How come we never saw this more

[Ragingcroc]

 

[wildturkey]

Because it was too successful. Stiney and O'cain are only good for "creative" plays that fail miserably.

 

[VTfoozball]

Because the staff whiffed on every QB imaginable there for a couple of years and LT was forced to play the QB position. Unfortunately there are consequences to having a one dimensional offense.

 

[ACC_HOKIES]

Would love to see it again. A simple and well executed play. Granted it was Wake Forest, but we created a matchup that gave us an advantage and exploited it. I think we all agree that Tech needs more well designed and creative plays. I do think it's worth mentioning two things to consider:

1. LT was not the starting QB at that point. Practice, open hits, and awareness of the position should be considered.
2. The video is one of the only examples of this type of play working for Tech. We tried a couple to Tyrod with both Boone and Glennon. Infact, Tyrod had to undercut a UVa player (dangerous for both players IMO) to avoid a horrible INT. Marcus Davis and Eddie Royal (twice) threw INTs on double passes. I think Richard Johnson threw a TD in 2004, Royal had a completion at some point, and Marcus Vick caught a TD from Randall in the Insite Bowl is just about the only other times this type of play has worked to my recollection. We "seem" (meaning I haven't compared statistically) to be worse than other schools at these types of plays.

I think lining up Leal or another threat to pass, could put pressure on the defense with Thomas on the field. Not only would it work for a fade, but Thomas can provide a matchup problem on a number of routes, blocking, etc. Enough that it'd change the defense into something less efficient. The question is, does our efficency in that scenario outweight their efficiency relative to a normal play? The staff should consider anything that gives us an advantage.

ETA: Why we didn't see it more with LT as a backup QB? I don't know. I recall that he did line up in a couple of games, but this was his one catch. Maybe he was covered the other times.

 

[NickVT10]

We should be throwing fades to Davis every time we are down by the endzone. Its fucking ridiculous the lack of intelligent play calling we have experienced.

 

[robV703]

We should be throwing fades to Davis every time we are down by the endzone. Its fucking ridiculous the lack of intelligent play calling we have experienced.

This is actually part of our playcalling I DON'T disagree with, and I'm being 100% serious here. I'm pretty sure LT can't throw a fade.

 

[Chrish1023]

This is actually part of our playcalling I DON'T disagree with, and I'm being 100% serious here. I'm pretty sure LT can't throw a fade.

He can't.

 

[wildturkey]

This is actually part of our playcalling I DON'T disagree with, and I'm being 100% serious here. I'm pretty sure LT can't throw a fade.

He can...provided his target is the 3rd row trumpet player

 

[hokiehi21]

Didnt Logan throw a perfect fade to DJ Coles for a TD last year against UNC?

 

[robV703]

Didnt Logan throw a perfect fade to DJ Coles for a TD last year against UNC?

That wasn't quite the same route we're talking about. IIRC on that one he lead Coles perfectly to the corner of the endzone. I'm talking about more of a jump ball type, which should in theory be perfect for Marcus Davis.

 

[hokiehi21]

Like the two-point conversion throw to Davis against Michigan?

 

[robV703]

Like the two-point conversion throw to Davis against Michigan?

Well that wasn't a fade, but yes. Marcus Davis should be a beast in the redzone and that's a good example.

 

[wildturkey]

Forget fades. I'd settle for actually throwing passes into the endzone. But that would require routes designed to pull defenders and create openings, something our offense has lacked forever