We all know the VT offense has never been a consistent juggernaut. We've had ups and downs but Beamer has always seemed to prefer a ball control offense first and not necessarily seemed to worry about constantly have big threats that can score from anywhere, anytime. And I don't think there's anything wrong with it, Beamer has won lots and lots of games with his philosophy.
But...I remember a home game vs. Syracuse. Might have been 2001? We lost. Something like 21-14? The whole game the team just couldn't run the ball. I remember a few goal line stands by Syracuse where we just couldn't stick it in.
I think that was the first time I saw a failure like that where it was obvious there was something different. The inability to stuff the ball in the end zone, a noticeable decline of the smashmouth running game, I think that game was the first time I think I noticed it. There have been times that the smashmouth running game has come back, but it's never come back as consistent, and that game against Syracuse was the first time I really was saying "huh? we've always been able to pick up a yard for a TD? what's wrong?"
Comments
Pick any Sean Glennon start and let's go from there.
I would say by second down it became pretty clear
As mentioned in the other thread, the debacle of Marcus Vick basically threw or QB rotations into the shitter by thrusting players, like Glennon, into playing time way before they were ready. We've been playing catch up ever since. Randall, Tyrod and Logan were godsends keeping us afloat during the ineptitude of the O'Cainspring era.
Well said. The upheaval at QB threw us into disarray for a VERY long time.
well, I basically regurgitated what you wrote on the other thread so turkey leg back at you! I think we both see this exactly the same way though.
But to be fair, I sincerely doubt Glennon would've been on par (or even half as skilled) as Randall, MV5, T-Mobe, and LT3 regardless of who was QB coach.
Agreed but wasn't ike whitacre or someone along those lines supposed to be the next qb and was just a knuckle head and never panned out?
He developed a serious alcohol problem and was dismissed from the team in 2008.
in his deffense he did later rejoin the team as wr. but he got his life worked out.
Indeed. I read a story that he's gotten better and turned his life around. My post was not intended as criticism; everyone has their struggles and I was very happy to hear that he was winning the battle against his demons. Just stating the reason for his dismissal at the time.
Almost completely off topic, but has anyone heard of the book Fearless? It's about a deceased Navy Seals' life and the demons he overcame. Just started reading it and it is just bananas what he did to himself and others when he was trying to figure himself out and which demons he had to fight. Great read so far. Now back to your regularly scheduled program
I have read that book and you are correct, it is an amazing story. I was just telling someone about it here at work the other day. The obstacles he overcame while continuing with his training makes for a very inspirational story.
Well shoot I feel like a dick, I always thought he was just lazy or something. Really glad to hear he got all of that worked out and got his life on track
Hey. Don't say anything bad about Marcus Vick. He was an outstanding student with great character and people get offended when you bring up anything bad about him.
Just out of curiosity (& this isn't directed as an attack at you or fern & hokieguitar) but why do y'all have so much animosity directed at him? Yes you've explained his character and legal issues, but I guess the point I'm getting at is: were you or someone close to you (family, close friend, etc) personally affected by his issues? You obviously can or not choose to answer.
One doesn't have to be directly personally affected to dislike another person. For example, if my alma mater's sports programs were consistently labeled as 'thuggish' for an extended period of years due to the behavior of a single athlete, if there were nationally televised incidents verifying that behavior by the best known athlete in school, if there were repeated incidents of illegal and immoral behavior by that athlete reported nationally, then all of those many and separate actions would tarnish the reputation of the school inside & outside of sports. As a result I would feel directly and personally affected by that athlete, and I would dislike him. I would also remember that for a very long time, even after my dislike waned into apathy. I would also comment on occasion about his many disgraceful actions and his failed potential and his continued disgrace even over a decade later. I would mock him at times, even when his apologists rose to ignore all of the above solely because he had athletic ability. I am fine with that, regardless if it didn't meet the approval of some who choose to ignore all the harm he did to individuals and to the pride of Hokie Nation. So, you didn't ask me, but that is my thought on the matter. This won't be an argument about Marcus, because he has proven his lack of character with his actions over the past decade-plus. You may disagree, and it will not change my mind. He was a disgrace then, and now he's the butt of jokes. Some people don't change, but at least we can joke about it now, in a self inflicted way.
^ This.
I don't need to say much more, because I've already said the same thing on a couple other threads, but figured I would at least post since I was directly asked.
Agreed. that pretty much sums it up.
We're fans of a football team. He was, in my opinion, it's worst participant. And he makes it all too easy to loathe him more and more as the years go by.
This question was open and meant for everybody (obviously) that shared exampled feelings about MV5 (apologies if I didn't make it more obvious), not just those who've been the most vocal about them. But again, has anybody on here been personally affected in some (be it through fam, friend, former teammate, etc)? I ask because it would clarify some of the intense vitriol spewed at the very mention of his name (understand I'm neither ignoring or disclaiming his character or alleged legal issues).
I think what you call "intense vitriol" is what we would call "normal criticism of someone who made repeated mistakes." We know you have a somewhat more favorable view of MV5, we get it. We disagree, that's all. I see no need to justify anything based on direct personal offense.
Honestly, I really don't see why you keep harping on him being some sort of positive ray of light that VT couldn't have done without. There is zero evidence to support this line of thinking. What evidence is actually there shows someone that deserves every bit of criticism that's thrown their way.
If for no other reason than he was a loser who got kicked off the football team because of numerous criminal incidents then it should be validation enough for any fan of said football team to criticize them with as much vitriol as they so choose. The better question: why is it that you personally feel so hurt when he is criticized? If you can't answer honestly, or just say the "W's" then you shouldn't be asking any of us our reasoning, especially when our reasoning is so blatantly obvious.
Well you still didn't clarify whether or not you were personally affected. I don't personally feel hurt when criticized. I feel disappointed (as I've stated before in other threads) that his career didn't pan out (both collegiate and pro). I'm disappointed that he made unwise choices. But I will always admire, respect and (if need) defend his athleticism and contributions on the field which I (and perhaps a small number of others) feel contributed in a positive way to the program. I may be the only one on this site but I don't mind it. At least there's an additional viewpoint.
yes we did. read again. we all have personal attachment to the school and it's football team, either as an alumni or as fan. done. answered.
we all do. we all want every Hokie to succeed.
His athleticism means jack and shit when he commits so many crimes and is kicked off the team. someone who makes mistakes and makes amends is perhaps someone to admire (eg. Mike Vick) if you feel inclined to do so. someone who continually make mistakes and throws every opportunity they ever had down the drain, refuses to take responsibility or change all whilst living off the teet of their successful family member is a loser and nobody to be admired. No idea why you don't get this but whatever.
good for you. we feel differently. now we all know. no need to get upset in the future when we rightly criticizes Marcus for being the loser he is. And we won't get upset when you admire him.
Now, let's put this to bed.
I have just one more question: does it bother you that there are a small number of people whom admire atheletic contributions on the field to the program that are vocal? Also to expand on the disappointment, I had hoped that he would be a starting QB on a team opposite his older bro. Had hoped they would both be SB winners, multiple Pro bowls and eventual HoFers.
If there's going to continual bashing and criticism towards him whenever his name is brought up without acknowledging his athletic contributions then it won't be truly put to bed will it?
Someone can bring up his name in whatever manner they'd like. It won't be put to bed because you'll be there squawking like a mother goose protecting her young.
You mean unless (of course) someone were to mention his name and athletic abilities as a positive for Tech, right?
We're entitled to our opinion and you're entitled to your opinion. You've been asked to defend yours, and you don't; you just rail against anyone who is disagreeing with you. No one has been insulting your views. We're debating the importance of various factors.
Why do I have to defend my opinion of him?
I suppose you don't, but it doesn't add any quality to the community, so consider this (quoting you):
Translation: you constantly challenge our opinions and/or want explanations; you don't do the same when anyone challenges your opinion. You just trash us, accuse us of spewing vitriol or otherwise hyperbolizing what we're saying. The community here is used to a certain quality of high-minded and respectful debate. If you can't do that, quit trolling. Because that's what this is. You take offense to anyone who disagrees with you on a certain set of issues (every time a few of them come up, I can count on seeing a post from you with the same stuff) and threads get sidetracked with stuff like this, re-stating what we're saying over and over, hoping you'll finally actually read what we're saying. It gets old. If you have an opinion on something, great, share it and say why you think. It makes for good discussion and gets us through the long offseason. Don't make a claim and then bash other people when they don't agree.
dude.... I sincerely hope you are trolling. your comments, if sincere, are troubling at the very least.
No. This is a ridiculously obtuse over-generalization of every comment we have made. I admire athletic contributions as much or more than most any fan, and myself along with guitarman are some of the most vocal on TKP (him especially).
In fact, every time we've spoke about Marcus I have repeatedly stated that his athletic contributions are overshadowed by his criminal activities. See both together just like you so desperately want.
In summary. stop trolling.
Just for fun, if Marcus Vick doesn't get thrown off the team:
2006: Marcus Vick (r-Senior)
2007: Sean Glennon (r-Junior)
2008: Tyrod Taylor (r-Freshman) or Sean Glennon (r-Senior)
2009: Tyrod Taylor (r-Sophmore)
2010: Tyrod Taylor (r-Junior)
2011: Tyrod Taylor (r-Senior)
2012: Logan Thomas (r-Junior)
2013: Logan Thomas (r-Senior)
To troll: How do you think things would have been different if this was our QB rotation?
Actually I don't think it would be much different, but IMO, and others at that time as I remember, Glennon was thrust into action way too early in 2006. He really needed that extra year of experience. I'm not saying he would have been amazing but perhaps more serviceable and confident. That in turn would mean that Tyrod wouldn't need to burn his redshirt in 2008 (debatable), which they really did not want to happen, which means that he perhaps plays through 2012 season. Then Logan may or may not have even been QB. Recruiting was pretty shite for QB at that point so maybe still.
Anyway, everyone gets another year of experience. I also remember from that time the pundits speculating that VT missed a golden chance to make another run with Marcus' meltdown. Had he kept it together we may have gotten back to or close to the top. Which would have paid dividends on the recruiting trail whereby perhaps our QB recruiting wasn't shite and Logan was drafted as TE instead of QB. And I remember many people at the time commenting that Marcus' actions, and the Thug U image of VT that came along with it, had some seriously negative impacts on VT recruiting.
It's all speculation and my opinion, sure, but I can see how we would have been better off.
We almost did get back to the top of it all. Even Mack Brown thought we were one of the best teams in the nation that year. Look, his character and legal issues obviously didn't prevent talented and (better) character players from coming anyway (T-Mobe, LT3, Coale). The only way your gonna get me to shut up about him (at least everytime y'all or anyone else bring him up as only a negative) is if a collective of offensive players in pros now or within the last 5 yrs say "his incidents almost convinced me not to go to Tech."
What are you talking about? Marcus wasn't a recruiter, nor did he even purport to have that kind of pull.
Besides, everyone with working eyes knew that his actions, though they put our school in a negative light, were his alone. It's not like you could trace anything back to Beamer or Stinespring or O'Cain (was he the QB coach then? I forget) giving him orders to stomp on Dumervil or flip the bird at the Morgantown faithful like it was part of the culture or something.
The esteemed Kevin Rogers was QB coach but Stiney and Newsome were OC and line coach. Rogers left after the '05-'06 season to go to the Vikes. That's when Beams picked up O'Cain.
Honestly, the only difference is that we would have missed out on the great year Logan Thomas had in 2011. Not really sure having Tyrod would have helped us beat Clemson in either of those 2 games, so we wouldn't have won the ACC, and Tyrod wouldn't have really helped us in that Michigan game, as the reason we lost was purely Michigan's ability to hit on miracle throws on 3rd and 4th downs, some moronic special teams decisions and gaffes, and a truly horrible call from the officials in OT. He might have been a shitty person, but I really truly honestly think the whole "Marcus completely altered our future and ruined the QB position for a decade" is a bit unfair. An extra year from Marcus wouldn't have made the OL play like a competent unit.
Considering who was "running" it. I heard someone say (not me, another fan) that a chimpanzee hanging from the rafters at Cassel, throwing feces everywhere would help our offense score more TDs than O'Cainspring (and Newsome).
I feel like I should point out that throughout this convo I didn't downleg anybody. So if anybody downlegged me because they thought I downlegged I didn't. Also, I didn't come up with this quote. It was another Hokie. Just a disclaimer.
I guess I should respond since it was a reply to my comment even though the others pretty much expressed my opinion also. First off, I have no personal connections to Marcus Vick other than through the Hokie Nation. Are you defending him because you have a personal connection with him? I think we are arguing different things and therefore never going to agree. He was a great athlete. The others and I just say that his off the field actions brought more negative light to VT than his abilities brought positive light. Bottom line: the pros were not worth the cons that came along with them, in my opinion. I understand you may not have the same opinion. I want to say that it's not just the bad decisions he made, but the way he had handled them even afterwards. For example, I have no animosity toward Michael Vick. He made some terrible decisions, but admitted his wrongdoing, served his time, and became someone that people can look up to. I'm sure people still hate him for his crime, but I forgive him because of the way he handled it afterwards. Cody Journell also comes to mind when I think about Marcus because of how he was given so many chances by Beamer and pissed them all away. That's very disrespectful to the coaches and the University. Again, this is all just my opinion. We don't have to agree. Go Hokies
My biggest problem with Marcus Vick is this. I feel, that as an athlete, you're held to a higher standing than a normal student. When you put on that jersey, you not only represent yourself, but Virginia Tech as well. Your actions can be seen as a reflection of the university.
His poor on and off the field actions hurt the image of Virginia Tech. Plain and simple
What do you say about the Coach who left him on the team after all of these above mentioned transgressions while he was at VT? Most other FB players who have been in trouble get no where near the opportunities Marcus had to stay on the team.
In retrospect I wish he had thrown him off a lot earlier, but at the time everyone I knew was happy Frank was trying to help him.
This seems like an obvious answer to me; he was given a longer leash than most others within the program because of who his brother was both as a professional player and the clout he carried in VT football lore. I think Frank did everything he could (sans having someone follow him around on a 24/7 basis).
Anyone that thinks Marcus might still be a good guy just needs to follow his Twitter for a week and quickly see that all of the ire thrust his way was and still is justified, IMO.
I also don't really understand challenging someone's perception of a player based on whether or not they were personally affected by the player. I was never personally affected by any UVA player, coach, or administrator but I still have a deep disdain for the Wahoos.
I think the easiest way to look at why there is so much animosity directed at Marcus is to compare him with his brother. Both have run afoul of the law at some point in there lives, the difference is that Michael has made an effort to reform, make amends and stop others from making the same mistakes he made. Marcus has continued to make bad decisions and find new and strange ways to commit illegal acts.
Fun Fact in NCAA 07 dynasty mode, I won a couple championships with "QB #12" as my starter
This was the game when Tyrod was injured at the very beginning of the game and Glennon was injured in the 3rd which led to Holt getting meaningful playing time.
I wouldn't use 'decline' as the operative word. I would say 'vulnerability in our offensive philosophy.' And I first saw that in the Syracuse '98 game.
A 'decline' from our low offensive standards started, I think, when Stiney took over at OC.
There's never been a 'decline.' We've had all of three or so great offenses, with the MV7 years and 2010 when we went 8-0 in the ACC. Other than that, it's been the passing game that has always been a struggle. The quarterbacks have usually been there, but the line and the receivers have not always.
I think that goes back to recruiting. It's rare that we land a top o-line or WR recruit, but we do get good QBs and top RBs to commit. And of course tight ends.
I'll agree - with the exception of Michael, and another outlier season or two, our offense has ALWAYS been weak. We don't have to limit it to 1998 until now, we can encompass Beamer's entire tenure. Even before Frank, under Dooley, it was, but that's a thread for another time. It's been decades, folks. When it became embarrassingly weak was when Frank inexplicably hired Stinespring, and then refused to ignore the obvious truth that Stinespring was incapable as an OC. Only when the moneyed boosters forced Frank to make changes, did we get Loeffler, while still having Frank publicly defend Stinespring as an OC after Loeffler was already on board. What will change that? Not Loeffler. Now, he's bound to be better than Stinespring, but overall, we'll still be bottom half offense overall. That won't change while Frank is in charge. Heck, it might not change after Frank retires. like I said - Dooley was no offensive svengali, either. Maybe it's just the Hokie way - ancient offensive strategies, excellent defensive performance. We've been better on defense than offense for all my life, even when we were under Jimmy Sharpe & Jerry Claiborne. Maybe we need to find another Charlie Coffey!
That 01 game you mentioned was a miserable game to watch. It was like the team didn't show up. I remember that was a cold day, with snow flurries (though the sun was out too). But 01 was also the year we lost Suggs the 1st game of the year and they were breaking in KJ behind Keith Burnell. That Cuse game was also when the wheels came off for Noel.
If you go by stats, the Offenses in 06 and 07 were pretty bad. Someone above blamed Sean but thats not really a fair assessment considering the o line he had to work with those two years. We under recruited the o line in the early 00s and it cost us in 06-08. Combine that with trying to do to much on O at the start of both of those seasons, a ill timed injury on the line in 07 and you get sub 100 rankings on O. Same thing happened a few years ago and it cost us in 12 and 13. We're just now digging out of that mess.
No but 1 million INTs were completely his fault. Also, not the nicest person on campus.
Wait... I'm sorry, did I just understand that correctly?
Not even 24 hours after your last post in a back and forth where you're defending Marcus Vick against everyone who list his behavior as a reason to not respect him, you're going after the personality of Sean Glennon? I stayed out of it earlier.... but... what?
There were approximately 38,000 people on campus at the time, and the nicest person on campus was one of those. That leaves approximately 37,999 people that were not the nicest person on campus. So he was one of us...
The saddest thing about that O-line wasn't not being able to protect a non-mobile quarterback, but that if we went for the QB sneak, it got 4-5 yards every time...even when the defense KNEW the QB sneak was coming.
I remember thinking at one point later in the season that we should just QB sneak it every time...at least we'd get 4 yards out of it and walk down the field.
So, just for fun, starting from 1998 to include the run-up to the year we reached the championship game:
Each dot represents the average for a given year (x-axis): blue (total points scored per game), red (point differential), and the green points are the number of wins that year. Simple linear regressions for wins and differential are shown as dashed lines.
Offense peaked in the MV7 years, no surprise there. If you take those two as outliers, scoring was pretty consistent from 1998-2005. Differential dropped over that time, but we averaged a win by 10+ points per game, so nothing too shabby. Starting in 2006 (after MV5 got booted, see fernley's and my comments above and in other threads), we dropped off significantly in both points and differential, yet the wins remained constant by some stroke of luck. Offense bounced back when TT became an upperclassman and we had guys like Evans, RMFW, and DW4 in the backfield and receivers like Boykin and Open. Then we slid back down again, for a multitude of reasons that likely could be discussed in several threads related to recruiting misses and lack of development of the O-line. It's a complex story, and though we appear to be trending downward in terms of scoring, the R2 is very small, so it's not really a strong indicator of a trend. I think it is fairly clear that there were a couple of prominent events that happened in a few key years that caused a LOT of instability in our offense, to the point that even though our D was amazing last year, we still only averaged a win by about a FG (3.23 pts, to be exact, up only slightly from 2.23 pts in 2012) over the entire season. When your average point differential is within one score, that's a rough season with no margin for error.
I may go back even further in time to try to see if there's anything else interesting going on, but this is just what I had time for right now.
Interesting to see the Bryan Randall years averaging just as many points as the Tyrod years
really cool graph, maybe check SOS too, it's hard to just look at the points without taking into consideration that VT changed conferences right in the middle of that time, some of it could be a tougher schedule
I wonder if a bigger coincidence if offensive drop off could be tired to Newsome being hired rather than Stiney taking over as OC.
Stiney took over as OC in 2002, and also coached O-line until 2006, when Newsome was hired. That also coincided with the dip in offensive production. Delving into rushing stats for those years would probably be informative.
EDIT: so I did, again over the same time period as above. Here are rushing and passing yards per game:
Yards/game on the y-axis over time (year), x-axis.
The pattern of the rushing yards looks strikingly like the shape of the points scored graph above, and in fact there is a reasonably strong linear relationship between rush yds/game and points scored:
Points scored on y-axis, rush yards/game on the x-axis.
Run the ball, win the game.
wow, 05 had an extremely balanced offense.
2005 ACC Championship Game
Top 5 Hokies with arguably more talent on offense than we've ever had gets stymied by an unranked Florida State squad just happy to be at the game. That single game was the beginning of the end. It showed the world that we were simply not a team that was prepared for the big time and we were not to be taken seriously. We were an ESPN darling before that debacle.
Really, I thought it was the U game.
Both answers are correct.
Yep. Same effect, same outcome.
At least the Miami game was against a Top 5 team, and the argument could have been made we just ran up against a Top 5 team that peaked for that game. For the FSU game... no excuse. They were a bad team that year and we looked clueless against them. Our playcalling was truly horrid that night and legitimately held up back from a ACC Championship. It also cemented our reputation as a paper tiger. Just bad all around. Yeah, that Miami game was bad, but that FSU game, in my opinion, was far more damaging to us long-term.
That same Miami team got blasted 40-3 in the Peach bowl, so I guess turnabout was fair play.
Regarding FSU, I guess that was a furthering of the fact that Bowden owned Beamer. Sad, but true. That game was one of many in the following years (Georgia after 2006, Kansas after 2007, BC in 2008, etc.) that we had no business losing.
This is like a witness on the stand being asked to recount a vicious assault; I refuse to reopen those memories.
April 21, 2001. Atlanta Falcons select Michael Vick.
With the first overall draft pick in the 2001 draft, the Atlanta Falcons select.....
2006 - 2007. Somewhere in there. It is depressing to think it sucked for so long and wasn't addressed soon enough.
Yes, it is depressing. And, IMO, it went on so long because we were in the 10 win streak. But, that streak was held up because we joined a very down ACC and usually had the schedule packed with a weak OOC to boot. Hard not to get 10 wins vs the Dukes/WFU's of the ACC and then top it off with 3-4 OOC directional U patsies. Now that others in the ACC have caught up the streak is over.
But, how good does VT's O have to be to become a serious contender? I've always thought that with our D (and until recently ST's) we could seriously contend on a national level with a top 60 O that can at least move the chains to rest the D and put points on the board in the RZ consistently.
i think the bigger question is when will we see that improvement we've all yearned for?
I'm going to have to go with the 05 Miami game and the ACC Championship game Vs FSU. MV5 was playing his nuts off with a great supporting cast including Royal, Clowney, King, Humes & Imoh. The Offense was on a great run averaging 34 PPG. Then against Miami totally fell apart but there is also the theory MV5 was paid to throw that game but who knows. Against FSU we came out flat and then came back near the end but it was just too late.
I didn't keep up much with football from the early 80's until I came back stateside in 2003. After all the talk I couldn't wait to get a look at the Hokies against WCouchU that year. As well as the perfunctory blocking style tackling of the much touted Arsenio (he played like Arsenio probably would have so I'll call him Arsenio) Hall, I wasn't much impressed with the anemic show the offense put on that night. That was what people were talking about? By 2007, it became pretty clear to me that the Offensive Coordinator was fairly offensive and in over his head. I was much slower to realize that the buck stopped at the top. Now Beamer, though, is attempting to right the ship. Get this QB situation squared away and he just might be in a position to make us competitive with the big boys again.
I'm with the guy who mentioned the Coffey years. Put Bud Foster and Dan Henning (Coffey's OC) together and it could get exciting.
Coffey like the drink? RIP, MCD
Another game I noticed was the Orange Bowl against Kansas from the '07 season. Seriously, wtf!? Weren't we supposed spore f-k Mangina (misspelled on purpose) & ralk chalks too!? I'm sorry but that game pissed me off something awful on Stiney.
Oh, you mean running the ball at will in the 1st half and then coming out in the 2nd like we had Peyton Manning at QB????
Exactly.
Yep. They couldn't stop Branden Ore at all, and we inexplicably went away from him. Facepalm
We were trying to trick them. The guy himself knew he was so predictable that he often seemed to pull that crazy shiite to prove that he wasn't. Boise at the end was another one. Couldn't go for the first down because they might be expecting that. Don't, please don't, get me excited.
Predictable? Not according to his computer program that told him that he wasn't predictable.
Don't forget the plays that his son told him to run, or so he claimed.
I'm curious, though. What happens if you take away the points our D/ST got during those "offensive peak" seasons? I seem to recall that our offense was good for 2-3 TDs a game, but our defense and special teams were also good for 1-2 TDs a game.
It has been a while since our D/ST has been able to get the TDs they were producing. So scoring isn't all on offense when you're talking about 40-60 points in a game.
Also, what about productivity of offense? Not just points, but the ground/pass/total offense. How have those declined?
See my post above. From 1998-2005, the run game was fairly steady, with peaks while we had MV7 on the field. There was a pretty big drop-off from 2006-2008, but then an increase back to the 1998-2005 levels from 2009-2011. The last two years have been sad. So it's not a trend, but serious fluctuation.
The pass game has remained fairly steady, except for a dip in 2008, likely due to the crazy QB situation and poor O-line performance. Passing is up in recent years, but likely that's a result of the inability to run the ball forcing more long-yardage, must-pass types of situations.
EDIT: updating here with actual scoring numbers. The rush TD and pass TD per year basically mirror the yardage trends I posted above.
Rushing (blue), passing (red), and special teams/defensive (green) touchdowns per year.
Looks like the special teams and defensive TDs are trailing off. It looks almost like a linear decline, but as you can see the R2 is not very large, so the trend, if any, is weak. We've had a drop-off in recent years, for sure, but it may not be an actual trend, much like what most of my other stats suggest. It's also hard the remember a ST/defensive play (punt, kick, INT, fumble return) that didn't get called back for a block in the back (real or imagined by the refs).
Also, just for fun, I looked at FG scoring as well. Even if everything else is going badly, if you get within 30 yards, you should be scoring points. Not a whole lot to report here, except holy crap how bad was our FG kicking this past year. In concert with the graph above, our average point differential was about 3 points this year. Imagine how much different things might have been had our kickers connected on just a few more kicks.
FG made (blue) and missed (red) over time.
All stats (this post and the ones above) are gathered from Hokiesports.com.
Sorry, those graphs aren't coming up on my computer at work to see what's going on with them.
Thanks for clarifying.
The key to winning is outscoring your opponents. To be a great team you need to average over 450-500 yds per game and scoring over 24 pts per game. Raw numbers don't tell the whole story though. The winning margin could be a tougher schedule or could be one or all of offense, defense, or ST failures. Except for a few years offense has never been great. It is designed to control the tempo, wear down the defense, and run the clock. To do that it should dominate at the line of scrimmage, which is a challenge.
For me it is the eye test. Does it look like the team knows what it is doing (scheme)? Are they over-powering or over-powered? Can they make plays when needed? During the Stiney OC years we won despite the offensive scheme and play calling. We were predictable but athletic skills allowed us to succeed. The scheme looks better now and hopefully with more experience and talent the results will be better. This year should show if we are on the right track or not.
December, 2001.