logan didn't see Cline or (a couple times) Byrn wide open for either a huge gain or a TD.
I agree. I am also no expert, but even on the long completion to Knowles down the sideline, I thought he threw to the wrong receiver as it looked like Byrn was wide open running a deep post.
Agreed, I don't think Byrn would have gotten as many yards as Knowles did, but he was very open.
I'm a fan of Logan's "X factor" but he takes WAY too long to progress thru his reads and often misses the obvious choice. Now I'm not out on the field and I know the game is a lot faster out there, but he is killing us with his decision making. I'd like the coaches to implement a count to four, then run plan. Often he has running lanes open that he misses because he's progressing slowly thru his reads. It's MADDENING.
Though, at the same time, there were a couple instances where he panicked because seemingly he felt he'd been in the pocket too long and tucked it when he still had loads of time, sometimes running into pressure that wouldn't have reached him.
Welp.
Ha! Is that a Money Train gif? Please tell me that's a Money Train gif!
Hate to depress you, but it's from Kingpin.
Reading this just brings on a whole wave of unpleasant emotions again. ..jeez..
The film room session this week for the players are not going to be fun. Plenty of ass-chewing, ear-splitting yelling, I'm sure. Plenty of blame to go around, and this write up nails it.
On Thomas' fourth interception, Moorehead was actually telling Thomas Byrn was open, and Thomas responded by slamming his helmet on the turf. I have noticed that Thomas was actually mouthing off at Knowles at one point of the game telling to shut up.
As I thought back to the game, I am convinced that the team never recovered from DJ Coles' penalty, because since then, that changed the demeanor of the offense. Sure, they scored on that 99-yard drive, but that was supposed to be the second touchdown of the day, not the only one.
Those mistakes are correctable. Boston College won't be an easy game to bounce back to, but if they are serious about being a contender for the Coastal, they have to win that game.
That's what disturbed me the most as well. Not only did Thomas look like he had no confidence, and was afraid to take the shot down the field even when it was wide open, but he was clearly upset with other players and coaches. The problem is, when you have a guy wide open behind the defense and you don't throw it to them, that's your fault, not theirs.
At least he wasn't like Dez Bryant yesterday.
I believe on that play Knowles was supposed to motion or be lined up elsewhere, but didn't, so Thomas had to call a time out. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I have no idea why Thomas called a timeout, but it was startling to see him mouth off at Knowles like that. I guess that's the meaner version of Thomas we have heard about in the offseason. I do remember Tyrod calling a timeout one game and he was screaming at the offensive line, pointing to his ears, and Beamer had the "Wut? What's the matter?" look on his face as Tyrod was approaching the sideline.
Again, I may be just blowing things out of proportion here, but it was startling since he is such an easy-going, laid-back guy.
Speaking of Moorehead and Knowles, did anyone else notice Moorehead ripping into Knowles sometime in the late first quarter or second quarter? It was as Knowles was going to the sideline on the south side of the field. Moorehead started well on the field and followed Knowles all to the sideline and beyond, screaming the entire time. From the intensity of it I didn't think Knowles would get back in the game, especially since he seemed to brush him off. I'd love to know what you'd have to do to get that kind of reaction but if it was a route breakdown or something I suppose we'll never know.
French - great (painful) right up. Question: Why can't Logan pump fake? Is he taught not to?...is it a "feel for the game" kind of thing? The way he stares down receivers from the snap a pump fake and throw to the other direction would be massive (other option is to fix the stare down problem...but 2/3 of the way through his r-SR year, that ship has sailed).
Considering he's just now being taught to go through more than 1 or 2 progressions, I'd say the whole "HE'S A RS-SENIOR, WHY ISN'T HE A BETTER QUARTERBACK?!?!?!!111one" argument is pretty much invalid. Let's also consider that I'm pretty sure just about all of the spring was focused on teaching LT how to mechanically throw a football.
My point was if he's been staring down receivers all season (and probably throughout his career), he's probably not going to be able to make a change this late in his r-SR year of his career. He has a bad habit of staring down his first read...rather than trying to change his style (which would probably mess up his mechanics they've working on so hard), go against the tendancy and pump-fake.
Well, he's done it before. Remember how excited he was when he got to his 5th progression a couple days ago? He's making progress. Too bad he and Lefty are only gonna be together for 1 year...
Can you please stop with the "he's just not being taught to go through progressions" argument? The other stuff I can agree with, but I'd hope to god that a college level QB wouldn't have to be taught to look at a different receiver if the primary one is covered.
Logan himself has said this, so I don't see how we can refute it. The mental aspect of the game is the biggest hang-up for him. His first year, all he had to do was find Coale or Boykin, one was always open and the other could catch anything thrown within 10 feet of him. Last year was a whole different series of failures, but he still wasn't being taught anything besides, "chuck it as far as you can to the guy you can see clearly."
That's why. And it's not just looking at a different receiver, it's HOW you go through progressions, which one comes 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. and having route designs set up so that progressions make sense and are effective. It's not something you can just pick up on your own. You have to be taught and on the same page as your QB coach/OC. There's a very good reason O'Cain was straight-up fired, a very non-Beamer move.
This! I hated O'Cain and Newsome far more than I hate Stiney. I was so glad when they were let go, I think a trained chimp would have been an improvement for both of them.
Logan stated that against Duke he was going through progressions too fast. It looked like that to me as he was too quick to go to the checkdown where he often threw into coverage. I think Duke just decided to cover the check down knowing LT's recent tendencies. LT couldn't make the adjustments and correct reads. He does not seem to have a clock inside his head to naturally count and feel the timing of the play. If he does it was way off last Saturday. You only get that through experience and practice. If he was not being taught that prior to this year it is no wonder he still hasnt got it right. I hope it clicks in soon.
I know it's less straightforward than I made it seem, but c'mon, do you really believe that he was never taught that at all? I know Logan is considered a leader, but he has made some odd comments to the media ("say it to my face haterz") so it would not surprise me in the least bit to hear him make a passive aggressive comment regarding his former coaches that wasn't entirely true. I'm not going to rag on Logan because I know what to expect from him, but please hold him accountable for at least some of his shortcomings.
That's what we have you for! Much love from the pro-Logan camp
I mentioned some of his shortcomings in a different thread just a few minutes ago; I won't repeat it all here. I won't fight tooth and nail to defend him. He's a great athlete and an average QB, and apparently the best we've got. There was a good read posted last week or so from the CT that chronicled Logan's HS days. It really seemed like the plan was, "just give it to Logan and he'll figure out what to do with it." And in HS, he was physical and talented enough to blow everyone away. Couple that background with being moved into a difficult position at the D-I level and 3+ years of poor coaching, and yea, the guy is going to have some serious deficiencies when put under the microscope.
I think this happens a lot in HS. The talent levels and athletes are pyramid. Pros on top down to rec league. Why some great kids in HS can't compete in college.
behind the scenes look:
The 4th down play killed me insideI thought for sure we had the QB gobbled up and were about to get the ball back considering he was at least 4 yards behind the line of scrimmage. As for the Thomas pick in the end zone he did make a bad play and a bad decision but that was because he felt pressured to do so in my opinion. The two picks that Thomas thew into the middle of the field that were tipped up make me have a hard time blaming Thomas completely..his receivers can't be tipping the balls in the air in the middle of the field where all the traffic is. As the game ended and i sat down in the stands and watched in disbelief as the Hokies lost I couldn't help but think that it was one play that lost us the game (but it never is). I don't know if I'd pick Journell missing the field goals from makable distance, Thomas making ill advised throws, the lack of running game by anyone not named Thomas, or the failed 4th down defense. I am however going to chalk this one up as a fluke game that we should have won that did not have any bounces go the Hokies way. If I had to bet money I'd think that the Hokies come out in the remaining games with intention to make up for the loss and get back to the ACC championship Game. Oh and one side note everyone that stayed for the game did a great job at being loud only a few people left so I'm proud the fans showed up and did there job! On to next week against BC
This being the Orange Effect, I suspect you looked a lot like this:
yeah pretty close just kept looking at the field and scoreboard in disbelief as the stats showed up on the board.Such a disappointing feeling.
Don't worry, you weren't alone. We all looked like that. Even my 16mo old son was sporting the same expression. His was a bit more justified as his diaper was loaded with a sticky brown mess that bared a striking resemblance to our offense.
I think I'm a yeller, goober, and a traditionalist.
Fuck. I'm only 21 years old, I shouldn't be getting compared to old grandpa leatherhead.
Know what though?
Back in my day the Hokies lined up in the I, ran it up the gut, and we motherfucking liked it. Back before all this spread pistol bullshit that the NCAA is so keen on now. It was a simpler time. A better time.
We blocked punts and kicks, and we sure as hell would have blocked kickoffs if the option was available to us. I don't call batted passes batted passes. I call them pass blocks.
agreed. I am not a fan of the spread in general. I miss pounding the rock, and then popping play action.
Don't feel too bad. On numerous occasions the defense DID deliver and the offense squandered opportunities (Re: first and ten on the Duke 45 after a pick, no points...) Even if the Defense did stop Duke on the 4th and 1, there is no reason to believe the offense would not have squandered yet another opportunity.
Welp...
1. It would be nice to be able to make field goals.
2. Wide receivers need to catch those short drag and crossing routes, because when they tip the ball in the air like that it will be intercepted every single time.
3. Logan sailed many of his intermediate throws early on, and besides the interception in the endzone, I thought he made OK decisions.
4. My question is why we abandoned the the inside zone running game. It worked very well early on, and later in the game we ran it 3 times in a row with Trey for over 20 yards. We clearly could beat Duke at the point of attack, so I'm not sure why we didn't just try to smash them between the tackles. Duke, being a smaller, more athletic defense, seemed better suited to defend option stuff, and that's exactly what we ran at them. What is it that Loefller sees in his personnel that makes him want to run the veer so extensively and abandon the inside zone game?
I don't even know what else to say. After watching the film, the offense didn't really look all that bad....but we just didn't score any points. I believe we could have ran at them all game, and we had success doing so when we did. So what is it that Loefller sees and knows that I don't?
#4 will be the focal point of my film review tomorrow.
I can't wait to read it. I had the exact same question while watching the game. As long as I can understand what happened, I can get over it and move on. Great work as always, French. When I saw this story pop up on my RSS, I took my lunch break early to read it because I just couldn't wait.
Normally I would anxiously await reading the review, but it sounds like I will just have to relive everything I was screaming to myself throughout the game. . . . . "WHY AREN'T WE POUNDING THEM WITH EDMUNDS UP THE MIDDLE?!? ITS ACTUALLY WORKING!!!" And he often seemed like he was really close to breaking those short gains into the second level. Did Edmunds ever even get another carry after those 3 straight runs?
Yeah, that 4th-and-1 that was stuffed.
Question for French (or anyone else):
In 2011 Logan threw 10 pics in 14 games (~.7 pics/game). He's had 26 pics since the Sugar Bowl (~1.2 pics/game).
Were the throws he was making in 2011 equally as inaccurate/risky as we've seen in recent seasons, and was the lower number of INTs/game due to fantastic catches from veteran receivers? OR was Logan making smarter, less risky, more accurate throws in 2011? How many of those 26 INTs would still be INTs with Danny and Jarret?
Ball park figures of course, not expecting anyone to rewatch every INT Logan's ever thrown.
In my personal opinion (which is worth just about nothing), I can think of many interceptions over the last 2 years that were his fault and many that weren't. Some that come to mind include the ones that bounced off his receivers pads/hands/helmet. I get that some people say "well he threw the ball so hard on a 5 yard route." Guess what, they should still catch it. He's not trying to peg them with it and MAKE them drop it. Another INT that comes to mind was last year against Duke when Tony Gregory was essentially stripped of the ball as he bobbled it on a screen and Duke returned it for a pick 6. Those sort of plays count against him as stats, but I don't hold those against him in terms of his ability to throw the ball. Now if we want to argue if he should have thrown it elsewhere to a more open receiver on some of those then I'll agree. But the throws that he made that hit a receiver and were then intercepted were often, not always, the receiver's fault in my mind.
How many times has a throw hit a defender right in the chest and he dropped it? And please don't blame the WR's for dropping Logan's fastballs; if you're expecting a ball at a certain speed and it comes in 2X faster, you won't have enough time to react. If human's could react that quickly, baseball would be the most useless sport of all time because players would hit homeruns every at bat.
For a group of people that have watched him play for 3 years, it amazes me that people haven't realized the simple fact that Logan is just an streaky player. There's really just no other way to explain how inconsistent he is. You can roughly break down his career into a mere 4 periods:
-sophomre year, first 5 games: poor
-sophomore year, next 7 games: great
-sophomore year, last 2 games all the way until the 4th game this season: poor
-senior season, next 3 games: great
I feel like his legacy as a VT player will largely be determined by how he finishes. Let's just hope it mirrors 2011.
Gimme a month to watch all of the game film, another month to figure out how to edit every dropped pass into one video, and I'll get that to number to you. As far as him being a streaky player goes, his supporting cast is just as streaky, he just takes the blame for it. It's called being the quarterback. They will always take the blame regardless of how the players around them perform.
It was a rhetorical question bud. And I wouldn't really say the supporting cast has been inconsistent; more just lacking in either talent or work ethic. I seriously can't understand how people don't find him to be a streaky player, though. One look at his stats will tell you that. It hasn't even really mattered who he's played either as some of his worst performances have come against some of the weakest defenses.
I completely agree he is streaky. He will probably be horrible this past week but lights out for the rest of the season. At least I hope so. I have always been a big LT fan or at least tried to be but now I feel like the move to QB was a bad one. He will more in likely go low or un-drafted this year. However if he would have played TE the entire career at VT he could very well have been the top TE in the NCAA and been a very high draft pick. Sad for him in that he could have lost a great deal of money and physical pounding.
There are other players involved. 22 on the field at any one time, 11 of whom are in opposition.
"Streaky" has to be put in context or we should all just put on pom poms and skirts and jump up and down. Arguably that is what 99.5% of fans do... but this site should aspire to more.
For instance, this season... any team with a shut down DB... god forbid they have a pair of very good DBs is going to be a huge challenge for this team. Ironically I think the DBs for Duke proved to be overrated but we did not go after them. Strangely I think the talk that was going on before the game was what was actually told to Logan. "Take what the defense gives you". That is a trite coach speak kind of statement that means nothing. But if you look at Logan's early throws he refused to go long unless he needs to pick up a long first down. Even when Duke had started cheating up because of the initial success of the running game, LT would check down and look for 82 on a shallow crossing route. Eventually the safeties cheated up and again unless we needed xx yards he would go short.
I think he lacks confidence and I think our whole football team and university frankly lacks the balls to get done what a D-1 QB needs to get done. When Duke cheats up you don't take what they give you. You make them pay for not playing the field honestly. Sounds like semantics, but for teams like the Hokies, Ravens, etc, the D's prominence often times pushes the offense into a "first do no harm" philosophy. Our coaches IMHO have adopted this for years. Our fanbase as well. Incredibly destructive to this team, where the running game is fragile and shut down DBs can lock our WRs down and they can put 7-8 in the box pretty quickly or put the 7-8 in coverage patterns that shut down short routes.
I want an offensive coach to say... we got a nasty RB combo and a couple guys off the bench... our WRs weren't heralded and are developing but we've put some WRs in the league and I think these guys have a shot to get there as well. We got a QB who can make every throw in the book. When the opponent starts to disrespect some aspect of our offense we're going to make them pay. We're not going to take what they give us. We're going to demand respect. That might mean we throw some interceptions. We're not only ok with that we're encouraging it.
Logan blows up in the NFL. Wrong system, bad coaching until this year. All the tools... three or four years in he's a starter.
Time for VT to play offense the way it was meant to be played... with balls and conviction... let happen what happens... but above all else ... leave it all out on the field.
Woulda coulda shoulda because we took what they gave us conservative mentality is far worse on Mondays than any other possible outcome other than getting hurt. Not only that but until we play with that change in philosophy mentality we're going to have a hard time getting really good offensive prospects, and that in turn has recently hurt our ability to get 5 star defensive recruits.
JMHO
Very well said. Welcome to the site.
In case you didn't see it, there's this analysis that ZachMariner put together that answers some of your questions: Logan Thomas, his receivers and catch efficiency
also having defenses scared of david wilson didnt hurt the passing game either
What if it was humble cake?
When you do your offensive breakdown, I hope you discuss why we went away from the hurry up offense. It seemed like we were actually having success with it, but then we suddenly stopped running it.
This is such a strange game to digest. The running game was much better than against Pitt, and Thomas was given much more time than against Pitt. Early in the game, Thomas was taking some serious chances where guys just were not open down the field. On the 4th and 11 drive, several balls could have been picked. Then he threw the high interception, where Stanford was wide open on a post and Thomas threw it over his head. After that, it seemed like he would look to that first deep read, and then check down, regardless of if the guy was open or not. That played right into Duke's strength. Duke kept four to five guys in an underneath zone whenever they were not in man coverage, and even though very little was open early, as the game progressed receivers were getting open deep and he didn't pull the trigger.
There were three deep throws. First, the Knowles bomb, which is odd given that deep passes were so rarely called yet this is the second time it was dialed up from their own goal line. The second was the deep throw to Knowles in the end zone at the start of the 4th quarter. On that route, Loeffler called the Four Verts, and Byrn was wide open on his post, but like a replay of the ECU game Thomas underthrew Knowles.
00:17:49–00:17:57
The 3rd was the deep ball to DJ Coles. The Duke DB got away with some grabbing, but if that ball is on the money it is a touchdown.
I am not sure if he was ratttled, or what was going on. He wasn't getting much pressure. Duke basically took away those short crossing routes, and when Loeffler called plays that worked in getting guys open, Thomas didn't make the throw.
Loeffler's MO backed up around the goal line is to take a shot deep because most teams will defend the run in that situation. It worked against UNC and it worked against Duke on Saturday.
I hate to blame the refs, but it seemed like Duke got away with quite a bit of grabbing and pushing on our receivers, with a few being in the endzone or on plays that would have resulted in a TD. Granted, I saw one play on the Jumbotron that showed Miller clearly hold one of Duke's Defensive Linemen so overall I think the refs were horrible. Correct me if I'm wrong, but did it look like on Duke's TD drive that the Duke player was actually holding on to Kyshoen and not the other way around as it was called? Initially, I saw Ky holding him, but the replay on the jumbotron almost looked like the other way around and the ref just had a bad angle forcing the wrong call.
Looking at the replay on TV, it appeared as though the hold on Ky came as he was falling to the ground because the receiver pulled his jersey down. So he fell to the ground grasping for whatever he could. I initially thought they would call an offensive pass interference because it seemed obvious to me that it happened, but such was our luck that game.
Okay, just making sure I wasn't seeing it entirely through maroon and orange blinders. I couldn't believe some of the calls. The DJ Coles illegal motion penalty infuriated me because from up top, it seemed there was no flag until after the play was over. As I said, I hate blaming the officials, but everyone around me was laughing at the comments I was making towards the refs, all of which were without profanity because we were in a section full of families with small children. I'm pretty sure my wife traumatized one of the kids as she shouted out "HE'S DEAD! OUR GUY KILLED HIM!" after one of Duke's players got injured. She had to reassure the little guy that the player was most definitely not dead.
You married a winner. Well done, sir.
I saw that as well if anything it should have been a no call as there wasn't enough to warrant a pass interference call on that play.
On the same replay, the receiver on the left running a straight go route looked wide open too but Logan never even looked at him.
They've played us real tough ever since Cutliffe got there. It paid off this year, after almost getting us in 2012.
Well...on a positive note, the media is giving TKP some justified praise:
I really appreciate his praise. One of the great benefits of being a Virginia Tech fan is that all the beat writers covering the team do really outstanding work. They relay the coach speak that most beats do, but they focus much more on the critical issues impacting the team instead of "what the PR staff is sharing with us today" human interest fluff that you see in many markets. It has made the staff much better at delivering interviews as well. The comments we have heard this year from the coaches have generally been much more insightful than a couple of years ago, and that is because this group of writers does a terrific job of structuring lines of questioning.
And despite all of this, the Hokies win the game IF
1) Journell makes his kicks, which is why he is on scholarship
2) Thomas plays an average game
Keep in mind, Duke played hard, not well. It was their worst offensive performance of the season, against a defense that was essentially playing three guys in every down roles for the first time (Dadi, Clark, and Exum.)
When was the last time you said/heard this statement..."if we ONLY commit 3 turnovers we probably win"?
Way late to this but what do you consider an average game for Logan? We've seen such great extremes for him that it's hard for me to determine average.
Here's a question, if you were Cody Journell's coach, what would you do to correct his faults?
Make sure he does the following things:
Relax
Keep his head down
Rotate his hips all the way through
Follow through correctly
Have a fanbase that doesn't boo him when he walks on the field. He's a Hokie, you asshats. Regardless of how you feel about him personally (and let's face it, I'm sure a good number of us have done things just as stupid in college), expressing it when he's out there representing the school and doing his best to help the team win is neither the time nor place to do it.
*EDIT* I'm sure there could be other things, but those are the biggies and I haven't taken the time to look at film of CJ kicking.
And maybe not undercut his confidence by going for it on 4th&11 on a normally makable kick with the wind at his back at the beginning of the game when there's no real pressure. If he misses it, it's not a back breaker and momentum shifting miss. If he makes it, he has confidence and isn't kicking to save the game but rather to win it later.
up vote for asshats - is that ass-hats or as-shats?
ass-hat
Journel was:
Involved in a drug related home invasion type incident in the off season resulting in suspension from a bowl game, forcing a kickoff specialist to kick field goals in a close game (loss to Mich).
Suspended in a game this season with the backup kicker going 0-3 (ECU).
Cleared out BW3 by spraying pepper spray
Maybe tell him- GROW UP and be repsonsible to your teammates and success will follow?
Have not booed him though, I just want him GONE
Right on. The whole "we all did dumb stuff in college" is a convenient shield but I'd guess either he's the most unlucky guy ever and just got caught every time he did something stupid or most college kids never did nearly as much dumb stuff. He's overstayed his welcome in my opinion, and it has nothing to do with his performance on the football field.
his grandfather is also in the hospital. not making excuses for his poor kicking, but something to think about before attacking him (not you, but people in general)
Well said. I'm not a fan of Journell, but I was a much bigger idiot when I was his age (and I could probably make an argument for certain days as I approached my 30s but I digress), but you don't boo a player on your team. Hell, I didn't even boo the UNC kid for throwing a punch. At the end of the day, these are kids playing a high octane game where emotions can run high. I can criticize a performance just like anyone else and that's the price you pay for playing for a high profile team, get your skin thick, kid. When it comes down to it, no matter how accurate our criticism may be, Logan has more touchdowns than me, Cody has more fg's than me, and I've run the risk of being arrested more than most of the kids on that team.
Please don't be so ignorant. Trust me, he is not doing his absolute best to help the team win. I'm not going to shit on him because he is doing exactly what I would do in his situation (enjoy his college experience), but don't just assume he's doing the most to help us win strictly because he's a Hokie. And before you call me out, we have mutual friends so I do know a little more about him than most.
Seems like his hook is the big problem right now - if I were his coach, I'd maybe start him on the left hash in practice, and have him do nothing but make kicks (from his comfort zone range, 30-40 yards) for a couple days, from that hash exclusively. Get him back into a comfort zone of a more straight-on approach with a gentle push. Then take a couple days to move him across the field gradually, hoping to re-establish a muscle memory of a less splayed-out angle of attack, intervening quickly if the motion breaks down and he starts bringing the leg across at a 10-degree angle again.
Basically anything I could do to shatter this existing routine of yanking his foot across the ball at the point of the kick.
I would also have kickers practicing on goalposts that were Arena Football dimensions.
Just some insight as to Kicker practiceThe kickers at VT spend about 30 minutes at Lane kicking (not sur show much but i digress since I am usually on the practice fields). After that they sit around in the middle of the practice fields unless the team is doing pride and joy (obviously special teams) most of this time is spent with the punting unit and kick return unit. The only time I've seen Journell attempt a kick on the practice field is during the two minute drill. Other then that Journell and the rest of the kickers don't get too much practice time compared to the rest of the team (about 2.5 hours). Most of the time as I've said they sit in the middle of the practice field drinking gatorade after they practice for about 30 minutes.
Basically you just described being the RF on a little league team. I guess Beamer must watch those 30 mins since he keeps saying he sees him hitting them in practice.
During the summer I did see him out there almost every day kicking by himself. I don't know if he still does it, but my guess is he kicks for more than 30 minutes a day as a FBS starting kicker.
I have noticed a number of things about open dates: Until three years ago or so, the Hokies lost the football game following the open date. I thought the Beamer and the coaches had changed their schedules so that distractions like speaking for city touchdown clubs had been eliminated. Does anyone have a schedule for the coaches over the open date period?
Logan Thomas likes those shallow crossing patterns over the middle or on the edge. Duke took those away all day. Linebackers were bumping the receivers going across the middle disrupting their patterns and timing. Duke specifically focused on those, often leaving other players open because Logan likes those routes so much. This is a case of good defensive coaching. It seems that this rattled Logan and frustrated him more than a little. One time a pass interference call was made on a dump pass to Edmunds over the middle, but these denials of these patterns worked.
is it just me or has misdirection gone missing?
LT's number of INTs could have been much worse - he threw into double- and triple-team coverage so often that I lost count.
+1 to get you off of 666, especially on Halloween...
One thought. I know several folks may be wondering why I selected one play on defense when the defense held Duke to their worst output in years. Well, I didn't think they played a terrific game. Fuller and Dadi's interceptions covered up some breakdowns. They did not generate a huge amount of pass rush, and while the defensive backs played well in coverage, Duke broke some big chunk plays because the defensive backs could not shake blockers.
Chuck Clark has been an ace on special teams all season, but his missed tackle on the Shaq Powell screen ended up being another huge play. He missed the tackle in the right flat, and the other DB's were in man and had their back to the play. Powell ended up breaking some tackles, and ultimately set up the Martin field goal that proved to be the difference. Several times, a few inches cost the Hokies dearly. And, Ken Ekanem was forced to play because of Collins screw-up, and he got sucked inside on the Boone TD run.
Offensive execution is the reason that the Hokies didn't win by a score of 21-13 or more. Those defensive breakdowns at critical moments, even though they were few and far between, had as much to do with the game being a loss as missed kicks and poor throws. With how poorly Duke executed on offense, it should have been at worst a tie game going to overtime.
I agree, their TD was aided by one PI call that looked legit and another that was bogus. It should have been at the least a tied game going into OT as you say.
http://youtu.be/N21uj4rINE4
I agree.. they missed on two long TD passes on overthrowns where receivers were running free in the first half. Could have been disastrous.
Yes on the pass rush! It felt like they didn't get pressure until halfway through the 4th quarter. Duke's downfield blocking consistently opened up lanes and gave their playmakers an extra 5 or 10 yards. At the end of the day, however, that defensive performance should have been plenty for a W.
It's shocking how wide open our WR's were and LT didn't see them..he has been playing QB so long you would think those are easy throws for big yardage. I'm now starting to accept the fact that LT will never be anything but average at the QB position. If LT just executes those plays we win the game by 20..it's one thing getting blown out but it's another to miss FGs, throw into triple coverage, miss wide open WR's, and going away from the run game when your QB is having the worst game in his career.
To me, the long completion to Knowles encapsulates why Loeffler sticks by him and why someone is going to draft him.
It's a flat-out amazing throw. The ball travels about 60-65 yards in the air, from six yards deep in his own end zone to just past the fifty on the opposite hash, dropping on a dime right into Knowles' hands. There are only about thirty people in the world who are physically capable of doing that in a football game and he's one of them.
But I'm with you, I'm afraid he's just never going to be an above-average quarterback. His post-snap decision-making is just so, so questionable, and I don't see how it's going to get better. I know some people want to say O'Cain this and Stinespring that when it comes to Thomas' development, but he's a fifth-year RS Senior, he is what he is at this point. O'Cain coaching and Stiney coordinating was good enough to get Tyrod Taylor into the NFL and it was good enough to get Thomas to hype levels in 2011 that he hasn't since approached.
And PLEASE don't read that as me pining for the old staff - I'm not - but the honeymoon for the new guys sure came to a crashing halt on Saturday.
To be fair, when Logan was aggressive and going downfield (first half) those receivers were not open. As he made more mistakes, and as he got hit more and more in the running game, he stopped being as aggressive.
One thing I will be very vocal about tomorrow is the abandonment of the zone stretch running game. The Hokie OL blocked it so well and it was all ready to set up big plays in play action. And instead, Loeffler abandoned it for the read option and inverted veer. Thomas, Edmunds, and Coleman all had nice runs from that set, but in the process your quarterback took a ton of hits he didn't need to take. On pass pro, I think Logan was only hit once all day. But, he took a hit on every run. He will be more effective IF his running is a surprise and catches a defense off balance. Get him one on one with a safety where he has a couple of strides going. Using him as Bronko Nagurski has diminishing returns.
It's sometimes hard to tell in real time what's read-option and what's a designed play-fake to a QB run, and I don't have the stomach for watching replays of this year's offense. But if there's an element of optionality on any significant percentage of his runs, he might be his own worst enemy, he does not seem to like giving it up, and it's not like defenses aren't keying on him on the keeper to begin with.
Do you have a sense, french, of how much LT is calling his own number, and how much Loeffler is calling it?
I noticed this a few times this game, and others, and I believe you've mentioned this before. Something that is assisting the defense is the sheer amount of times Logan goes with the ball, because they collapse on him, when it looks like if he had given it to the RB, it would be a pretty big play.
It's hard for those plays to actually work when the defense KNOWS Logan is keeping the ball 9 out of 10 times.
I would love to see once, just once, how far Logan can throw it. He said last week that his arm felt 'live' again, so I was hoping to see Knowles just let loose and run straight ahead, with Logan just rolling out and flinging it for all its worth.
Always learning something new from your reviews. Excellent write up!
Great write up. I can't believe that the d had so much trouble getting to Boone in the backfield. I'm speechless there. Ditto to the lack of running game from above when it seemed to be working.
I too am looking forward to the next section of your review French. You have brought a whole new dimension to the way I watch and cheer our team on, and I appreciate all of the time and effort you put in, as I do of the whole TKP staff.
I know that as a fan base, we often have questions regarding our team that go unanswered because they are behind the scenes, and all we can do is speculate given the information on hand (albeit some very good speculation due to TKP). Execution obviously played a major role in Saturday's loss, but that is simple to understand. I am so interested in the next segment of French's analysis because it involves the aspect of our team that I have a really hard time wrapping my head around. I can understand poor coaching in the past, adjusting to new coaches, new coaches having to play with the hand they've been dealt, etc., but it seems at times that our offensive woes extend further than just these issues. What it boils down to is that these players are young and are going to make mistakes, so what I really want is to be able to trust the guys making the big bucks (ie the coaches) to hold up their end. Loeffler has proven in the past to be a very successful position coach, but doesn't he have limited experience actually calling plays? If it's as simple as this, adjusting to new coaches, and a depleted talent pool on the offensive side of the ball, then I can have all the patience in the world and can very much enjoy watching our team play.
I think that our new coaching staff has tremendous upside, and I trust Loeffler and believe he both deserves and needs our patience. But above all else, I trust in CFB. He is a true class act. His ability to field a team that exudes class AND personality is remarkable (it's usually one or the other), not to mention the stability he brings to the program that we have all grown accustomed to. I'll take that any day of the week over some of these other topsy turvy "elite" programs that are so obviously driven by money. And while I most certainly have questions about this team, I believe in them and the coaches to turn things around. After all, isn't that the point of being a fan?
Well said.
I think that some of us have gotten spoiled with the 10-wins season, forgiving the ugly offense under Stinespring because we won more games than we lost. But, to a degree, there's a bit of panic in the fan base, which is understandable because we are not used to seeing this type of loss to school that is known more for it's gigantic basketball program. I give Cutcliffe ton of credit for the job he has done at Duke and not bending the academic requirements to get the players to fit the system there. He is truly a class act, and he was, to be quite honest, due for a major signature win, even if it was at our expense.
However, during the span of 10-wins season, we have seen slip up against teams (which was documented here), and found a way to bounce back. Am I saying that the Hokies will repeat the formula of the past? Honestly, I don't know. That's one reason I have repeatedly said on Twitter that every game is a test and I have kept my expectation low.
Does the loss hurt? Absolutely. Is it time to mash the panic button? Unless you are one of those fickle bandwagon fan, no. Does that mean we just gloss over the loss to Duke? Heck no. Otherwise, we wouldn't be the obsessed fans of Hokies Nation without that. :)
Random thought, where the heck has chris mangus gone? is he injured? Definitely think he is more of a threat than most of our players on offense, atleast in big play capability.
He was in on a couple of snaps. I agree though. Everytime he came in all I could think was "Okay, sweet, some good shit is about to happen."
I rank our RBs like this: Edmunds, Mangus, Coleman, Caleb. I haven't seen anything out of Caleb that seems exceptional. To be fair, the same goes for Coleman, but he certainly seems to have a play your nuts off factor. Mangus is clearly super talented. Edmunds is super talented and plays his nuts off.
Mangus > #EdmundsForLB > Coleman > Caleb
Marshawn Williams, however....MMFW in earnest
Hands up if you're still depressed and not over it yet!
I mean uh-raise designated alcoholic beverage if you're still not over it!
The Duke loss is why I call them the Chokies.
Wow, I'm not going to down vote for that, but Wow.
I did...
We do not care for that word in here.
That's fair. If VT fans will use the term "Clemsoning," then opposing fans should be able to use the term Chokies. Clemsoning, Chokies, what's the difference? I guess Clemsoning has taken off into the national spotlight, but in all reality I don't know why Clemonsoning isn't called Chokieing considering the two schools extremely similar losses to teams they shouldn't lose to. Can say the same thing about FSU and Miami and pretty much every other major football University (sans current Alabama).
Because to do it in the manner posted above, by an account that is relatively unused, it springs real close to trolling.
Trolling is something we do not do here unless it involves a taunt regarding dessert choices.
Why has no one said anything about Carol Lee's? For the love of god, I'm not sure if there's any better a dessert.
Yeah there's a number of things that are permitted on here but "Chokies" (which is actually an age old label), f-king with the Fullers & denying-p*ssy-SAM ROGERS TDs are not.
Call Sam Rogers that to his face...
True, I haven't generated many turkey legs but I do read each post with great interest, looking for something positive to feel good about the team, and with the excellent analyses, I'm learning a lot about the game. The excoriation generated by my post is why I haven't posted very often. I've seen what you guys do with comments you don't like. But, hey! I think I've earned the right to say whatever the cat hair I want to about them. I was a student at Tech in the early 60's when the Beamer himself was playing, and I graduated a year ahead of him. I suffered along with the rest of the Hokie Nation for many years and then while Frank got the team's act together. We went to the NC in New Orleans for the '99 championship against the Seminoles. I have season tickets. Can't make every game, but I do get to Hokieville 2-3 times a year. The other games I faithfully watch on TV or the BS ESPN3. I've been to several gator holes and Charlotte ACCCs when Tech is playing. We seem to have a penchant for losing to teams that we should blow out. Those losses hurt like heck, and I catch a whole lot of flack from my buddies from other schools. Unexplainable, unbelievable. It's like they can't stand prosperity, and they choke, like a golfer missing a gimmee putt and losing a tournament by one stroke. Say what you want to fellas, call me a troll and down vote all you want, but I'm a die hard Hokie fan. That, my friends, will never change. I just hope we can soon place a NC trophy in that empty case!
I would agree your passion is there, but it sure came across the wrong way. For me I will stomp and scream every time they lose but I will never disparage the team or call them 'the name'. But that's just me.
I was amongst your down-voters. To me, it's tough to claim lifelong fandom and then put them down that way. Throwing out the c-word isn't frustration to me, it's just hateful. If you've been with the program that long you should appreciate the high standards even more and understand the stumbles. My first game was in one of the probation years as a 4 year old watching us get stomped because my dad was at a conference and they gave him tickets in the presidents box for free due to no interest. I started school in 2000 and had classmates that didn't know anything of the pre-'95 successful Hokies. Am I disappointed in this team for last week? Absolutely, but I am eternally grateful that we have reason to sit at 6-2 and be disappointed. 6 wins is a season goal for some teams, it was a dream for us for much of your fandom and is still a dream for certain other teams on the other side of the state. I will never let my disappointment turn to bitterness and will never call these kids by the dreaded name. I will give you back a leg for having the fortitude to come back and explain yourself though.
Started in 2000? So did I, which department?
Psych...which eventually led to culinary school. Makes no sense, I know, if I had it to do over I'd go Chem so that I could play with some food science, but maybe ill toy with that idea in the future.
When experience fails... we can just take all of our frustration out on the Cavaliers on the gridiron.
sounds like a good plan to me!
I would love to see Leal play against the hoos
(this is not a jab at LT, rather a wish for a huge blow out in which Leal would get "garbage" time)