Said this for some time...but the game has passed Frank by

[hokie80]

He is approaching what Bobby Bowden became in his last few years.

Our special teams haven't been good for quite a while.

Offensively, we continue to struggle.

Game planning and in-game adjustments are awful.

I would like to see him retire and get some new blood at the top.

If not, we will (at best) be a lower mid-tier ACC team.

[cwtcr hokie]

cutcliffe also? or the ks dude? or saban? no it has not, no team stays good forever, we hit a down cycle (still above .500 tho) and are rebuilding, may want to notice all the youth starting for us now and the folks coming in

He is approaching what Bobby Bowden became in his last few years.

Our special teams haven't been good for quite a while.

Offensively, we continue to struggle.

Game planning and in-game adjustments are awful.

I would like to see him retire and get some new blood at the top.

If not, we will (at best) be a lower mid-tier ACC team.

[hokie80]

cutcliffe also? or the ks dude? or saban? no it has not, no team stays good forever, we hit a down cycle (still above .500 tho) and are rebuilding, may want to notice all the youth starting for us now and the folks coming in

He is approaching what Bobby Bowden became in his last few years.

Our special teams haven't been good for quite a while.

Offensively, we continue to struggle.

Game planning and in-game adjustments are awful.

I would like to see him retire and get some new blood at the top.

If not, we will (at best) be a lower mid-tier ACC team.

As I recall, you were slamming Jimbo Fisher and using him as an example of of how a coaching change isn't a good idea right after Jimbo's first year as FSU's HC.

So......

[BigDave]

As I recall, you were slamming Jimbo Fisher and using him as an example of of how a coaching change isn't a good idea right after Jimbo's first year as FSU's HC.

So......

The rub is, sometimes when you force out your long-time coach, you get a Jimbo Fisher and sometimes you get an Al Groh.

I think reading between the lines, 2016 is Coach Beamer's final year. Personally, I think he's deserved to go out on his own terms and if he wants to coach until 2016, he gets to coach until 2016.

[RiverguyVT]

As I recall, you were slamming Jimbo Fisher and using him as an example of of how a coaching change isn't a good idea right after Jimbo's first year as FSU's HC.

So......

The rub is, sometimes when you force out your long-time coach, you get a Jimbo Fisher and sometimes you get an Al Groh.

I think reading between the lines, 2016 is Coach Beamer's final year. Personally, I think he's deserved to go out on his own terms and if he wants to coach until 2016, he gets to coach until 2016.

there's the reality, right there.

[hokie80]

As I recall, you were slamming Jimbo Fisher and using him as an example of of how a coaching change isn't a good idea right after Jimbo's first year as FSU's HC.

So......

The rub is, sometimes when you force out your long-time coach, you get a Jimbo Fisher and sometimes you get an Al Groh.

I think reading between the lines, 2016 is Coach Beamer's final year. Personally, I think he's deserved to go out on his own terms and if he wants to coach until 2016, he gets to coach until 2016.

there's the reality, right there.

The reality is that the program is slipping (has been for quite a while really). While I realize he's probably not going to retire until 2016, I don't see that as a plus for the program by waiting another 3 seasons.

[BG Hokie]

As I recall, you were slamming Jimbo Fisher and using him as an example of of how a coaching change isn't a good idea right after Jimbo's first year as FSU's HC.

So......

The rub is, sometimes when you force out your long-time coach, you get a Jimbo Fisher and sometimes you get an Al Groh.

I think reading between the lines, 2016 is Coach Beamer's final year. Personally, I think he's deserved to go out on his own terms and if he wants to coach until 2016, he gets to coach until 2016.

there's the reality, right there.

The reality is that the program is slipping (has been for quite a while really). While I realize he's probably not going to retire until 2016, I don't see that as a plus for the program by waiting another 3 seasons.

I do see that as a plus because the odds are that when Frank Beamer retires, whether it's tomorrow or in 2016, etc. we will trend down and not up. 60% chance or so that we get worse and hire Al Groh and not Art Briles. And don't get me wrong, I get it, I do think football has evolved past the bread and butter that made Frank Beamer one of the most successful college coaches in the history of the college football.

[Florida Hokie]

As I recall, you were slamming Jimbo Fisher and using him as an example of of how a coaching change isn't a good idea right after Jimbo's first year as FSU's HC.

So......

The rub is, sometimes when you force out your long-time coach, you get a Jimbo Fisher and sometimes you get an Al Groh.

I think reading between the lines, 2016 is Coach Beamer's final year. Personally, I think he's deserved to go out on his own terms and if he wants to coach until 2016, he gets to coach until 2016.

there's the reality, right there.

The reality is that the program is slipping (has been for quite a while really). While I realize he's probably not going to retire until 2016, I don't see that as a plus for the program by waiting another 3 seasons.

I do see that as a plus because the odds are that when Frank Beamer retires, whether it's tomorrow or in 2016, etc. we will trend down and not up. 60% chance or so that we get worse and hire Al Groh and not Art Briles. And don't get me wrong, I get it, I do think football has evolved past the bread and butter that made Frank Beamer one of the most successful college coaches in the history of the college football.

I don't. If they went back to the Ricky Bustle style offense they'd be back in the thick of things. I mean that seriously. Strong running game. Reasonable threat under center. Keep the passing game simple. Smash them in the mouth - that's Alabama football for the record. I'm not saying we'd get Alabama talent but still..

[BigDave]

I don't. If they went back to the Ricky Bustle style offense they'd be back in the thick of things. I mean that seriously. Strong running game. Reasonable threat under center. Keep the passing game simple. Smash them in the mouth - that's Alabama football for the record. I'm not saying we'd get Alabama talent but still..

When Ricky Bustle was here, people couldn't wait to get rid of him. He was great when he had Michael Vick, but lousy otherwise. 1998 and 2001 had anemic offenses. (Obviously, in 1998, it didn't help that we were down to our third string quarterback and in 2001, it didn't help that TD Lee was injured in the first game and KJ had a fumbling problem.)

I think the system has only been a small part of our offensive problems. We seem to get far more than our fair share of linemen who come in highly touted but tear an ACL and never play a meaningful snap. And maybe some of it is lousy recruiting - could it just be that our coaches are not good at identifying good O-linemen?

When Stiney was the OC, my entire row could pick out, based on the formation, what the play was going to be and we'd be right 99% of the time. There was no mystery whatsoever. I can't do the same with Loeffler. I'm right 0% of the time under Loeffler. I know our offense stunk it up this year (and having no talent whatsoever at the tailback position didn't help things) but just the fact that we have more than 5 plays per game is an improvement in my book.

When Beamer requires, I have a sinking feeling that we're going to have Bud Foster as our HC for a few years and for a lot of reasons, I think that's going to be a disaster.

[BG Hokie]

The rub is, sometimes when you force out your long-time coach, you get a Jimbo Fisher and sometimes you get an Al Groh.

I think reading between the lines, 2016 is Coach Beamer's final year. Personally, I think he's deserved to go out on his own terms and if he wants to coach until 2016, he gets to coach until 2016.

there's the reality, right there.

The reality is that the program is slipping (has been for quite a while really). While I realize he's probably not going to retire until 2016, I don't see that as a plus for the program by waiting another 3 seasons.

I do see that as a plus because the odds are that when Frank Beamer retires, whether it's tomorrow or in 2016, etc. we will trend down and not up. 60% chance or so that we get worse and hire Al Groh and not Art Briles. And don't get me wrong, I get it, I do think football has evolved past the bread and butter that made Frank Beamer one of the most successful college coaches in the history of the college football.

I don't. If they went back to the Ricky Bustle style offense they'd be back in the thick of things. I mean that seriously. Strong running game. Reasonable threat under center. Keep the passing game simple. Smash them in the mouth - that's Alabama football for the record. I'm not saying we'd get Alabama talent but still..

We don't have a good run blocking OL nor a good running back but you think we could run the I formation into success. It's an offensive scheme problem? To run smash mouth in college these days, you need supreme talent IMO. We don't have it. Our recruiting hot beds in VA lends us to being a spread, tempo team which is what I think Beamer missed the boat on with Stiney and now Loeffler. Loeffler basically is Ricky Bustle.

[awesome guy]

there's the reality, right there.

The reality is that the program is slipping (has been for quite a while really). While I realize he's probably not going to retire until 2016, I don't see that as a plus for the program by waiting another 3 seasons.

I do see that as a plus because the odds are that when Frank Beamer retires, whether it's tomorrow or in 2016, etc. we will trend down and not up. 60% chance or so that we get worse and hire Al Groh and not Art Briles. And don't get me wrong, I get it, I do think football has evolved past the bread and butter that made Frank Beamer one of the most successful college coaches in the history of the college football.

I don't. If they went back to the Ricky Bustle style offense they'd be back in the thick of things. I mean that seriously. Strong running game. Reasonable threat under center. Keep the passing game simple. Smash them in the mouth - that's Alabama football for the record. I'm not saying we'd get Alabama talent but still..

We don't have a good run blocking OL nor a good running back but you think we could run the I formation into success. It's an offensive scheme problem? To run smash mouth in college these days, you need supreme talent IMO. We don't have it. Our recruiting hot beds in VA lends us to being a spread, tempo team which is what I think Beamer missed the boat on with Stiney and now Loeffler. Loeffler basically is Ricky Bustle.

Your last sentence is flat out false. Bustle was smash mouth, Loeffler is trying to out formation you.

[oaktonhokie]

A big question I think is whether tech is a "destination" for coaches, or a stepping stone.

Will we get a top coach who wants to stay here, (re)build the program and win a national championship?

Or is blacksburg where a coach goes to burnish a resume, so he can get the gig at Texas or usc?

Are we Alabama or Boise st?

Beamer is one of us. He has walked the frozen drill field for an 8am class. He has lived in the dorms and eaten in the dining halls.

That's special, imo. It's not a prerequisite, but it's special. He reacted to the 4/16 massacre like a hokie, not a mercenary, not an employee.

That said, yeah, it's time to plan to go. Two more years? Time for a succession plan.

He has earned the right to leave on his terms. I hope he does the right thing and doesn't do a Bobby Bowden.

I don't. If they went back to the Ricky Bustle style offense they'd be back in the thick of things. I mean that seriously. Strong running game. Reasonable threat under center. Keep the passing game simple. Smash them in the mouth - that's Alabama football for the record. I'm not saying we'd get Alabama talent but still..

When Ricky Bustle was here, people couldn't wait to get rid of him. He was great when he had Michael Vick, but lousy otherwise. 1998 and 2001 had anemic offenses. (Obviously, in 1998, it didn't help that we were down to our third string quarterback and in 2001, it didn't help that TD Lee was injured in the first game and KJ had a fumbling problem.)

I think the system has only been a small part of our offensive problems. We seem to get far more than our fair share of linemen who come in highly touted but tear an ACL and never play a meaningful snap. And maybe some of it is lousy recruiting - could it just be that our coaches are not good at identifying good O-linemen?

When Stiney was the OC, my entire row could pick out, based on the formation, what the play was going to be and we'd be right 99% of the time. There was no mystery whatsoever. I can't do the same with Loeffler. I'm right 0% of the time under Loeffler. I know our offense stunk it up this year (and having no talent whatsoever at the tailback position didn't help things) but just the fact that we have more than 5 plays per game is an improvement in my book.

When Beamer requires, I have a sinking feeling that we're going to have Bud Foster as our HC for a few years and for a lot of reasons, I think that's going to be a disaster.

[BG Hokie]

Your last sentence is flat out false. Bustle was smash mouth, Loeffler is trying to out formation you.

Let me clarify. No we don't run the I formation any more with 2 WR's and 1 TE on every play. I'm not sure that anyone does that any more nor do I think that would work, especially at VT.

If we could successfully run the ball in 2013, we would have ran it in similar proportion to what we did under Bustle. That's my general point. We're a run first team now just as then. It's just that we can't run it, so we have to pass it in higher proportion to have any chance at moving the ball.

Relative to the offensive landscape in college football today, Bustle and Loeffler are really not that far apart. Further, I have a feeling that when we have the stable of TE's we want (plus better OL and RB's) we will be smash mouth, relative to 2013 smash mouth standards (see Stanford as an example - who is smash mouth and tries to out-formation teams).

[BG Hokie]

That could definitely be a problem. If we were to make a home run hire, we would likely be a destination before going to an elite football school. Worth the risk though...

A big question I think is whether tech is a "destination" for coaches, or a stepping stone.

Will we get a top coach who wants to stay here, (re)build the program and win a national championship?

Or is blacksburg where a coach goes to burnish a resume, so he can get the gig at Texas or usc?

Are we Alabama or Boise st?

Beamer is one of us. He has walked the frozen drill field for an 8am class. He has lived in the dorms and eaten in the dining halls.

That's special, imo. It's not a prerequisite, but it's special. He reacted to the 4/16 massacre like a hokie, not a mercenary, not an employee.

That said, yeah, it's time to plan to go. Two more years? Time for a succession plan.

He has earned the right to leave on his terms. I hope he does the right thing and doesn't do a Bobby Bowden.

[awesome guy]

Let me clarify. No we don't run the I formation any more with 2 WR's and 1 TE on every play. I'm not sure that anyone does that any more nor do I think that would work, especially at VT.

If we could successfully run the ball in 2013, we would have ran it in similar proportion to what we did under Bustle. That's my general point. We're a run first team now just as then. It's just that we can't run it, so we have to pass it in higher proportion to have any chance at moving the ball.

Relative to the offensive landscape in college football today, Bustle and Loeffler are really not that far apart. Further, I have a feeling that when we have the stable of TE's we want (plus better OL and RB's) we will be smash mouth, relative to 2013 smash mouth standards (see Stanford as an example - who is smash mouth and tries to out-formation teams).

But you're just making stuff up giving one year of data. I'm going with what he's done previously, being balanced. Like AL, using formations to keep the D off balance and confused and disciplined execution, which is required for this style of offense. Bustle was none of that, it was power I all the time with an occasional bomb to legitimate threats, just enough passing to keep the D from overloading the box. And really in modern times, it's more about the talent at the skill positions. Like we saw this year, that dictates the plays called. When we have a passing game, that's what we'll use. Or visa-versa with running. His schemas work the same for pass or run oriented plays. That's the key difference from Bustle, deception. There was never any doubt what we were doing with Bustle, we were going to man up and run you over. He went with the "stop me if you can" approach. We don't have the horses to do that, so we're going with "you can't figure out what I'm doing till it's too late".

[BG Hokie]

Let me clarify. No we don't run the I formation any more with 2 WR's and 1 TE on every play. I'm not sure that anyone does that any more nor do I think that would work, especially at VT.

If we could successfully run the ball in 2013, we would have ran it in similar proportion to what we did under Bustle. That's my general point. We're a run first team now just as then. It's just that we can't run it, so we have to pass it in higher proportion to have any chance at moving the ball.

Relative to the offensive landscape in college football today, Bustle and Loeffler are really not that far apart. Further, I have a feeling that when we have the stable of TE's we want (plus better OL and RB's) we will be smash mouth, relative to 2013 smash mouth standards (see Stanford as an example - who is smash mouth and tries to out-formation teams).

But you're just making stuff up giving one year of data. I'm going with what he's done previously, being balanced. Like AL, using formations to keep the D off balance and confused and disciplined execution, which is required for this style of offense. Bustle was none of that, it was power I all the time with an occasional bomb to legitimate threats, just enough passing to keep the D from overloading the box. And really in modern times, it's more about the talent at the skill positions. Like we saw this year, that dictates the plays called. When we have a passing game, that's what we'll use. Or visa-versa with running. His schemas work the same for pass or run oriented plays. That's the key difference from Bustle, deception. There was never any doubt what we were doing with Bustle, we were going to man up and run you over. He went with the "stop me if you can" approach. We don't have the horses to do that, so we're going with "you can't figure out what I'm doing till it's too late".

FYI, a power I formation is a three back set. We may have run that some on the goal line and 3rd and short but we weren't a Power I football team. We had two backs, 1 TE, and 2 WR's as our base package, an I formation, not the power I formation.

[awesome guy]

Let me clarify. No we don't run the I formation any more with 2 WR's and 1 TE on every play. I'm not sure that anyone does that any more nor do I think that would work, especially at VT.

If we could successfully run the ball in 2013, we would have ran it in similar proportion to what we did under Bustle. That's my general point. We're a run first team now just as then. It's just that we can't run it, so we have to pass it in higher proportion to have any chance at moving the ball.

Relative to the offensive landscape in college football today, Bustle and Loeffler are really not that far apart. Further, I have a feeling that when we have the stable of TE's we want (plus better OL and RB's) we will be smash mouth, relative to 2013 smash mouth standards (see Stanford as an example - who is smash mouth and tries to out-formation teams).

But you're just making stuff up giving one year of data. I'm going with what he's done previously, being balanced. Like AL, using formations to keep the D off balance and confused and disciplined execution, which is required for this style of offense. Bustle was none of that, it was power I all the time with an occasional bomb to legitimate threats, just enough passing to keep the D from overloading the box. And really in modern times, it's more about the talent at the skill positions. Like we saw this year, that dictates the plays called. When we have a passing game, that's what we'll use. Or visa-versa with running. His schemas work the same for pass or run oriented plays. That's the key difference from Bustle, deception. There was never any doubt what we were doing with Bustle, we were going to man up and run you over. He went with the "stop me if you can" approach. We don't have the horses to do that, so we're going with "you can't figure out what I'm doing till it's too late".

FYI, a power I formation is a three back set. We may have run that some on the goal line and 3rd and short but we weren't a Power I football team. We had two backs, 1 TE, and 2 WR's as our base package, an I formation, not the power I formation.

thanks for the correction. My point still stands, they're only alike in that they're offensive coordinators at VT that have run and pass plays.

[Major Kong]

We'll be fine.

[HokieJoe]

We don't have a good run blocking OL nor a good running back but you think we could run the I formation into success. It's an offensive scheme problem? To run smash mouth in college these days, you need supreme talent IMO. We don't have it. Our recruiting hot beds in VA lends us to being a spread, tempo team which is what I think Beamer missed the boat on with Stiney and now Loeffler. Loeffler basically is Ricky Bustle.

Ehh, Loeffler is just playing the cards he was dealt. You have to give the new staff some time to get the sort of players they want into their system. Hopefully, Beamer won’t Jerry Jones it too much. He needs to leave Loeffler alone and see how he develops the offense.
Beamer has been great for VT. Not just for our football program, but the University as well. However, his handling of Stinespring has been terrible IMO. Stiney was just out of his depth at OC.

[BG Hokie]

We don't have a good run blocking OL nor a good running back but you think we could run the I formation into success. It's an offensive scheme problem? To run smash mouth in college these days, you need supreme talent IMO. We don't have it. Our recruiting hot beds in VA lends us to being a spread, tempo team which is what I think Beamer missed the boat on with Stiney and now Loeffler. Loeffler basically is Ricky Bustle.

Ehh, Loeffler is just playing the cards he was dealt. You have to give the new staff some time to get the sort of players they want into their system. Hopefully, Beamer won’t Jerry Jones it too much. He needs to leave Loeffler alone and see how he develops the offense.
Beamer has been great for VT. Not just for our football program, but the University as well. However, his handling of Stinespring has been terrible IMO. Stiney was just out of his depth at OC.

Loeffler was an obvious upgrade to Stiney. We ran better designed passing plays from the outset. Running game just sucked all around but that's a talent issue at OL and RB, not a scheme issue. My only beef is that Loeffler is going after pro style quarterbacks. To me, that means a lot more Sean Glennons than Tyrod Taylors and even Bryan Randalls. I think VT should be a team that always goes after dual threat QBs. I think the move to pro style QBs is a risky one for our program due to a lack of OL in the state of VA.

[awesome guy]

We don't have a good run blocking OL nor a good running back but you think we could run the I formation into success. It's an offensive scheme problem? To run smash mouth in college these days, you need supreme talent IMO. We don't have it. Our recruiting hot beds in VA lends us to being a spread, tempo team which is what I think Beamer missed the boat on with Stiney and now Loeffler. Loeffler basically is Ricky Bustle.

Ehh, Loeffler is just playing the cards he was dealt. You have to give the new staff some time to get the sort of players they want into their system. Hopefully, Beamer won’t Jerry Jones it too much. He needs to leave Loeffler alone and see how he develops the offense.
Beamer has been great for VT. Not just for our football program, but the University as well. However, his handling of Stinespring has been terrible IMO. Stiney was just out of his depth at OC.

Loeffler was an obvious upgrade to Stiney. We ran better designed passing plays from the outset. Running game just sucked all around but that's a talent issue at OL and RB, not a scheme issue. My only beef is that Loeffler is going after pro style quarterbacks. To me, that means a lot more Sean Glennons than Tyrod Taylors and even Bryan Randalls. I think VT should be a team that always goes after dual threat QBs. I think the move to pro style QBs is a risky one for our program due to a lack of OL in the state of VA.

I think it's going to be more Logan Thomas/Cam Newton types. That's the model duel threat they're looking for, a big bruiser and not a tall delicate flower like Glennon.

[BG Hokie]

We don't have a good run blocking OL nor a good running back but you think we could run the I formation into success. It's an offensive scheme problem? To run smash mouth in college these days, you need supreme talent IMO. We don't have it. Our recruiting hot beds in VA lends us to being a spread, tempo team which is what I think Beamer missed the boat on with Stiney and now Loeffler. Loeffler basically is Ricky Bustle.

Ehh, Loeffler is just playing the cards he was dealt. You have to give the new staff some time to get the sort of players they want into their system. Hopefully, Beamer won’t Jerry Jones it too much. He needs to leave Loeffler alone and see how he develops the offense.
Beamer has been great for VT. Not just for our football program, but the University as well. However, his handling of Stinespring has been terrible IMO. Stiney was just out of his depth at OC.

Loeffler was an obvious upgrade to Stiney. We ran better designed passing plays from the outset. Running game just sucked all around but that's a talent issue at OL and RB, not a scheme issue. My only beef is that Loeffler is going after pro style quarterbacks. To me, that means a lot more Sean Glennons than Tyrod Taylors and even Bryan Randalls. I think VT should be a team that always goes after dual threat QBs. I think the move to pro style QBs is a risky one for our program due to a lack of OL in the state of VA.

I think it's going to be more Logan Thomas/Cam Newton types. That's the model duel threat they're looking for, a big bruiser and not a tall delicate flower like Glennon.

Glennon was durable, he was just slow. I'm not convinced the guys we are recruiting now can run anything like Logan Thomas. Hopefully I'm wrong.

[Homebrew]

We don't have a good run blocking OL nor a good running back but you think we could run the I formation into success. It's an offensive scheme problem? To run smash mouth in college these days, you need supreme talent IMO. We don't have it. Our recruiting hot beds in VA lends us to being a spread, tempo team which is what I think Beamer missed the boat on with Stiney and now Loeffler. Loeffler basically is Ricky Bustle.

Ehh, Loeffler is just playing the cards he was dealt. You have to give the new staff some time to get the sort of players they want into their system. Hopefully, Beamer won’t Jerry Jones it too much. He needs to leave Loeffler alone and see how he develops the offense.
Beamer has been great for VT. Not just for our football program, but the University as well. However, his handling of Stinespring has been terrible IMO. Stiney was just out of his depth at OC.

Loeffler was an obvious upgrade to Stiney. We ran better designed passing plays from the outset. Running game just sucked all around but that's a talent issue at OL and RB, not a scheme issue. My only beef is that Loeffler is going after pro style quarterbacks. To me, that means a lot more Sean Glennons than Tyrod Taylors and even Bryan Randalls. I think VT should be a team that always goes after dual threat QBs. I think the move to pro style QBs is a risky one for our program due to a lack of OL in the state of VA.

That is fixed by heading into PA and Ohio for Olinemen.

[Bay_area_Hokie]

2016 sounds about right IMHO. I do think Bud will get a shot at HC and he might surprise everyone. I think he knows what he doesn't know, and he might be a great boss for an OC.

I do think we have the worst talent right now in the modern era. Seriously, in the Sun Bowl, there were a couple times I thought our players on O looked size wise like the JV squad compared to UCLA players.

Question, why would Ohio and Pennsylvania have better OL recruits than Va? Do you think they have more people that size? I am curious, and just asking, as I had never thought of Va recruiting being an issue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[awesome guy]

2016 sounds about right IMHO. I do think Bud will get a shot at HC and he might surprise everyone. I think he knows what he doesn't know, and he might be a great boss for an OC.

I do think we have the worst talent right now in the modern era. Seriously, in the Sun Bowl, there were a couple times I thought our players on O looked size wise like the JV squad compared to UCLA players.

Question, why would Ohio and Pennsylvania have better OL recruits than Va? Do you think they have more people that size? I am curious, and just asking, as I had never thought of Va recruiting being an issue.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Just a bigger state and more German and Scandinavian genes than us slightly tall and stocky Scotts in the commonwealth.