What do you think happens at the end of VT's season?

[amszete]

Was thinking of making a poll but whatever - just interested to know your thoughts....

Now that we are a bottom feeder (as of 11/10) in the Coast Division for football (which is down to begin with), what do you think happens next year? Do you foresee any coaching changes happening? Or do we keep status quo with the new (upgrade) of recruits coming in...

 

[amszete]

Personally I think a move or two is made. I think we could see a change at RB coach and have SB take over ST at a minimum. I also think that SL could be shown the door. While I think some of the play calling has been OK, there are some things on offense that have happened this year that we can't ever have happen again -- namely the penalties that we saw in the early season on offense. Also I don't think our OC has called games to the strengths of our players at times. Just my thoughts here.

While I think we have a chance to haul in a great recruiting class - could be one of the best depending on how the cards fall, I don't think we get to next season without seeing some sort of change.

 

[ckhokie]

As much as I want to say, "hey look at our improved recruiting," I feel no better than a UVA fan with London. Recruiting doesn't change our antiquated offensive philosophy, or our terrible special teams play. When we've lost at home to the likes of Duke, Maryland, GT, Miami, and ECU, I feel like that is reason enough to make a change.

We're last in what is not a good football division or conference. There is no way that some stars next to some high schoolers name should make us forget that.

I worry that if we don't make some kind of change, and fairly soon, we'll just fall into mid-tier obscurity, a la WVU.

 

[Sleepy T]

To be fair to WVU (and it pains me to say this), they are light years ahead of our club wrt offensive philosophy and a much better team right now. Their defense leaves much to be desired.

I agree some changes should be made, but doubt they will. If we somehow get blown out by the Dookies, get upset by awake AND get beaten squarely by UVA...ending the bowl streak, I think heads might roll, particularly Loeffler if these losses are on the offense. I agree, he has been all over the place with play calling and some personnel decisions.

I disagree about SB. No disrespect, but I chuckle when everyone is calling for a new RBs coach. Sure he didn't play the position and I would rather have Kevin Jones running the show there. But that position is easily the position where high quality athletes need little to no help wrt coaching. It's all about having open holes and having the vision, speed, power and overall god given ability to make things happen. Those things aren't coached.

 

[wildturkey]

There will be coaching shake ups. How severe I don't know

 

[NickVT10]

The calls for SB to be removed from the RB coach is mostly due to the rotation he has. He pulls guys who are playing great regardless of game flow and sticks with guys who are struggling too long.

I can't say that I expect changes after the season but I wouldn't be surprised. I do think Searels will get the OL to a much better state in a few years but that takes time through recruiting and teaching these young guys so I don't want him to go. Moorehead has been a great addition to the staff and I hope we can retain him for a long time. SL could be removed and I would not be heart broken about it at all but would not be upset to see him get a 3rd season either. If SL is removed, then I hope we are able to keep our other position coaches. Stiney is doing a good job with the TEs this year as well. They are blocking pretty well and making plays.

 

[Sleepy T]

The calls for SB to be removed from the RB coach is mostly due to the rotation he has. He pulls guys who are playing great regardless of game flow and sticks with guys who are struggling too long.

And if he is the making those decisions, I agree... I would think that CSL would have the ultimate say so on who is toting the rock, not Shane.. but I really dunno?? If SB is making those calls then yes, he is hard headed and too loyal (ahem...JC). A chip off the old block.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

Some changes and some movement but nothing earth shattering. I am not sure if I agree with that approach but this is what I expect. I have some major issues with some of the roster decisions. IMO, if you quit the team and then come back you don't jump in line as well. That pisses me off more than the losses.

 

[HoHumHokie]

Define earth shattering?....anyone other than Frank or Bud?

 

[amszete]

The calls for SB to be removed from the RB coach is mostly due to the rotation he has. He pulls guys who are playing great regardless of game flow and sticks with guys who are struggling too long.

I can't say that I expect changes after the season but I wouldn't be surprised. I do think Searels will get the OL to a much better state in a few years but that takes time through recruiting and teaching these young guys so I don't want him to go. Moorehead has been a great addition to the staff and I hope we can retain him for a long time. SL could be removed and I would not be heart broken about it at all but would not be upset to see him get a 3rd season either. If SL is removed, then I hope we are able to keep our other position coaches. Stiney is doing a good job with the TEs this year as well. They are blocking pretty well and making plays.

This...

Also to be honest while RB seems like a relatively easier position to coach having little experience it is quite obvious our RBs also do not secure the ball as well as in the past. While we have a young team, fumbles has been something that has been plaguing our RBs for the last couple of years I feel. I personally don't think SB should be let go as there could be other ways we could leverage his strengths - but coaching RBs I am not so sure now.

 

[amszete]

Exactly on the rotation part for SB...

Also to be honest while RB seems like a relatively easier position to coach having little experience it is quite obvious our RBs also do not secure the ball as well as in the past. While we have a young team, fumbles has been something that has been plaguing our RBs for the last couple of years I feel. I personally don't think SB should be let go as there could be other ways we could leverage his strengths - but coaching RBs I am not so sure now.

Some changes and some movement but nothing earth shattering. I am not sure if I agree with that approach but this is what I expect. I have some major issues with some of the roster decisions. IMO, if you quit the team and then come back you don't jump in line as well. That pisses me off more than the losses.

And I TOTALLY agree here. From what I understand that is a head ball coach decision and that is a way to lose the locker room in a heart beat. This is what makes me think our time with CFB as head ball coach will be up when the next extension expires. While it pains me to say this for I having nothing but respect for the guy, I think he is lost when it comes to running the type of ship he had back 10 years ago. He had a team focused, disciplined, dedicated to the program and paid attention to the small things that helped you win games. We have won with talented and extremely young teams before - this is not a first for Beamer.

 

[sparko]

winning is the most important thing. All football programs do shady shit. But there's a line that you don't cross. Shelving players into the game that quit on the team the head of dedicated hard-working options is bullshit. It's pretty obvious that CFB is starting to feel the pressure to win. 10 years ago that shit would've never happened

 

[NickVT10]

This...

Also to be honest while RB seems like a relatively easier position to coach having little experience it is quite obvious our RBs also do not secure the ball as well as in the past. While we have a young team, fumbles has been something that has been plaguing our RBs for the last couple of years I feel. I personally don't think SB should be let go as there could be other ways we could leverage his strengths - but coaching RBs I am not so sure now.

I believe we had 0 lost fumbles last year from RBs and very few the year before.

 

[Sleepy T]

I believe we had 0 lost fumbles last year from RBs and very few the year before.

True. Once again an individual thing. Wilson had problems holding onto the ball at VT and with the G-Men. It can be beat into their head, drills in practice, etc. but ultimately it's the RBs responsibility.


I understand and agree with all of your thoughts on the personnel things. It's been pretty bad. But I have a serious question here....

If say, a healthy Trey Edmunds or MW said fuck it after the summer session, but wanted to come back a couple months later. How would you feel about them getting the carries right now??

Say we didn't have the young WRs really making things happen, but when Stanford returned he was by far the best option...how would you feel about him getting starter PT.

I don't agree with the way the RB situation was handled, but with the way Caleb and JC has performed, does CFB have anything to lose in seeing if Wright can give us a spark?? I don't think so. Outside of MW, the available RBs that we have right now are just not very good. And part of that does have to do with the OL.

I don't think Beamer is trying to piss anyone off, just trying to do whatever it takes to win. If that means a few under performers get pissed because they can't get it done, then I'm sorry, but that's life.

 

[VTscores]

I don't think Beamer is trying to piss anyone off, just trying to do whatever it takes to win. If that means a few under performers get pissed because they can't get it done, then I'm sorry, but that's life.

I agree. Beamer is about as loyal as they come, but you have to reward ability and performance on the depth chart. You put in whoever gives you the best chance to win.

How many games have been decided by a handful of plays this year? This is a game of inches. If you get passed on the depth chart, get better.

 

[amszete]

I believe we had 0 lost fumbles last year from RBs and very few the year before.

Right about last year. It was the year before 2012 and the one with Wilson 2011 I think where those stick out. I am pasting below stats from Hokiesports.com assuming that I have interpreted the data correctly.

For 2014 thus far...
J.C. Coleman 2
Marshawn Williams 2
Jerome Wright 1
Joel Caleb 1
TL RBs: 6

2013 - No fumbles by RBs (we were also very pass heavy and Logan ran the ball mostly)

For 2012:
J.C. Coleman 2
Michael Holmes 2
Tony Gregory 2
Martin Scales 1
TL for RBs: 7

For 2011
David Wilson 7
Josh Oglesby 1
Tony Gregory 1
TL for RBs: 9

 

[ACC_HOKIES]

I think changes will be made, but its hard to know the extent. I'm sure many will be unsatisfied. I feared fans were trying to talk ourselves into liking Loeffler as the hire a couple years ago. I'm not sure if he can coach or not, but clearly its not working here and now. Frankly, its so bad, I can't even tell who the biggest problem is anymore.

I don't think piecing together parts has or will work on offense. The offense needs an identity and vision. Right now we seem to have an OC with 4 random guys (at least two of which weren't his doing), trying to implement an some sort of idea Frank Beamer had for a ball control spread offense (?). It's like when we tried the Wildcat after every other program had done it and defenses knew how to prepare, or the bubble screens starting with Stiney, because the NFL teams did them, or when we try a special teams fake that strongly resembles one that was done to us months before. We're just throwing stuff against the wall. No commitment to an identity with those ideas.

Meanwhile, Bud Foster appears to be given the authority to go full throttle with his vision, get his guys, and experiment with great success. Sure details and personnel change, but there will always be the overall philosophy.

 

[VTscores]

I think the jury should still be out on Loeffler.

It's true that the offense doesn't have an identity, but part of that has been because it's in transition. I certainly see some things happening on the offense, even if there are some growing pains with young players. Some of the games have been painful to watch (pre-snap penalties). I'm choosing to believe that this is because the team just isn't where Loeffler wants it to be. He wants a pro-style offense, but has never had the personnel. Is he getting any closer to it? Well, he has some decent receivers and tight ends. He needs a lot better offensive line. And he needs a running game. You know, just a few things.

If the defense were the normal for VT, some of the losses this year would have been wins. Four of the five losses have been by one score.

Seems to me that the big changes were when Beamer hired Scot Loeffler. Not sure he has time in his career to hire another OC, so he probably needs to make this one work. I can imagine some tweaks, but I can't imagine wholesale changes until Beamer retires.

 

[757Hokie83]

end of the year...coaches round table, coaches doing self evaluations:

Loeffler: "I know we had some issues on offense this year guys, but i think i have pinpointed the problem, and know how to fix it next year. Tow words 'gents :Bubble. Screen. We didnt run nearly enough of them this past year, next year, we go exclusively to the bubble screen! Genius!"

 

[VTscores]

end of the year...coaches round table, coaches doing self evaluations:

Loeffler: "I know we had some issues on offense this year guys, but i think i have pinpointed the problem, and know how to fix it next year. Tow words 'gents :Bubble. Screen. We didnt run nearly enough of them this past year, next year, we go exclusively to the bubble screen! Genius!"

I think he's going to point to the lack of a running game, and I think he's going to be correct.