Not that I don't want to see VT ranked, but this seems like some BS hype poll that ESPN is putting together to make the Labor Day game be between two ranked teams. Even their explanation of the rankings system is stupid.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Well they have to design it to get the most SEC teams in the top 25. FFS 10 in the Top 25 and half of the Top 10 is SEC. They probably kept tweaking weightings until that happened. I'm surprised Bama isn't #1.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
It's pretty obvious why ESPN packs the top 10 with SEC teams. Ole MIss at #8 is marketing. They were obnoxiously over-rated last season, lost to a mediocre LSU, a mediocre Aubrun, got steam-rolled by Arkansas and then absolutely demolished by TCU in their bowl game. Besides, if Treadwell was really that important and wont be back, they won't be any better this year.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Do you watch games or do you just look at box scores? Because I get the impression you'd never heard of Treadwell until now.
First of all, he IS coming back. He's only a sophmore. They were 7-1 before he went down and they averaged 29 a game and only 11 a game after. Secondly they lost that auburn game because he broke his leg on the 1 yard line for the go ahead touchdown with a minute left and fumbled. They also had the number 1 scoring defense last year. What part of that is wildly overrated? They have 16 players returning including 5 returning OL (led by Tunsil, the best returning LT in the sec) and the best retuning dl in Nkemdiche. Btw they also beat the fiesta bowl winner boise easily, and alabama, but let's just focus on the losses
Take off those maroon and orange glasses and stop trying to put down other teams you don't know about
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Really, their offense was on as long as Bo Wallace was doing good things. As soon as Bo Wallace did Bo Wallace things, it went down hill. Their defense kept them in games though, just not against TCU.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Yeah, Ole Miss really went as Bo went. I would not say Treadwell was their only offensive weapon but he certainly helped bring out good Bo more often than bad Bo. Bo took a lot of risks and I'll be really interested to see what they look like without him.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I agree with you, but they didn't beat Boise (who quite frankly wasn't all that great this year, no where near as good as the 2006 or 2010 teams) easily. It was a close game until the middle of the 4th quarter. Bo Wallace really struggled for the vast majority of that game.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
So which injuries did that #1 scoring defense have when they got boat raced by Arkansas and TCU? Or does only their offense get a pass when ONE guy gets hurt?
Not sure where the hostility in your reply to the previous poster came from, but I don't think its disparaging to question Ole Miss' credentials. Based on last year's body of work, outside the win vs. Alabama, their resume does not suggest a #8 ranking. Its because they are in the SEC, and thats it as far as why they are there.
Their OOC schedule was not good (and those 4 games really padded their scoring defensive stats). They drew about the easiest matchups against the middling SEC East as you can find (Vandy, Tenn.) Seems off that those games padded their scoring defensive stats as well. They did have that game against an average LSU where they gave up only 10 points, but that lost that one so...
So there are 6 of their 9 wins.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I'm not saying they were the number 8 team last year. I'm saying based on their performance last year (nice of you to ignore the Boise win btw) and their returning studs going forward (or do those only exist when we say why VT will be better next year) I don't think its a stretch to say they are a top 10 team next year. There's a lot of goofy things with that list, but rating Ole Miss high is not one of them unless you feel so confident to say which handful of teams that should be ahead of them. Any team can get knocked pretty easily
The hostility comes from the fact that I constantly see people posting misinformed comments about other teams. Like things that aren't even opinions, just facts. Its not hard to look up if Treadwell is returning if you're unsure. I'd hope that a site that is so knowledgeable about VT football would have a little more awareness of the college football landscape
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
No O&M glasses here, and no misinformation. I was watching the game when dude broke his leg. He "won't be back" to his peak form after a break like that (if at all). I was previously unaware of his draft status and ignored your assertion of first round viability. Could be wrong, but I suppose we'll see. And speaking of box scores, how does one determine that Ole Miss was the #1 scoring defense last season? The best game that defense had was against an LSU team that tried to rugby scrum their way to victory. So forgive me if I'm not sold on the Rebels. Yes they beat Alabama, but we beat OSU (who in turn beat Alabama, handily). Why not ignore all our losses, focus on our wins, and rank us #8?
Beyond all that, I wasn't trying to offend anyone with my comment, so apologies if that happened. But ESPN packing the top-10 with SEC schools is going to draw some skepticism from me, doubly so when they're Mississippi schools that got exposed toward the end of the season.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Yea the SEC West will return to semi-normal next year. The Mississippi schools are decent, but they (especially ole miss) will not be the same teams next year. Arkansas will be a team to watch, they are tough and can grind out wins. They lost a bunch of games by very close margins last year LSU will be interesting, I think they lose a step on defense. Bama will be Bama.. The East will be between Tennessee and Georgia.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
The fact that they had the #1 scoring defense is just that, a fact. Also, every defense got "torched" at some point. I don't think there was a single team that gave up fewer than 30 points in every game in 2014.
Also, Ole Miss was #7 in F/+, #9 in FPI, and ranked top 20 by every poll. With what they're returning, 16 starters according to Phil Steele, Ole Miss hardly seems out of place in the top 15 for next year.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Those losses, and the points, weren't entirely on the defense. They allowed an average of 367 yards in those two games- it was the offense that killed them. They had a combined 10 turnovers in those games and they were backed up in their own territory the entire time. Look at the length of the scoring drives in those games. Bo Wallace played terribly down the stretch (5 TD, 8 INT) and was a liability. Also, TCU in particular was a bad matchup for them offensively.
Also, Treadwell wasn't the only guy hurt for them. They lost their other leading receiver for their last two games and were banged up on offense in general.
Like mentioned before, they had more than one win. They beat Boise State on a neutral field, beat a top 20 Mississippi State (then top 5), beat Alabama (then top 5), and were a tragic injury away from beating a then top 5 Auburn team. There's no doubt that they collapsed down the stretch, but they were hardly a terrible team and they return quite a bit.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I don't think anyone is saying they're terrible, just that they aren't #8, maybe not even top-15. Also people are saying that ESPN is hyping the SEC by over-ranking those schools (much like they did all of last season). Two good examples are the Mississippi schools.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Like I've said elsewhere in the thread, I don't think that the issue in this case is solely ESPN bias but rather that their formula is inherently flawed in such a way that it happens to reward schools that recruit well (i.e. SEC schools, blue bloods).
I agree regarding Mississippi State but disagree regarding Ole Miss. I'm not sure why people are seeing drop off of any sort for them. I'm not sure that I would personally put them in the top 10, but top 15 for sure. They return as many starters as almost anyone, which is apparently cause for excitement for everyone except them, and their performance last year didn't seem to be a statistical anomaly. It feels as though the bowl game has biased people against them.
I know that they do not return their QB, but almost everyone else on offense is back (9 returning starters) and they will have a very good defense again. I think they finish 2nd in the SEC West- there'll be a bunching in the SEC West this next year, although I don't think Texas A&M will improve and I think Mississippi State takes a significant step back.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Nobody is saying Ole Miss is terrible. I even said I would have no problem at all with them somewhere in the teens (thinking like 15-19). But it is very realistic that they are a team that will be no better than 3rd or 4th in their own division. Is such a team really a preseason #8? I think the point that really is being made that only in the "mighty" SEC would that be a possibility. How quickly we forget how all of those top SEC West schools did poorly coincidentally right around the time they had to play some actual talented squads out of conference.
They will be starting a first year starter at QB, and there is nothing to say that Treadwell will be 100% after what was a very bad injury. Granted their OOC schedule is fairly weak this year and they get to play Vandy again at home, so I have no doubt they will be back to the 7-8 win minimum range, but just not sold on them as a Top 10. Thats not ripping them.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I think we all know that these polls really don't matter, and that they are just out there to keep their viewership up during the offseason. But, I am excited by how often they reference returning starters as a strong indicator of future team performance, considering we're returning 16(ish). (Notre Dame is #1 with 19 returners)
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
But dude, weren't you super impressed with their top-45 recruiting class this year, the loss of their 2 biggest defensive playmakers, or their 3-5 conference record last year? Did you know Mike London was a cop?
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
pretty sad to see the our prior year offense is at a negative #. I am positive Zohn, Lefty and Searels will come up with a good color scheme for this upcoming year's dork magic dip!!!!!
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Yes, it is wholly speculative but our FG kicker is no longer unblooded, our return man for punts is very good and the kinks are knocked out. Out last couple games we blocked kicks and one was a TD.
Our guys got the blocking figured out for kickoffs and started to get good returns.
Over the season, our ST were above average, vs UVA and the bowl game, it was waay above average. I don't know about top 10 but, nowhere near 65th.
Bowl game:
Don't forget we proved FG under pressure of personal bests x2.
De'rwon Greene, 2 kick returns average 35 yards
Punt returns averaging 10 yards.
Theirs:
Punt returns 0 yards total
kick returns average 19.9 yds
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I wholly agree that our special teams improved substantially last year and is headed in the right direction. I've been banging that drum for a while now. However, we definitely still had some issues last year that still need to be improved upon. F/+ had us at #42 in the country in special teams and FPI at #21- which is in the above average range, but not #5. Beamer's reputation, deservedly so, no doubt boosts the score as well. I think being #10-15 for FPI is a reasonable expectation for next year. Still not #5 though...
More so, I think that their system of predicting special teams is either highly flawed or largely guessing, regardless of where they have VT. Given the number of teams that they inexplicably have making substantial improvements even using last year's FPI and no real explanation as to why this is so, I have serious doubts about waving this particular poll around.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Is AJ back next year? Wasn't he dealing with some sort of injury? I feel like he was hit or miss, but had nowhere near the long kick capability that he had the first year.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
He will be back next year. He had surgery (on his back, I believe) a few weeks back. Should be good to go next year. Said he was playing through pain this past season. On top of that, Beamer was asking him to hit his punts higher to allow for better coverage, so the drop in his average was a function of lingering injury and game plan, but our net coverage was much better this year than in 2013.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
yeah he visited a couple times i knew that they had a change i think it came down to being close to home. i know his family is very important to him and them being able to make it to the games.
on a side not the weekend before signing day he was in ATL and he was in TNT studios on the NBA on TNT set with chuck and kenny and the guys. wonder how GT pulled that off.....
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I'm having a hard time figuring out LSU, Texas A&M (especially them), Tennessee, Mississippi State, Texas, Michigan, Notre Dame, or to some degree Florida, other than the obvious common denominators.
I have absolutely no idea how they predicted special teams. Alabama, Miami, Ole Miss, Clemson, and Stanford are all supposed to make substantial improvements in special teams, even when it was an absolute liability for each of those teams at times this year? But GT is supposed to all of a sudden be terrible when they return their punter, kicker, and best return man? What?
Also, how exactly are Texas, Florida, and LSU supposed to improve so dramatically on offense and Arizona State, Texas A&M, and Notre Dame so much on defense?
This just seems to be the end of the year rankings from last season combined with a heavy dose of the ESPN recruiting rankings with some returning starters sprinkled on top. Hardly seems better than any other preseason poll.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Hmmm, Clemson loses 10 of 11 starters, from a good D and their D is expected to be on par with VT's where the 8 starters return including the entire DL 2 deep returns, an AA at corner, not to mention a 2013 All ACC CB who was out for 2014, on the other side?
Yeah, this is another e$ECpn hype effort for the greatest conference in the history of organized sports.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Clemson recruits at an elite level. Virginia Tech doesn't. Last season Clemson was No. 1 in total defense, No. 3 in scoring defense and No. 1 in F/+ defense.
Yeah, this is another e$ECpn hype effort for the greatest conference in the history of organized sports.
Clemson isn't in the SEC.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Plus Clemson has Brent Venables, and while he isn't on Bud level, he is still a darn good DC. I'm not expecting their defense to be as good as ours next year because they lose so much but I'm not expecting them to take a big step back either.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I would still argue that expecting them to be #3 in the country is rather high.
Overall, I think that this gives entirely too much weight to recruiting. That's why you're getting a heavy "bias" toward the SEC, blue blood programs, Clemson, and UCLA- they tend to recruit well. However, teams who have recruited well and had recruits pan out will have played well in recent years, whereas teams who have recruited well but have not had players turn out like they wanted will not. See Texas, Florida, Michigan, UVA, and the like. This gives too much credit to teams who have had classes that were, by and large, busts or teams with bad coaches.
The recruiting classes that matter are largely the ones two or three years ago, as this year will mostly have players who are not ready yet and the ones 4 years ago will already be contributors.
Also, I take issue with how they seem to pick and choose certain elements to include. Not only does it include Scout and Phil Steele's recruiting rankings, it entirely ignores 247 without any explanation as to why. They also are giving teams seemingly arbitrary boosts because of coaching reputations, without any evidence that this will hold up in the new season.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
It gives too much weight to recruiting...which gives too much weight to programs that consistently do less with more, but sell lots of recruiting subscriptions (thus leading to overinflated rankings and doing less with more...and so on).
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
My perception is that there aren't a lot of great offenses in the ACC next year. FSU will take a step back. GT seems to have the best offense, by a significant amount.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I think that FSU has a ton of talent on defense obviously, but Charles Kelly is not very good DC at all. If they struggle to begin next season defensively, I wouldn't be surprised if he is canned mid-season.
Offensively, obviously Cook is a stud and should have a 1500+ yard season rushing but other than that they shouldn't be anywhere near as good as they were the past 2 seasons with Winston and company.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
My $EC comment wasn't related to the Clemson comment. I separated the two statements to denote two separate thoughts. Sorry about the confusion.
With regard to Clemson recruiting, I agree completely, but even Bama can't replace 10 of 11 and expect comparable performance to a #1 D, the following year. Clemson doesn't have anything near their track record on D, so I think it's overly generous to assume comparable performance, when they essentially lose their entire team.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Look for that D to start slow but gel quickly. Venables has his system in place and is probably the second best DC in our conference. The days of Clemson playing like a Big XII team are over.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I would rather not be ranked to begin the season, but I think it would be a lot better for TV ratings and national exposure if VT was ranked when they play #1 OSU.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I'm not sure which one espn would like more. A top 25 match up with us sneaking in at 25 isn't really enticing. Or the unranked vs number 1 upset angle, especially since there's history from last year
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I can only speak for myself on wathcing college football, but I am way more enticed to watch a #1 vs. #25 game on a saturday than a #1 vs. unranked, even if they are pretty close to the top 25 on ESPN
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I was expecting this response and I disagree 100%. We all claim we want to see our Hokies win the Championship and play with the big dogs. Well, that comes with expectations. When was the last time anyone has won a championship having not been ranked in the preseason? We have said "we play better as the underdog" for far to long, and honestly that's a hallmark of a team that isn't as good as the ones that do win championships. Don't get me wrong I am all for a Cinderella run and the trophy. I'll take it. But I would really love to see us consistently ranked, play up to and beyond those expectations and ranked higher the next year.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
We were consistantly ranked in the 2000's and still only managed one BCS win, as a result, seen as choking in the other games, even in other non-BCS bowl game losses. Sure being ranked in the preason is nice. but it really means shit. Auburn was ranked 22 preseason when they won it a couple years ago, only a couple spots outside of being not ranked. Of course, every Hokie wants us to win it all, but you also have to have realisitc expectations.
I was mainly speaking for this year bc imo I dont think we deserve a top 25 preseason ranking.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
i'll give you this year for sure. Based on last season we definitely shouldn't be, yet there is no denying that this team was close to winning a lot more games and did beat the national champion. So I can see why we were included.
That being said the point still stands. No unranked team has won and every great program needs to be able to win with expectations to.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I hear ya on the fact we could have been as bad as 4-8 or even as good as 9-3, etc.
But I am sure someone was like "oh no one outside the top 15-20 preseason rank will win it." I am just saying just because it hasnt happened doesnt make it impossible.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
yeah that's true. I agree with that. I guess my larger point isn't so much about the being unranked as it is about the expectations that come with being a winner.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
We pine about being the underdog so much that sometimes I think we have a mindset where we're legitimately afraid of being the big dog.
As you said, I would much rather be the ones ranked playing the annual big showcase games getting all the national publicity and sometimes failing than being the team that is nationally ignored and has to scrape and claw its way into the national discussion.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Yeah, and I don't have too much a problem with that.
I was just saying that I grow tired of the inevitable whining that happens when we go into a game with hype about how we always do so much better when we're under the radar. Screw that, I want us on the radar. If it were up to me, we'd be the big, huge, massive blip on that radar everyone wants a piece of. I hate being ignored, I want us with a target on our backs again. College football is so much more fun when you are nationally relevant.
Didn't mean it as a criticism of you, so apologies if it came across that way.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
This is a pretty simplistic ranking system, but it's worth noting something: If Loeffler can just get us to be decent on offense, it will mean a lot.
FPI ranks VT 79th in offense, which is below average (-1.3). If we could get to just WVU offense (ranked 51st), we would be a top 20 team. If we could get to top 25 (say, Auburn, at 23rd), we would be top 10.
Ohio State has the #1 ranked offense and #7 ranked defense.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Auburn was ranked 22nd in the preseason that year. But last year when they went to the national championship game they weren't ranked at all in the preseason coming off a 3-9 season.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
TCU didn't get to the title game last year, but they ended up #3 and had a somewhat legitimate claim to belonging in the playoff. They were ranked roughly equal to Virginia Tech to begin last season.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Me personally, I dont think we should initially belong there but the challenge should be welcomed. Why would you not want to be ranked? If you can't handle a little expectation then why play the game?
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
The potential is there for a solid season. I wonder what we are going to get in Brewer year #2 and if any of our RBs can stay upright and carry the load. A lot of question marks for an offense that was up and down all year last year.
The D gives some hope.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I'm in the Brewer camp (thinking he will previal #1) and im proud to say i am. The heart is there with Brewer. Im hoping the extra time in the offseason (instead of jumping right in in August like last season) will play a big part in polishing off things. If everything clicks with him year #2 then we could have a special season (with how good our defense is). Back up QBs will need to be ready (if Brewer is #1) for he will go for the win or die trying. As we saw with OSU last year it is great to have other QBs ready to go if needed.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Comments
Boom. Done. We're winning the national title.
I'm surprised to see Virginia in the top 60
They are too!!!
Not that I don't want to see VT ranked, but this seems like some BS hype poll that ESPN is putting together to make the Labor Day game be between two ranked teams. Even their explanation of the rankings system is stupid.
Well they have to design it to get the most SEC teams in the top 25. FFS 10 in the Top 25 and half of the Top 10 is SEC. They probably kept tweaking weightings until that happened. I'm surprised Bama isn't #1.
Yeah, I'm having a chuckle at Ole Miss in the #8 spot...
Why? They have a VERY talented young defense and an offense that was pretty solid until their future first round pick Treadwell went down
It's pretty obvious why ESPN packs the top 10 with SEC teams. Ole MIss at #8 is marketing. They were obnoxiously over-rated last season, lost to a mediocre LSU, a mediocre Aubrun, got steam-rolled by Arkansas and then absolutely demolished by TCU in their bowl game. Besides, if Treadwell was really that important and wont be back, they won't be any better this year.
Do you watch games or do you just look at box scores? Because I get the impression you'd never heard of Treadwell until now.
First of all, he IS coming back. He's only a sophmore. They were 7-1 before he went down and they averaged 29 a game and only 11 a game after. Secondly they lost that auburn game because he broke his leg on the 1 yard line for the go ahead touchdown with a minute left and fumbled. They also had the number 1 scoring defense last year. What part of that is wildly overrated? They have 16 players returning including 5 returning OL (led by Tunsil, the best returning LT in the sec) and the best retuning dl in Nkemdiche. Btw they also beat the fiesta bowl winner boise easily, and alabama, but let's just focus on the losses
Take off those maroon and orange glasses and stop trying to put down other teams you don't know about
So, you say their offense is 1 guy and he got hurt......
Really, their offense was on as long as Bo Wallace was doing good things. As soon as Bo Wallace did Bo Wallace things, it went down hill. Their defense kept them in games though, just not against TCU.
Yeah, Ole Miss really went as Bo went. I would not say Treadwell was their only offensive weapon but he certainly helped bring out good Bo more often than bad Bo. Bo took a lot of risks and I'll be really interested to see what they look like without him.
I agree with you, but they didn't beat Boise (who quite frankly wasn't all that great this year, no where near as good as the 2006 or 2010 teams) easily. It was a close game until the middle of the 4th quarter. Bo Wallace really struggled for the vast majority of that game.
True that game was definitely a good one. Ole Miss played lights out defense. Boises wrs were getting rocked after every catch
So which injuries did that #1 scoring defense have when they got boat raced by Arkansas and TCU? Or does only their offense get a pass when ONE guy gets hurt?
Not sure where the hostility in your reply to the previous poster came from, but I don't think its disparaging to question Ole Miss' credentials. Based on last year's body of work, outside the win vs. Alabama, their resume does not suggest a #8 ranking. Its because they are in the SEC, and thats it as far as why they are there.
Their OOC schedule was not good (and those 4 games really padded their scoring defensive stats). They drew about the easiest matchups against the middling SEC East as you can find (Vandy, Tenn.) Seems off that those games padded their scoring defensive stats as well. They did have that game against an average LSU where they gave up only 10 points, but that lost that one so...
So there are 6 of their 9 wins.
I'm not saying they were the number 8 team last year. I'm saying based on their performance last year (nice of you to ignore the Boise win btw) and their returning studs going forward (or do those only exist when we say why VT will be better next year) I don't think its a stretch to say they are a top 10 team next year. There's a lot of goofy things with that list, but rating Ole Miss high is not one of them unless you feel so confident to say which handful of teams that should be ahead of them. Any team can get knocked pretty easily
The hostility comes from the fact that I constantly see people posting misinformed comments about other teams. Like things that aren't even opinions, just facts. Its not hard to look up if Treadwell is returning if you're unsure. I'd hope that a site that is so knowledgeable about VT football would have a little more awareness of the college football landscape
No O&M glasses here, and no misinformation. I was watching the game when dude broke his leg. He "won't be back" to his peak form after a break like that (if at all). I was previously unaware of his draft status and ignored your assertion of first round viability. Could be wrong, but I suppose we'll see. And speaking of box scores, how does one determine that Ole Miss was the #1 scoring defense last season? The best game that defense had was against an LSU team that tried to rugby scrum their way to victory. So forgive me if I'm not sold on the Rebels. Yes they beat Alabama, but we beat OSU (who in turn beat Alabama, handily). Why not ignore all our losses, focus on our wins, and rank us #8?
Beyond all that, I wasn't trying to offend anyone with my comment, so apologies if that happened. But ESPN packing the top-10 with SEC schools is going to draw some skepticism from me, doubly so when they're Mississippi schools that got exposed toward the end of the season.
Yea the SEC West will return to semi-normal next year. The Mississippi schools are decent, but they (especially ole miss) will not be the same teams next year. Arkansas will be a team to watch, they are tough and can grind out wins. They lost a bunch of games by very close margins last year LSU will be interesting, I think they lose a step on defense. Bama will be Bama.. The East will be between Tennessee and Georgia.
The fact that they had the #1 scoring defense is just that, a fact. Also, every defense got "torched" at some point. I don't think there was a single team that gave up fewer than 30 points in every game in 2014.
http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/defense/split01/catego...
Also, Ole Miss was #7 in F/+, #9 in FPI, and ranked top 20 by every poll. With what they're returning, 16 starters according to Phil Steele, Ole Miss hardly seems out of place in the top 15 for next year.
Those losses, and the points, weren't entirely on the defense. They allowed an average of 367 yards in those two games- it was the offense that killed them. They had a combined 10 turnovers in those games and they were backed up in their own territory the entire time. Look at the length of the scoring drives in those games. Bo Wallace played terribly down the stretch (5 TD, 8 INT) and was a liability. Also, TCU in particular was a bad matchup for them offensively.
Also, Treadwell wasn't the only guy hurt for them. They lost their other leading receiver for their last two games and were banged up on offense in general.
Like mentioned before, they had more than one win. They beat Boise State on a neutral field, beat a top 20 Mississippi State (then top 5), beat Alabama (then top 5), and were a tragic injury away from beating a then top 5 Auburn team. There's no doubt that they collapsed down the stretch, but they were hardly a terrible team and they return quite a bit.
I don't think anyone is saying they're terrible, just that they aren't #8, maybe not even top-15. Also people are saying that ESPN is hyping the SEC by over-ranking those schools (much like they did all of last season). Two good examples are the Mississippi schools.
Like I've said elsewhere in the thread, I don't think that the issue in this case is solely ESPN bias but rather that their formula is inherently flawed in such a way that it happens to reward schools that recruit well (i.e. SEC schools, blue bloods).
I agree regarding Mississippi State but disagree regarding Ole Miss. I'm not sure why people are seeing drop off of any sort for them. I'm not sure that I would personally put them in the top 10, but top 15 for sure. They return as many starters as almost anyone, which is apparently cause for excitement for everyone except them, and their performance last year didn't seem to be a statistical anomaly. It feels as though the bowl game has biased people against them.
I know that they do not return their QB, but almost everyone else on offense is back (9 returning starters) and they will have a very good defense again. I think they finish 2nd in the SEC West- there'll be a bunching in the SEC West this next year, although I don't think Texas A&M will improve and I think Mississippi State takes a significant step back.
Nobody is saying Ole Miss is terrible. I even said I would have no problem at all with them somewhere in the teens (thinking like 15-19). But it is very realistic that they are a team that will be no better than 3rd or 4th in their own division. Is such a team really a preseason #8? I think the point that really is being made that only in the "mighty" SEC would that be a possibility. How quickly we forget how all of those top SEC West schools did poorly coincidentally right around the time they had to play some actual talented squads out of conference.
They will be starting a first year starter at QB, and there is nothing to say that Treadwell will be 100% after what was a very bad injury. Granted their OOC schedule is fairly weak this year and they get to play Vandy again at home, so I have no doubt they will be back to the 7-8 win minimum range, but just not sold on them as a Top 10. Thats not ripping them.
FWIW, we finished #28 in S&P+ & #23 in FEI so I don't think ESPN's numbers are unreasonable, even if their explanation of FPI is nonsense
I think we all know that these polls really don't matter, and that they are just out there to keep their viewership up during the offseason. But, I am excited by how often they reference returning starters as a strong indicator of future team performance, considering we're returning 16(ish). (Notre Dame is #1 with 19 returners)
UVA ranked higher than 4 ACC teams?
/Burns computer.......
But dude, weren't you super impressed with their top-45 recruiting class this year, the loss of their 2 biggest defensive playmakers, or their 3-5 conference record last year? Did you know Mike London was a cop?
Wait, er - Time out.
He was a cop? No wonder no one goes to their spring games.
I mean, we can't really mock the conference record when we had the same one....
That was the saddest upvote I've ever given. :'(
Yes, we can.
pretty sad to see the our prior year offense is at a negative #. I am positive Zohn, Lefty and Searels will come up with a good color scheme for this upcoming year's dork magic dip!!!!!
Offensive rank - 79
Defensive rank - 4
Special Teams rank - 5
First of all, with better offensive play, we are a title contender. The numbers show it. Secondly, were our Special Teams really that good last year?
The special teams were much improved, but only above average. This whole thing is highly speculative.
Yes, it is wholly speculative but our FG kicker is no longer unblooded, our return man for punts is very good and the kinks are knocked out. Out last couple games we blocked kicks and one was a TD.
Our guys got the blocking figured out for kickoffs and started to get good returns.
Over the season, our ST were above average, vs UVA and the bowl game, it was waay above average. I don't know about top 10 but, nowhere near 65th.
Bowl game:
Don't forget we proved FG under pressure of personal bests x2.
De'rwon Greene, 2 kick returns average 35 yards
Punt returns averaging 10 yards.
Theirs:
Punt returns 0 yards total
kick returns average 19.9 yds
I wholly agree that our special teams improved substantially last year and is headed in the right direction. I've been banging that drum for a while now. However, we definitely still had some issues last year that still need to be improved upon. F/+ had us at #42 in the country in special teams and FPI at #21- which is in the above average range, but not #5. Beamer's reputation, deservedly so, no doubt boosts the score as well. I think being #10-15 for FPI is a reasonable expectation for next year. Still not #5 though...
More so, I think that their system of predicting special teams is either highly flawed or largely guessing, regardless of where they have VT. Given the number of teams that they inexplicably have making substantial improvements even using last year's FPI and no real explanation as to why this is so, I have serious doubts about waving this particular poll around.
Is AJ back next year? Wasn't he dealing with some sort of injury? I feel like he was hit or miss, but had nowhere near the long kick capability that he had the first year.
He will be back next year. He had surgery (on his back, I believe) a few weeks back. Should be good to go next year. Said he was playing through pain this past season. On top of that, Beamer was asking him to hit his punts higher to allow for better coverage, so the drop in his average was a function of lingering injury and game plan, but our net coverage was much better this year than in 2013.
This was a great post from this season about how even though his kicks were getting shorter, their effectiveness was increasing as higher, shorter kicks yielded less return yards.
http://www.thekeyplay.com/content/2014/november/5/mythbusters-has-aj-hug...
I still feel like his old self (hoping his new self) would be able to kick it high and farther than he did this year when he was on it.
10 SEC teams in the Top 25 including 6 of the Top 11
19 - Clemson
21 - FSU
23 - GaTech
25 - Hokies
Yeah... there's no bias at all going on here
doesn't surprise me SEC teams but up a bunch of points against each other...
so a 41-38 win was a great SEC Defensive battle and SEC Speed was the winning factor.
But only ACC speed could stop Ohio State.
That guy who plays the Penguin creeps me out. He's doing a great job.
I think I recognize him from an emo/punk music video on MTV2 airing sometime in 2005.
Reminds me of the lead singer from Marcy Playground circa 1997.
Every SEC-West team ranked...
Speaking of GT I didn't even realize they were in the running for Victor Alexander. They flipped him from UCLA. WTF! I can't stand GT.
yeah he visited a couple times i knew that they had a change i think it came down to being close to home. i know his family is very important to him and them being able to make it to the games.
on a side not the weekend before signing day he was in ATL and he was in TNT studios on the NBA on TNT set with chuck and kenny and the guys. wonder how GT pulled that off.....
I just hope this doesn't jinx us
I'm having a hard time figuring out LSU, Texas A&M (especially them), Tennessee, Mississippi State, Texas, Michigan, Notre Dame, or to some degree Florida, other than the obvious common denominators.
I have absolutely no idea how they predicted special teams. Alabama, Miami, Ole Miss, Clemson, and Stanford are all supposed to make substantial improvements in special teams, even when it was an absolute liability for each of those teams at times this year? But GT is supposed to all of a sudden be terrible when they return their punter, kicker, and best return man? What?
Also, how exactly are Texas, Florida, and LSU supposed to improve so dramatically on offense and Arizona State, Texas A&M, and Notre Dame so much on defense?
This just seems to be the end of the year rankings from last season combined with a heavy dose of the ESPN recruiting rankings with some returning starters sprinkled on top. Hardly seems better than any other preseason poll.
Mission Accomplished guys. Let's get some tshirts printed up! /s
How about some "IT WASN'T A FLUKE" t-shirts?
That T-Shirt is sold after we beat them on Sept. 7th.
Hmmm, Clemson loses 10 of 11 starters, from a good D and their D is expected to be on par with VT's where the 8 starters return including the entire DL 2 deep returns, an AA at corner, not to mention a 2013 All ACC CB who was out for 2014, on the other side?
Yeah, this is another e$ECpn hype effort for the greatest conference in the history of organized sports.
Clemson recruits at an elite level. Virginia Tech doesn't. Last season Clemson was No. 1 in total defense, No. 3 in scoring defense and No. 1 in F/+ defense.
Clemson isn't in the SEC.
Plus Clemson has Brent Venables, and while he isn't on Bud level, he is still a darn good DC. I'm not expecting their defense to be as good as ours next year because they lose so much but I'm not expecting them to take a big step back either.
I would still argue that expecting them to be #3 in the country is rather high.
Overall, I think that this gives entirely too much weight to recruiting. That's why you're getting a heavy "bias" toward the SEC, blue blood programs, Clemson, and UCLA- they tend to recruit well. However, teams who have recruited well and had recruits pan out will have played well in recent years, whereas teams who have recruited well but have not had players turn out like they wanted will not. See Texas, Florida, Michigan, UVA, and the like. This gives too much credit to teams who have had classes that were, by and large, busts or teams with bad coaches.
The recruiting classes that matter are largely the ones two or three years ago, as this year will mostly have players who are not ready yet and the ones 4 years ago will already be contributors.
Also, I take issue with how they seem to pick and choose certain elements to include. Not only does it include Scout and Phil Steele's recruiting rankings, it entirely ignores 247 without any explanation as to why. They also are giving teams seemingly arbitrary boosts because of coaching reputations, without any evidence that this will hold up in the new season.
It gives too much weight to recruiting...which gives too much weight to programs that consistently do less with more, but sell lots of recruiting subscriptions (thus leading to overinflated rankings and doing less with more...and so on).
My perception is that there aren't a lot of great offenses in the ACC next year. FSU will take a step back. GT seems to have the best offense, by a significant amount.
I think that FSU has a ton of talent on defense obviously, but Charles Kelly is not very good DC at all. If they struggle to begin next season defensively, I wouldn't be surprised if he is canned mid-season.
Offensively, obviously Cook is a stud and should have a 1500+ yard season rushing but other than that they shouldn't be anywhere near as good as they were the past 2 seasons with Winston and company.
Minus Chad Morris tho...
My $EC comment wasn't related to the Clemson comment. I separated the two statements to denote two separate thoughts. Sorry about the confusion.
With regard to Clemson recruiting, I agree completely, but even Bama can't replace 10 of 11 and expect comparable performance to a #1 D, the following year. Clemson doesn't have anything near their track record on D, so I think it's overly generous to assume comparable performance, when they essentially lose their entire team.
Look for that D to start slow but gel quickly. Venables has his system in place and is probably the second best DC in our conference. The days of Clemson playing like a Big XII team are over.
I would just like to point out that our ST rank (which i'm pretty sure is special teams) is ranked at 5. #beamerballisback
I would rather not be ranked to begin the season, but I think it would be a lot better for TV ratings and national exposure if VT was ranked when they play #1 OSU.
I'm not sure which one espn would like more. A top 25 match up with us sneaking in at 25 isn't really enticing. Or the unranked vs number 1 upset angle, especially since there's history from last year
I can only speak for myself on wathcing college football, but I am way more enticed to watch a #1 vs. #25 game on a saturday than a #1 vs. unranked, even if they are pretty close to the top 25 on ESPN
Except the kicker is that we're the unranked team that beat them last year. Otherwise yea 1 vs 25 is almost always better
why don't you want to be ranked?
Because it means absolutely nothing but heightened expectations
bingo
because preseason rankings come with expectations to live up to. I'd rather start underneath the radar and surprise teams at the end of the season
I was expecting this response and I disagree 100%. We all claim we want to see our Hokies win the Championship and play with the big dogs. Well, that comes with expectations. When was the last time anyone has won a championship having not been ranked in the preseason? We have said "we play better as the underdog" for far to long, and honestly that's a hallmark of a team that isn't as good as the ones that do win championships. Don't get me wrong I am all for a Cinderella run and the trophy. I'll take it. But I would really love to see us consistently ranked, play up to and beyond those expectations and ranked higher the next year.
We were consistantly ranked in the 2000's and still only managed one BCS win, as a result, seen as choking in the other games, even in other non-BCS bowl game losses. Sure being ranked in the preason is nice. but it really means shit. Auburn was ranked 22 preseason when they won it a couple years ago, only a couple spots outside of being not ranked. Of course, every Hokie wants us to win it all, but you also have to have realisitc expectations.
I was mainly speaking for this year bc imo I dont think we deserve a top 25 preseason ranking.
i'll give you this year for sure. Based on last season we definitely shouldn't be, yet there is no denying that this team was close to winning a lot more games and did beat the national champion. So I can see why we were included.
That being said the point still stands. No unranked team has won and every great program needs to be able to win with expectations to.
I hear ya on the fact we could have been as bad as 4-8 or even as good as 9-3, etc.
But I am sure someone was like "oh no one outside the top 15-20 preseason rank will win it." I am just saying just because it hasnt happened doesnt make it impossible.
yeah that's true. I agree with that. I guess my larger point isn't so much about the being unranked as it is about the expectations that come with being a winner.
So you're saying we could be the first?
We pine about being the underdog so much that sometimes I think we have a mindset where we're legitimately afraid of being the big dog.
As you said, I would much rather be the ones ranked playing the annual big showcase games getting all the national publicity and sometimes failing than being the team that is nationally ignored and has to scrape and claw its way into the national discussion.
exactly
I agree, I was just speaking about this year's ranking
no worries. I think we are all in agreement here. legs all around
Yeah, and I don't have too much a problem with that.
I was just saying that I grow tired of the inevitable whining that happens when we go into a game with hype about how we always do so much better when we're under the radar. Screw that, I want us on the radar. If it were up to me, we'd be the big, huge, massive blip on that radar everyone wants a piece of. I hate being ignored, I want us with a target on our backs again. College football is so much more fun when you are nationally relevant.
Didn't mean it as a criticism of you, so apologies if it came across that way.
All good, no offense taken. I am just looking forward to be apart of the first debate on who we want to play on NYE's
1990, Georgia Tech. (Coaches')
This is a pretty simplistic ranking system, but it's worth noting something: If Loeffler can just get us to be decent on offense, it will mean a lot.
FPI ranks VT 79th in offense, which is below average (-1.3). If we could get to just WVU offense (ranked 51st), we would be a top 20 team. If we could get to top 25 (say, Auburn, at 23rd), we would be top 10.
Ohio State has the #1 ranked offense and #7 ranked defense.
Out of curiosity, and I feel like I've looked this up before and found out, but wonder if anyone out there knows for sure:
Has any team outside of the preseason top 25 ever won the national title, or even gone to the national title game?
Auburn in 2010 is the first team that comes to mind.
Auburn was ranked 22nd in the preseason that year. But last year when they went to the national championship game they weren't ranked at all in the preseason coming off a 3-9 season.
They started the season ranked #22.
Notre Dame a few years ago.
Not sure Notre Dame counts.
They showed up to that game about as well as Manti Te'o's girlfriend did.
The 1984 BYU Cougars and the 1983 Miami Hurricanes started the year outside of the Top 25 and finished first.
Auburn.
TCU didn't get to the title game last year, but they ended up #3 and had a somewhat legitimate claim to belonging in the playoff. They were ranked roughly equal to Virginia Tech to begin last season.
Me personally, I dont think we should initially belong there but the challenge should be welcomed. Why would you not want to be ranked? If you can't handle a little expectation then why play the game?
yeah, we don't deserve it but I'd take it in a heartbeat.
The potential is there for a solid season. I wonder what we are going to get in Brewer year #2 and if any of our RBs can stay upright and carry the load. A lot of question marks for an offense that was up and down all year last year.
The D gives some hope.
I'm in the Brewer camp (thinking he will previal #1) and im proud to say i am. The heart is there with Brewer. Im hoping the extra time in the offseason (instead of jumping right in in August like last season) will play a big part in polishing off things. If everything clicks with him year #2 then we could have a special season (with how good our defense is). Back up QBs will need to be ready (if Brewer is #1) for he will go for the win or die trying. As we saw with OSU last year it is great to have other QBs ready to go if needed.
I'm sure E$PN will latch on to some news from spring or summer ball to justify ranking us higher to hype labor day even more.
I'm ok with it. A bit more hype plus a win (or even a great game for an outside view a la Boise 2010) would be great for the program.