Virginia Tech entered the season as a sleeper playoff contender but showed up to the locker room in Nashville still asleep at halftime. The overtime loss to Vanderbilt to open the 2024 season was unfortunately emblematic of the Brent Pry era. Regardless of the offseason praise heading into this season, the Hokies under Pry are not known for their early season success – especially against major competition on the road.
The Hokies are 3-5 in OOC play under Pry, with wins against FCS Wofford, Liberty, and Old Dominion. Those wins were hardly impressive, as we allowed the first points of the season to Wofford (who was shut out by Chattanooga and Elon), a nail biter 23-22 win at Liberty (in a game where Hugh Freeze had all but accepted the job at Auburn), and an uneven 36-17 win to open the season against Old Dominion last year. The losses aren't much better, falling to bad major conference schools (Purdue at home, Rutgers on the road), and two away Sun Belt losses. Furthermore, Pry only has two road wins against major conference opponents, beating Boston College and UVA last season. Again, not particularly impressive.
But things were going to be different this year! The offense evolved after Drones took over. We became a team that could win on the ground and through the air! We brought in help on the defensive line and at linebacker!
Alas, a new season but the same old story as Virginia Tech faces an early hole once again in 2024.
Unprepared starts a problem
Unsurprisingly given the stats above, the Hokies have a problem in one score games under Coach Pry. The Hokies are now 1-8 in one score games, the only win against Liberty in 2022. A common theme is a team that is incapable of playing complementary football for multiple quarters at a time. Whether it is being held scoreless in three quarters against Purdue, blowing an 11 point fourth quarter lead against Georgia Tech, or throwing four interceptions in the first game in his tenure, Pry's teams are allergic to stringing together quarters of just average football. Vanderbilt was no different this year.
| Team | | 1st Qrt | | 2nd Qrt | | 3rd Qrt | | 4th Qrt | | OT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VT EPA | | -0.922 | | 3.662 | | 6.369 | | 11.894 | | -4.300 |
| VANDY EPA | | 0.095 | | 8.088 | | -0.406 | | 8.178 | | 2.700 |
| NET EPA | | -1.017 | | -4.427 | | 6.775 | | 3.716 | | -7.000 |
In terms of EPA per quarter, Virginia Tech and Vanderbilt appeared relatively even throughout the first quarter. However, Vanderbilt scored on the first play of the second quarter to take a 10-0 lead before ultimately taking a 17-3 at the half. Virginia Tech made some halftime adjustments and actually came out ahead significantly in EPA in the third quarter, and slightly ahead in the shootout fourth quarter before a disappointingly quick overtime loss.
It is hard to come out the gate this slowly when you have a whole offseason to prepare. While it is true that Vanderbilt changed significantly by bringing in much of the talent from New Mexico State, it was still shocking to hear Coach Pry in a sideline interview after the first quarter lament their inability to adjust to looks they were unprepared for.
Short term adjustments belie play calling decision making issues
Despite the start, and the general unpreparedness, the Hokies did adjust in the second half. After gaining about 100 yards on 30 plays in the first half, Virginia Tech opened up the offense gaining nearly 300 yards in the second half. Virginia Tech was able to accomplish this through big chunk plays through the air. Using statistics compiled by the College Football Data API (which uses ESPN box scores, and aggregation is not always perfect), Virginia Tech went from averaging nearly 3.3 yards per play in the first half, to almost 10.1 yards per play in the second half.
In the first half, Virginia Tech had a single explosive play (runs over 15 yards or passes over 20 yards) in the first half: a 24 yard pass to Jaylin Lane during the field goal drive. In the second half, Virginia Tech had 8 explosive plays (7 passes, and 1 rushing play; a 24 yard touchdown run by Bayshul Tuten).
The problem was that Virginia Tech found almost no success moving the ball outside of chunk plays. The 8 second half explosive plays accounted for 264 yards of offense, while the remaining 23 plays accounted for only 49 yards (an average of 2.1 yards per play). Even though Virginia Tech found success often throwing the ball downfield, too often they found themselves trying to recommit to the first half game plan (bubble and tunnel screens, primary targets in the flat, a predictable running scheme), that went nowhere.
More experienced (literally anyone other than me), will point out that you still need to mix in concepts, even when they aren't working, to keep the defense honest and that is true. But Virginia Tech felt like it was all or nothing in terms of play calling. One drive we'd see the Hokies move the pocket, run play action fakes off the toss play, open up crosser routes, etc. The next looked like the worst excesses of the Brad Cornelsen regime: bubble screen, outside zone for no gain, QB draw/power, punt.
When it worked last season, the offense functioned a lot more like the Vanderbilt offense, which traded big plays for methodical, clock churning drives. A play is considered successful if it gains the following:
- 1st down: 50% yards to gain
- 2nd down: 70% yards to gain
- 3rd down: 100% yards to gain
- 4th down: 100% yards to gain
Vanderbilt picked up 12 successful passing plays on 18 called passes (66.67% of called passes) and 75% of passing attempts (removing sacks from the total), which meant that every completion was a successful attempt. Of their completions, 75% (8 of 12) went for first downs or scoring plays.
Virginia Tech was anything but passing the ball, outside of the explosive plays. Virginia Tech was successful on 17 of 38 passing plays (44.7%) and on 50% of passing attempts adjusted for sacks. Kyron Drones completed 7 passes (out of 22) that went for five yards or less.
On the ground, Vanderbilt was not successful overall (18 of 46 rushes, or 39.1%) but they averaged about 4 yards per carry (adjusted for sacks) and had 18 rushes for two or fewer yards. Comparatively, Virginia Tech was slightly worse in terms of success rate (38.5% on 10 or 26 rushing plays) for about 3.8 yards per carry (adjusted for sacks). However, 11 of Virginia Tech's 26 designed run calls went for 2 yards or fewer.
Too Sad; Didn't Read:
Virginia Tech has a long way to go to become competitive in on-the-road, out-of-conference football and Saturday's game at Vanderbilt was a step back for expectations. But Virginia Tech did manage to make adjustments in the second half that led to a brief lead and some explosive plays throwing the ball downfield. In order to win games, Virginia Tech needs to come out quicker and more prepared, and not be afraid to stick with what is working on offense. The Hokies proved they could win over the top, yet still continued to play into Vanderbilt's strengths on the edge and moving downhill on screens. The strength of this team when it succeeded last season was not some sophisticated pro-style offense, but one that used the mobility and arm talent of the QB on the move in conjunction with smart routes and play fakes to get the defense moving horizontally not vertically.
Comments
Hey everyone, after a couple of years of being off (unemployment and not having the money to spend on TKP) I wanted to rejoin and start sharing some analytical articles geared towards success rate, explosive plays, and EPA per play/quarter based on some stuff I did last year for fun. Here is the link to the last article I wrote last season.
I am by no means an expert on film or play calling, just my observations and trying to match them up with what the numbers say. I'll try to keep this going weekly as much as I can throughout the year and build more data in as the sample sizes get large enough for comparisons with other teams.
If anyone has any feedback, criticism, and what not, I'd love to hear it! This is only focused on offensive stats for the time being but I can look into other stuff in the future if there is interest.
Welcome back! Good read. I'll defer to the experts, but I enjoyed the insight. Numbers on offense matched the eye test for the parts of the game I was able to see.
Welcome back! Nice to see a few familiar faces trickle in with the season start
Welcome back brother! Great info!
Thanks for posting!
Some musings and questions. Fuente's (arguably) two biggest regular season wins were WVU and UNC in Game 1, and then seemed to lose the plot as the season went on. Pry (with a small sample size) and staff seem to really struggle at the beginnings of seasons and then round into form as things move week to week.
For those that have been involved with organized, competitive football, what's the deal with this? How does coaching play a part in this, and how much is on the players?
If we all agree that we need to start faster, what are the specific set of football details that need to get better?
Love this! If anyone else likes this stuff, check out the advance box score for this game from gameonpaper.com. Some other things that stood out to me...
Special teams sucked:
Explosive plays destroyed us
This is another way of reiterating/summarizing Boyle's post...
TLDR we were way too reliant on explosive plays.
We had terrible turnover luck...
Quick caveat above... I'm pretty sure Vandy had more than two PBUs, but GameOnPaper says they only had one.
EDIT: if you're looking for optimism, check out how we dominated the middle 8. Like, absolute domination in all three phases.
One of the "phantom" PBU's was a ball that deflected off our WR's hands and was nearly intercepted by a Vandy player, who couldn't survive the ground. I am not sure what the rules say but I guess you have to physically tip, deflect, or intercept a ball to count as a PBU.
This was my thought too... the receiver has to be actually defended for it to be a PBU.
Seems like the story is really bad coaching and bad luck. Losing the field position battle, special teams mistakes, and lack of efficiency is on the coaches. But missing out on so many TO chances is awful luck. It really did feel like every break went their way in this game.
I assume this refers to the low success rate... This is where I think we're really limited by personnel on the Offensive Line. It's tough to stay ahead of the chains when you can't block. Maybe Bowen should've started by stretching the field in hopes of making some breathing room to run? But when Vandy is controlling the clock and shortening the game, I'm not sure that's doable either.
The more (emotional) distance I get from the game, the less I think the issue is Bowen, and the more I think it's Marve.
Yea I equate efficiency and success rate. But I also meant it as the disparity in efficiency between our offense and Vandy's.
We are certainly limited by the OL, but it seemed like we were able to mitigate it at the end of last year. Instead...it's the same problem as the start of last season? I'm certainly annoyed, but I agree that this is less of a concern than the defense.
Marve being unable to scheme a way to stop this offense is mind boggling. Did he not pull up any tape from New Mexico State last year? He figured something out for a few drives when we came back and then seemingly abandoned it or the entire defense forgot all of the fundamentals they just executed. Either way it's very worrying for the rest of the season.
on the Vandy secretly decent -- I thought Vandy had a chance to be decent this year, but I didn't think they would be ready week 1. On the O-line, they got a 12-game SEC starter (that Miss. St. didn't want to lose) and another reputable G5 starter. And with a new O-line coach, they definitely played better than worse P4 offensive line (VT may be wearing that crown). I'm also surprised that the defense was flying to the ball and they didn't miss many tackles or had many defensive breakdowns. It is surprising how well the O-line and defenses of Vandy played as units.
From my perspective, Vandy played a respectable game. I think two things are true: (1) too much hype that VT was great and (2) too much expectation that Vandy was atrocious. While I don't think VT should have lost this game, I don't think this is loss is ODU-bad or JMU-bad or Temple-bad. Perhaps my mind will change over the next two weeks.
Also, of note: VT started as -17 favorites over Marshall and moved to -20. I think the VT fanbase is way further down on VT than the rest of the country. I'm just going to let the season play out and see if the team can improve to the level of it's preseason hype.
And thanks for the advanced stat breakdown and sharing the box score.
"VT started as -17 favorites over Marshall and moved to -20"
I do not gamble beyond the occasional $5 or $10 bet with someone at work, but if I did, I would be betting on Marshall next week. Yes, we should win easily. But I would not bet on that.
If fan duel let me bet on VA schools, I'd probably drop the house on Marshall at least covering
I don't bet on sports (never have) but this is super tempting. I don't think there's even a snowball's chance in hell that this team can beat anyone, let alone Marshall, by 20 points right now.
Re: how quickly Vandy was ready - we've seen the QB/OC joint transfer a few times now. It definitely accelerates time to productive.
I think you're wise to let the season play out before making a judgement call. I don't think this will be a Q U A L I T Y L O S S (in the meme sense or the actual sense), but I agree it's not JMU/ODU/Temple bad; we could be 6 weeks in and realize this game was just week 1 weirdness.
My friend who worked for the football team 10ish years ago always said that the players get over losses wayyy faster than fans do... it's because players get to start fixing mistakes and seeing progress the day right after a loss. Fans have to wait at least a week, and don't see the progress that's being made in practice. It is maddening, but that's college football 🤷♂️
I think Frank once said that the most improvement you ever see on any team is between game 1 and game 2. I guess the theory there is that you don't really know what you've got until you play someone and then you can correct a lot of stuff from game 1. Then, the rest of the way, it's minor tweaks and adjustments.
I'm not sure if I buy that for this team. I'm particularly concerned about the defense looking basically exactly as inept as year 1. I haven't seen any notable improvement in the linebacker play since 2022 so I have a hard time believing we're going to see some huge leap there in one week. Offensively I expected us to be a lot better than we showed on Saturday. I thought the offense would be our strength this year because they finished the year so well and returned a lot of production. Yeah the ol was expected to be a liability but it was a liability last year too and we still moved the ball and scored points later in the year. Expecting the offense to be decent wasn't unfair imo.
Maybe the ACC is really a lot more trash than everyone thought. Maybe we are one of the best teams in the league but the league is so far behind everyone else that it looks like amateur hour when we play sec scrubs.
I was definitely tearing my hair out over the fumbles and just had a hunch they'd come back to bite us. When the ball hits the ground anything can happen and somehow vandy was able to just fall on all 3 fumbles. We get one of those and it's likely we win in regulation instead of losing in ot.
Interceptions are one thing. We dropped a gimme but so did they. We had a good play coming together and it got tipped at the line right to a defender. Somewhat bad luck but a bit more a result of defenders making or not making a play. Much closer to being a wash.
The ball bouncing right back to them is not a wash. Reminds me a tad of the battle at Bristol where we fumbled 5 times and lost them all (also maddening), but at least we weren't big favorites in that game.
Hokies need to be better and outplay opponents to the point that we can overcome some bad luck, and we didn't do that. But I haven't lost all hope yet.
What's annoying is that luck on stuff like turnovers will probably swing the other way for vandy and they'll lose to some inferior team in the next several weeks, making this even more frustrating
This this this.
Personnel limitations on the OL require everyone (Coaches and players) to perform at a higher level. This just means We have less margin for error.
Am I upset that we lost, yes. Is the world going to end? No. Will this team get better, I believe so. Do I feel bad for the literal thousands of Hokies that wend down to Nashville to watch us lose, yes. Vandy was better than we expected, and we were far worse on the OL than we expected. Bowen adjusted in the second half and we got more explosive plays, I nearly threw the remote at the TV when I don't think we threw the ball more than five yards downfield in the first half.
The games will go on. Bowen continues to get better, Marve will be fired at the end of the year unless there is a drastic turnaround on defense.
I think all of us want this, I think all of us are nervous that this won't happen.
I don't think a coordinator has been fired from VT for performance (or lack thereof) since Dave Braine had a sit-down chat with Frank Beamer between the '91 and '92 seasons. So it's no wonder we're nervous that Marve will not be let go. Plus, it's going to be hard for Pry to fire him since it'll be an admission of his own big mistake in hiring him in the first place. I'm not sold on Bowen yet. His offenses have beaten up on terrible teams but they get shut down by teams with a pulse. (Sound familiar??)
It's early. Maybe the team can turn things around and go on a run. If we enter ACC play with a 3-1 OOC record and manage to make it to November with a chance to get to Charlotte that'll be a pretty decent result for these coaches. That Vandy game, though, leaves many people (myself included) feeling very little to no confidence that we can manage that feat. If we finish the year worse than 7-5 and Pry doesn't fire anybody we're going to continue our long, painful descent into football irrelevance.
Yeah I don't think anyone's really sold on Bowen either, I'd rather not replace an OC and DC in the same offseason. As bad as the offense has looked at times and as questionable as some of the initial game strategies look (trying to run it into the teeth of every opponent we've faced that has a physical DL) at least there seems to be some adjustments and progress being made on that side of the ball. Bowen has enough experienced coaches around him. Marve is really the most qualified coach on the defensive staff (sorry Price, excluding Pry*) and that's saying a lot, he doesn't have the people to lean on like Bowen has and its showing horribly with a defense full of proven talents constantly schemed out of position.
* if Pry is helping a bunch with the defense still he should probably not mention that to anyone and find someone that can actually develop a program.
this is absolutely a fair point. If I had to choose which coordinator to let go I'd pick Marve. But Bowen's leash is short IMO.
Better to admit your mistake and move on and up than to ignore it and eventually lose your own job over it!
case in point: Fuente
I still maintain that if he had made staff changes following the 2018 season he would have saved face. Had he hired an actually competent OC who could recruit (something Blacksburg hasn't had in decades) and started winning games with good offense he might still have a job.
One would hope that Pry understands the issues that ultimately made his predecessor unsuccessful so that he can avoid repeating history. Or at the very least, that Whit, as the common denominator, has a grasp of those things and can counsel Pry.
one would hope, yes. But Hubris is a hell of a drug. A lot of guys think they know the mistakes that others make and think they know how to avoid them but can be too proud to see that they are actually doing exactly the same thing. "I know what that guy did wrong and what I'm doing is different"
If that happens, then our program is in a really, really bad spot. Either we don't have the funding to make changes, or there's an AD problem.
it feels like this program is in a really bad spot now
our defense has been stagnant, backsliding if anything, under Marve. Our offense showed glimpses last year but the OL is a constant problem area and the play calling is questionable at best, for at least half of just about every game. It's maddening.
I don't feel that way. There's coaching issues, but not structural issues (to my knowledge). Funding is increasing every year, recruiting is improving every year. The issue is on the field, and that's easy to fix (relative to fundraising and recruiting issues).
OL isn't going to be better until Clements/Moores age out or beat out. I don't have the same concerns with offensive play calling as you do. It's far from perfect, but we've seen the vision.
Barring a major turnaround and complete 180 this season from what we saw Saturday, Pry is likely going to have to do at least the following:
1) Replace Marve, get a proven DC (this might entail some position coach changes)
2) Either replace Bowen (has shown promise but has started terribly now three years in a row) OR get someone else more proven and make them co-OCs to assist with gameplan and playcalling
3) He REALLY needs to get someone he trust to be his advisor on game management/coaching responsibilities. Similar to how Fu brought in Kill. I think he would greatly benefit from a role like that.
The fundraising, the work we have done in recruiting, Pry's PR work have all been great. But we really need to address on the field coaching if we are going to take the next step as a program.
My concern is that Marve will be cut, but Quinn will not be... and IMO Quinn and Marve both have to go given the weakness of the LB position.
I would expect a new DC to want to bring in some of his own guys, so I wouldn't assume any coaches on that side if the ball would be safe.
My concern is more that Pry will not want to cut his "chosen DC" and replace with a proven DC outside of his school.
It seems like his thought process in choosing a raw, unproven DC was that 1) he would be there to help mentor him from a coaching perspective and 2) the defense would be made in his image and likeness.
If he brings in a new, experienced DC then #2 is probably no longer true. It seems like that might be a tough pill for him to swallow. This is really just a hunch based on what i assume his thought process was and some comments he's made about involvement with the defense.
Quinn coaches the Star / Nickel spot right? The issue with the LB's seems to be the Mikes and Wills (basically because they're all OLB's trying to play ILB except Brumsfield who is a strong safety sized player lining up at Mike)
I have not seen the same glaring problems at Star.. Keonta Jenkins has been solid and is generally much more decisive than the inside LB's when it comes to attacking the run game or locking in on flat routes out of the backfield.
Yes... I didn't know that Marve was coaching 'linebackers' and Quinn is just coaching Nickel/star. I just checked Hokie sports and learned this for the first time.
coaches aren't cheap, though. And we have no reason to believe that changes will be made. To my knowledge, Pry has never fired another coach before. It's not an easy thing to do. And, even if he does fire someone (Marve, hopefully) who does he hire to replace him? What kind of setback do we expect with a new coach? I see every single year some team (like Vandy) that was an absolute dumpster fire one year, hires a new coach, and suddenly they're better than VT has been in an a decade in year 1. Yet, at VT, for some odd reason, every time we get a new coach it's all "wait 3 years until you can expect any positive results" and that just pisses me off. Why can Vandy go out and get a new coach and have a better offensive plan than us in game 1 but we have to wait 3 years for it (and, by the way, after waiting 3 years the result we get is an offense that can't even move the ball a single yard when we f*cking needed to)??
The coaching issues are substantial. You may not think we're in a bad spot but I think we are. And until Pry proves that he can uphold the "accountability" he always talks about and fire underperforming coaches to replace them with guys who know how to win at this level I don't see how anyone can look at our situation and think it's okay.
To start, your point is well taken.
The reality is, the coordinators were either getting replaced or extended (which likely entails raises) this year, as it's a contract year. So I would assume we're prepared for a bump in pay around year three. That could be overly optimistic
Totally agree with this. That was fair when Pry was hired. It is not fair now.
I'm taking Pry at his word... He's had these conversations with players before, has talked about having them with coaches... we'll see what happens.
I guess this is the part I struggle with. I want to believe Pry. Really, I do!
But as the losses pile up and there are no wins against anyone with a pulse, those words start to look more and more like lip service than anything. 25 games in and the best win we have is against a 7-6 BC team. Something has to change soon. Excuse me if I don't believe it'll happen.
I hear ya. I'm basically relying on the trend line. In 2021, we beat 1(?) ACC team. Last year, that went up to 5. I guess I'm willing to wait to further into the season and observe the trend line before forming my opinion.
But truly, I understand your viewpoint here. Quite rational.
Perhaps I'm being over optimistic, but this is the last of year of Marve's three-year contract. I think he will be replaced if we don't see noticeable improvement.
I believe the length of the coordinator contracts was intentional. I would imagine that Pry wants to reassess the coordinators after three years and then decide to extend or replace them.
Bowen, for all of his imperfections, has done more with less. Marve has not gotten a single player to play above his known ceilings, and arguably as many players playing worse than they have previously.
I don't think Coach Pry will shit on his staff publicly, but as a defensive guy, this has to be driving him insane.
I'd say TENS of thousands(or damn close to it). Both in the stadium (and even watching the recording on TV) , it was at least 2-1 and likely closer to 3-1 VT to Vandy fans at the game.
On the bright side, a friend of mine just sent me this gem.
"Current scoreboard:
Teams suing the ACC: 0-3
Teams not-suing the ACC: 15-2. "
I love that fact. I was so happy when I picked BC to win, and then FSU played down to my expectations. Do they start to implode or right the ship?
lmao
Those are a lot of numbers to tell me how much pain I'm in