Week 10: Virginia Tech @ Boston College, Saturday 11/2 12:00pm on ABC/ESPN/ESPN2

[Ragingcroc]

 

[JPCVT]

If a receiver or running back coughed up the ball 8 times in two games, regardless of talent level, would they play? No. And that's why I'm officially on the Mark Leal train at this point. He can't possibly be worse than this. Logan may give us an opportunity to win at times, but he's always directly responsible for these two losses. I don't think any of the current excuses - no weapons, TE playing QB - hold water at this point. Recall that, in game TWO of 2007, the coaches pulled the rug out on Sean Glennon, a QB who actually played QB and had had four years of development at that point for an 18 year old with "upside". I'm not saying that Leal is Tyrod, but I'm saying that "upside" at this point could be considered a QB who doesn't turn the ball over 4 times a game.

Additionally, Leal needs game experience if he's to be the starter next year, and I honestly don't think he could be worse at this point. Not to mention he's not built to run this veer/read option system where the running back is bigger than he is. Put the QB under center, let it be Leal, hand off to the best player on our team 30 times a game (Trey), and give us an actual shot to win on offense. OK, rant over.

 

[wildturkey]

What "should" (in quotes because it won't) happen this week is both LT and Leal get 1st team reps at practice all week. LT gets the start at Miami but as soon as he shows signs of being sloppy with the ball like he has been, put Leal in. Provided Miami loses against FSU, the game next week will still be for the Coastal division. If LT is still turning it over, you cannot leave him in. You have to do everything you can to try to win that game and leaving a guy in that's coughing it up only hurts you. If Leal gets put in and stinks it up too, so be it. At least we'd go down with all our cards played.

 

[Sleepy T]

I understand the frustration, trust me, I'm there too. But to be a game manager, the offense has to be able to run the ball...at least a little bit, this offense has proved every game that they cannot so that. You put Leal under center and hand Edmunds and Coleman the ball 30 times a game, they end up with 100 total yards..at best, that's the reality of the VT running game. The pick 6 was bad today, but the other turnovers almost any other QB could've gotten. Sack/Fumble from the backside...90% of QBs lose that one. Fumble on the last drive...yeah he carried it like a loaf of bread..he was just trying to make a play.

Once again, not making excuses for LT. But this bench LT for Leal stuff...ain't gonna happen, nor should it IMHO. I think many of you think managing the game would be good enough (even though we have ZERO running game)... But I think our offense would be even more pedestrian w/out LTs ability to throw the ball like he does at times, and especially his ability to run the ball like Leal nor the RBs can. His running ability is why he is still on the field. Not sure why y'all don't get that.

 

[wildturkey]

Part of the reason the running game is nonexistent is Logan Thomas. LT getting lots of carries and yardage is fool's gold. Loeffler is using him as a crutch. The playcalling places far too much responsibility on Thomas. Thomas is getting an absurd amount of carries, usually out of read plays, and defenses are just locking in on him. It's a self inflicted wound. We don't have a run game, but we're calling plays that hamper the run game. Edmunds had like 8 carries all day today and I think only 2 were out of your traditional run sets. 1 had a nice 5 yard gain, the other he fell down (a problem with him I won't get into) but a lane was there for another good gain. But like in a few other games this year, if a Edmunds shows good gains on a few plays its abandoned for whatever reason in favor of more LT. The thought process of putting in Leal is that removes Loeffler's crutch. Leal isn't built like LT so he shouldn't have the play calls where every damn thing is QB dependent. You'd see more traditional runs, play actions, quick hitches, and just the occasional read option all of which Loeffler has shown in his playbook but won't use consistently. Apparently every football coach just sees 6'6 250 and says "Yep! That'll work everytime, right?"

 

[ckhokie]

I understand the frustration, trust me, I'm there too. But to be a game manager, the offense has to be able to run the ball...at least a little bit, this offense has proved every game that they cannot so that. You put Leal under center and hand Edmunds and Coleman the ball 30 times a game, they end up with 100 total yards..at best, that's the reality of the VT running game. The pick 6 was bad today, but the other turnovers almost any other QB could've gotten. Sack/Fumble from the backside...90% of QBs lose that one. Fumble on the last drive...yeah he carried it like a loaf of bread..he was just trying to make a play.

We're running draws on the goal line out of the shotgun. The running plays we do run are almost exclusively reads, which have developed so slowly this year. Coleman and Edmunds haven't done poorly when taking handoffs, but if we're not doing that, the read has to be made faster.

The pick 6 is another absolutely terrible play in a long list of throws that just should never be made. Like his int in the endzone last week, Logan looks like a freshman out there, not a 5th year. That is why I can't support him starting anymore. He is still making very, very basic mistakes that are crippling the team.

Once again, not making excuses for LT. But this bench LT for Leal stuff...ain't gonna happen, nor should it IMHO. I think many of you think managing the game would be good enough (even though we have ZERO running game)... But I think our offense would be even more pedestrian w/out LTs ability to throw the ball like he does at times, and especially his ability to run the ball like Leal nor the RBs can. His running ability is why he is still on the field. Not sure why y'all don't get that.

I would like you to explain why it shouldn't. The issues with our offense is not just young WRs or bad RBs. We have a QB who throws it into the ground or 100mph on a dumpoff, and sails it 3 yards over a guys head who is wide open down the middle. What is most disturbing, that I couldn't really see on TV until I was at the game last Saturday, is how many times Logan just doesn't even get the ball out of his hands when he has guys downfield totally uncovered.

Even when he is at his absolute 'best,' it's not like we're we're running train on anyone. We're still very pedestrian on offense. I'm not sure how we can continue running this guy out there.

 

[HoHumHokie]

I can complain all day about LT, Knowles, the running game etc...but I want to comment on some of the offensive play calling.

1) The zone read: has anyone actually seen this work like its supposed to? We haven't gotten any big plays using it. LT usually keeps 90% of the time on the run options. And it does take forever to develop and LT doesn't have the quicks to take off after faking the handoff. I think this needs to be scrapped. Also, it literally takes 2 seconds for the zone read to develop, which is critical when the offensive line is suspect.

2) The sweep: BC didn't exactly look like the fastest defense. On the one time I saw VT run a sweep with JC he got about 4 yards....would have had more if he actually cut up field instead of heading straight to the sideline. So why was Knowles or Mangus not given a sweep or reverse? Seem like this could be effective at least once or twice a game and even more so against a BC defense that seems limited.

3) The final 2 drives: So we lose Byrn to injury and Meyer comes in, but why did Meyer instantly become option #1?!?!? And after the PI call was overturned...Beamer called a timeout. What was discussed during this timeout?....because VT came out and ran the same damn play again with LT instantly looking Meyer's direction. And then on the final drive, LT throws 2 or 3 passes 5 yds out to the flat....do the coaches not instruct to get the ball down field in the final seconds with no timeouts?

 

[wildturkey]

I can complain all day about LT, Knowles, the running game etc...but I want to comment on some of the offensive play calling.

1) The zone read: has anyone actually seen this work like its supposed to? We haven't gotten any big plays using it. LT usually keeps 90% of the time on the run options. And it does take forever to develop and LT doesn't have the quicks to take off after faking the handoff. I think this needs to be scrapped. Also, it literally takes 2 seconds for the zone read to develop, which is critical when the offensive line is suspect.

2) The sweep: BC didn't exactly look like the fastest defense. On the one time I saw VT run a sweep with JC he got about 4 yards....would have had more if he actually cut up field instead of heading straight to the sideline. So why was Knowles or Mangus not given a sweep or reverse? Seem like this could be effective at least once or twice a game and even more so against a BC defense that seems limited.

3) The final 2 drives: So we lose Byrn to injury and Meyer comes in, but why did Meyer instantly become option #1?!?!? And after the PI call was overturned...Beamer called a timeout. What was discussed during this timeout?....because VT came out and ran the same damn play again with LT instantly looking Meyer's direction. And then on the final drive, LT throws 2 or 3 passes 5 yds out to the flat....do the coaches not instruct to get the ball down field in the final seconds with no timeouts?

In regards to #1, that mesh point handoff is stupid slow. Watch any other team in the country run it and I swear we're the slowest. I like reading French on TKP and I'd love to see him do an entire column on why its so slow or if its all an illusion. I can't figure it out.

About #3, I'd have to see the play again. The lazy answer is LT just stares down whatever route he's most comfortable with as opposed to going thru progressions regardless of who the WRs are. But Meyer very well could have been the only guy open. What I'm not sure of is was Meyer put in over Coles? I can't remember if it was Knowles, Stanford, Coles and Meyer or just 3 WRs minus Coles. If its the latter, then that's a mistake imo. I'd much rather trust Coles in that spot.

 

[Sleepy T]

Yeah, the read option is pretty slow developing. I will be interested to see what Loeffler does the next couple years with the offense with regard to play calling, base formations, overall scheme, etc. I kinda think that maybe he tried not to change too much from last year because of the limited time he had with the team in his first year and not trying to change too much with a 5th year senior QB. Possibly starting next year (with Leal being the starter??) and certainly the year after that (Ford, Bucky, Motley) I would expect the read option to be phased out and VT return to more of a power running/pro style offense with the QB under center the majority of the time. It will take some time...I guess we will have to be patient.

 

[Cobrabit]

I certainly hope we return to a true power running game, especially if Grimes can recruit some true nasties up front. Our biggest problem has been our red zone efficiency. Everyone in the country knows that we can't line up in a power I and stuff it in for the tough 2-3 yards. We instead try a read option where everyone knows the Logan is going to keep it and try to power through after taking those two additional seconds to fake the handoff that the defense knows isn't happening.

 

[VTscores]

I certainly hope we return to a true power running game, especially if Grimes can recruit some true nasties up front. Our biggest problem has been our red zone efficiency. Everyone in the country knows that we can't line up in a power I and stuff it in for the tough 2-3 yards. We instead try a read option where everyone knows the Logan is going to keep it and try to power through after taking those two additional seconds to fake the handoff that the defense knows isn't happening.

Yes, there is nothing quite like predicting a one trick pony. On the short run power play, they just have LT or a very slow end-around. They simply don't seem to have a hole to run through, at least not for long enough to run through it.

 

[VT_Antzo]

I havent seen too many plays to Rogers or Mangus the past few weeks...I wonder if it is due to injury or just depth.

We we more of a balanced offense who spread the ball around the field much better.

On to the Miami game...we still have a chance at the Coastal.

 

[VTscores]

On to the Miami game...we still have a chance at the Coastal.

Amazing, but true. I'd LOVE to see VT to show up with both an offense and defense and win that one.

 

[Sleepy T]

3-0 the rest of the way gets us back into the ACCCG. If the offense can eliminate the mistakes and move the damn ball... I think it is very doable.

EDIT: This is assuming Duke drops another ACC game.

 

[HoHumHokie]

3-0 the rest of the way gets us back into the ACCCG. If the offense can eliminate the mistakes and move the damn ball... I think it is very doable.

EDIT: This is assuming Duke drops another ACC game.

Not to look ahead, but lets assume Miami tanks games against VT and Duke....who wins the Coastal tiebreaker between VT, Duke and GT?....the highest BCS ranking? This might be interesting. Duke would be 10-2....although I can't see them winning against both Miami and UNC.

 

[HoHumHokie]

College football players often aren?t allowed to talk a good game - The Washington Post

 

[wildturkey]

Not to look ahead, but lets assume Miami tanks games against VT and Duke....who wins the Coastal tiebreaker between VT, Duke and GT?....the highest BCS ranking? This might be interesting. Duke would be 10-2....although I can't see them winning against both Miami and UNC.

Duke has the head to head against us so Duke wins.

 

[hokiegrad]

Duke has the head to head against us so Duke wins.

in this case (3-way tie with VT, Duke, and GT), each team has one win and one loss vs. the other two, so head-to-head doesn't matter.

But we're getting way ahead of ourselves here. Too many possible scenarios to discuss them all with this many games left.

 

[hokiegrad]

College football players often aren?t allowed to talk a good game - The Washington Post

That article was crap. Journalist whining about this not being a perfect world for journalists. It's not a perfect world for anyone. He needs to get used to it.

 

[757Hokie83]

in case anyone was wondering about that PI call...obviously the refs reviewed and said it was tipped because they just needed an excuse to pick up the flag

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BRKtGDyc_0]Tipped ball???? - YouTube[/ame]

looks to me like pretty indisputable evidence that the ball was not tipped