Join the conversation [ADD A COMMENT]

View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem

1. other Tony | January 11, 2012 at 12:20 pm

   Skeaking of NO running attack, I see that new Arkansas State coach Gus Malzahn has hired JB Grimes as offensive line coach ( formerly at VT when we actually had a line that could block ) and he said ” top offensive line coach in America ” and he was happy to get him. Are you paying attention Beamer ?????????????
2. abdnva | January 11, 2012 at 12:49 pm

   You know, it’s not like VT football is played within a vacuum. There are lots of teams that understand how to run balanced offenses that are not ‘go for broke’ in terms of their risk level.

   I saw a supposedly knowledgeable person assess VT’s decision to stop throwing the ball in the second half of the Sugar Bowl by this excuse – ‘Marcus Davis was not playing well, and that left VaTech with only two good WR’s to catch the ball.’ Two good receivers? You mean the two statistically best receivers in the history of VT football? Those guys were the ‘only’ receiving options, thus Beamer decided to ignore the passing game? How many receivers do you need before you decide it is ‘safe’ to throw to the end zone?

   Hey, welcome to the 1960′s… heyday of Jerry Claiborne, Frank’s idol.
3. Tim | January 11, 2012 at 1:34 pm

   I’m a long-time Hokie fan but it’s gotten so old to watch Tech rise so high in the polls and then fall on their face every time against a non-ACC opponent. And this year they couldn’t beat the only highly ranked ACC opponent. They’ve become an embarrassment nationally in big games. The talent level is there but the coaching isn’t. I hate to say that about Beamer who has risen us up but can’t get us to the next level of just winning a big-time game. We had a record setting running back and a near record setting quarterback and still end the season with 2 straight losses. Very frustrating.
4. Bert Hubbard | January 11, 2012 at 1:49 pm

   Two straight runs in OT (outside the red zone) were what disturbed me. I was fine with the 1st down run, but the 2nd down run disgusted me!
5. #1 Tiger | January 11, 2012 at 1:52 pm

   Andy, all this says is that you better have the horses up front when you get in the red zone. There is no doubt in my mind that those kids gave everything they had in trying to get a push in the line. All you ever look for is about a yard movement to gain yards. This has shown
   up in all the games that they played when the opponent was equal or better. Just could not equal out in strenght and size in most cases. There is a smaller area to deal with the closer you get to the goal line and yes most coaches do get somewhat conseravtive with play calling in the red zone. The worst thing that can happen is to come away with nothing.
   Look forward to the experts saying that I don’t know what I am talking about. Been there, seen that. You got to be nasty in the trinches.
6. Mark | January 11, 2012 at 2:17 pm

   The real killer in the Sugar Bowl was the false start on 3rd and 2 with 40 secs or so left and VT moving the ball very well. Logan Thomas 2 yd TD push and game over. Instead, it was a Greg Nosal false start that left us 3rd and 7 instead… no TD… FG… OT loss.

   I would LOVE to see how many false starts and delay of games VT has had over the last 10 years or so. In addition, I would love to see how many of those occur at home in Lane. I have NEVER seen so many delay of game penalties as VT gets at home when it is basically silent while they have the ball. Its like there is no decision whatsoever to get a play in until there are about 9 seconds on the play clock.
7. alwaysOandM | January 11, 2012 at 2:37 pm

   It looks like it might be catch22 situation. Not an overpowering Oline and no back that can hit a seam with enough power to make it a hole. Although. He is big and powerful a QB sneak is not generating enough of a collision behind him to push the pile. I would have liked to seen more of a speed pitch to Wilson to try to make the corner and outrun pursuit to corner. That might cause defenses to not clog middle knowing bread and butter short yardage plays is QB sneak. It really got that you could not call it a sneak when everyone knows it is coming. Bigger backs on the way will help. Go hokies
8. Tom L | January 11, 2012 at 2:53 pm

   It’s not a red zone problem. Coale beats his coverage by 5 steps early in the game, Thomas missed him and we never see the pass again. Mich. DB’s could not match up with our receivers ans we never exploited it. Bubble screens, short out patterns, nothing deep. How many 3rd and long did we execute, plenty. It’s the only time we threw downfield. Mich. throws up 2 prayers and the receivers make a play. The only time we gave ours the opportunity to make a play was Coales catch in OT. No fakes to Wilson and bootleg by Thomas on goal line. No screen passes to Wilson. No release of Wilson through the line of scrimmage for a pass beyond the line of scrimmage. You look at Mich. defense and you knew that running the ball was going to be a no go. It was a 9 man front and we didn’t go deep up the middle once. Check WVU’s scoring drive times and tell me we don’t need a change at OC. We’re a very vanilla,predictable,conservative offense. Works well in a weak ACC but against strong OOC opponents not creative enough to generate wins.
9. VTHokieTom | January 11, 2012 at 3:14 pm

   No, the thing that cost us was the self-inflicted special team errors. Take away the roughing the kicker and the fake punt and the Hokies win. The Tech defense was dominant, the offense was fair, and as usual in big games, except for the field goal unit, the special teams were horrid.

   Good luck on selling any bowl tickets next year.
10. Bob H | January 11, 2012 at 3:55 pm

    Andy,

    No offense (or pun) intended here but comparing VT’s Red Zone offense in 2012 to VT’s Red Zone offense for the previous 5 years proves nothing because VT has been anemic in the red zone for years (google JMU 21, VT 16-VT never punted ONE TIME in that game-and still lost it).

    It is kind of like comparing the 2 halves of the Titanic that are on the bottom of the ocean. Yep, one is bigger than the other but they are both halves of a sunken ship…….
11. Eagle | January 11, 2012 at 3:56 pm

    Finally, we need to go watch Austin Peay!!!! This should make everyone forget the Sweet and Low Bowl.
12. Say What? | January 11, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    I agree with HokieTom to a point–the special teams are very rarely special these days, especially in big games. However, coming away with just 6 points on 3 Red Zone trips in the first half really hurt. Wilson’s -22 yard run on the first drive pretty well killed that one, and the false start ruined the last drive in regulation, but otherwise the play calling stunk. It’s like we were trying to somehow fool Michigan by running into the (only) strength of their defense.
13. Sloth | January 11, 2012 at 4:38 pm

    Agree with several things Tom L wrote – I can’t believe with the way that defenses sell out to stop our running in the red zone that we don’t have more bootlegs for Thomas – get him outside the pocket with the option to throw or run. Of course we never did that with Tyrod either, and he was much more mobile. Also agree that we needed to look for Wilson down the field more – he caught several long wheel routes last year but we never seemed to look for it this year. His TD catch against FSU in the ACC-CG last year was a textbook way to beat a blitz.
14. Joe Hokie | January 11, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    I’m still bothered by these two plays:
    M7, 3rd and 4: Thomas 3 run
    M4, 4th and 1: Thomas no gain
    There was no replay during the game, but I think had there been, it would have shown that VT was screwed on either one by a bad spot by the ref. There is no way you can convince me that after either of those runs, especially the first one, that the ball should have been moved back to where it was spotted. If it was based on where the ball was, then Thomas was carrying the ball between his knees! If the ball were placed just on Thomas diving forward, which he does well on sneaks, then there should have been no question that he made it on 4th down. But it was evident all through the game that VT wasn’t getting the calls, so this is a moot point.

    But this is one of the few plays that was a good call. Among the many head-scratchers were the two running plays as time was running out at the end of the fourth quarter. All they did was eat up time but go nowhere — time that could have been used with pass plays that moved the ball down the field for an eventual game-winning touchdown. Instead, the coaches played conservative, had a case of bad clock management (Boise State all over again) and had to go for the tie.
15. Trevor | January 11, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    One problem with the red zone is the goal line package. They don’t employ any option plays, pitches, or heck, a Wildcat play. I have to agree that the false start on 3rd and 2 killed the drive, but if you go back further, I think it was in the 2nd quarter and we were on Michigan’s 2-yard line with 4th and 2 to go. Michigan were scrambling to get back in position, and Thomas failed to take advantage of that.

    The other thing that bothered me was how far the ball was away from Coale when he made the leaping grab for it in OT. I was thinking if Thomas had it just where Coale would snag it, game was over.

    Unfortunately, there’s no time machine to go back and try a different strategy. It was a disappointing outcome.
16. scott whitaker | January 11, 2012 at 5:42 pm

    It seemed to me the O totally changed gears as it neared the end zone and your stats bear that out. It was as if they put on the brakes. We all know it is harder to throw in the red zone, but as abd… points out, VT did have a couple of decent (to say the least) receivers and Coale’s TD in OT shows what can be done. The play calling down there was just ridiculous. LT is a wonderful passer, and Boykin and Coale were the best VT has ever had. Throw in a wide body like Drager and you have a ton of capability to score through the air. Beamer shot himself and the team in the foot with his philosophy of avoiding the INT. If it had not been for the fact they were starting their #3 place kicker, it almost seemed like he was saying “a FG would be fine if we can’t pound it in.” Someone please tell me that is not true…
17. Mark r | January 11, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    After having the enjoyment of watching the spectacular ineptitude of coaching unfold, from my 160.00 seat in the Superdome, I was unable to witness the classic look of disbelief on Beamer ‘s face. But sure as the sun rise, Beamer never failed to disappoint. The look of confused despair was on full parade january 3rd, and has remained frequent since at least 2005 in my view. Anyone that remembers the look of frank Beamer during the Kansas debacle knows “the look”.
    It’s pathetic to have a fan base, a stadium , willing donors and the good relationships with several bowl leaders and be this bad when it matters most. Never in my life have I seen a coaching staff so committed to failure as this one is, as we have no example of the alternative.
18. Peter777 | January 11, 2012 at 10:26 pm

    VT is just bad in the Red Zone. My observation is that for years, VT has often got to the RZ by a good mix of running and passing, and then cramps into run only with often obvious play selection. No one can explain the play calling that caused the VT loss to Michigan- not even Michigan. But, they’ll take it and move on. The VT offense coaching staff is just mediocre. But, maybe that is true of much of the ACC. How else can one explain the bad performance of the teams and the high number of placements of players into the NFL, which seems like a contradiction? Frank Beamer needs to shake up the Offense staff and hire a couple of replacements starting with the OC.
19. Robert | January 11, 2012 at 10:42 pm

    If a new coach came into VT, the first 2 things he would do are: 1) try to retain Bud Foster, 2) Fire Stinespring. How many teams have tried to lure Foster away from VT? Now on the other hand how many D-I teams would hire Stinespring if he were let go by VT? My guess is he would have to go pretty far down the food chain to find a job. Every offensive coach should be required to interview for their own job this offseason.
20. mark r | January 11, 2012 at 11:38 pm

    Robert, Answer to to #1, Get rid of Bryan Stinespring before Foster kills him. #2. William Byrd to hire Bryan Stinespring.They need help on offense.
    I actually have a 1992 Virginia Tech program vs Miami where Byran Stinespring is listed as THE TEAM’S PHOTOGRAPHER!!! What a country!
    We were better under the tutilage of Ricky Bustle..dude is out of a job isnt he? Could we be any worse under the Hellen Keller quadruplets of Beamer, O’cain, Stiney, and Curt Newsome?
    And all this time I blames Ernest Wilford for helping us lose that game vs Miami( Not Really… Grant Noel should’ve never been allowed in a uniform let alone start for St. Francis of Fancy Gap’s hokie’s, Thx, abdnva)
    Lastly, lets hook up a truth detector to Bud Foster.. I wonder what he really thinks about Beamer’s offense? Outside of a well compensated salary package, I really wonder if Foster would even be here at all.
21. Frank | January 12, 2012 at 7:17 am

    All 20 comments are true, and that is the sad shape of the Virginia Tech football program.
    But as always, Let’s go Hokies !!!
22. Greg Bowyer | January 12, 2012 at 7:59 am

    To answer mark r’s question about what Foster really thinks of the offense. He was asked last year what kind of offense he would run if he was hired as a head coach. His answer — “I like what Oregon does.” Enough said!
23. Uptheriver | January 12, 2012 at 8:49 am

    No one wants Foster. He’s only a legend in Blacksburg and in his own mind.
24. Bob | January 12, 2012 at 8:49 am

    The best way to learn is to look at those teams most effective inside the twenty like Oregon. Oregon too had an All-American running back, but they got it done, and without defensive help. They used a hurry up offense. They keep defenses on their heels. They do not wait for the fourth quarter to get dominate players in the game. Go with the guys who have done lifting during the season. It is a lot more difficult to defend Boykin, Thomas and Coale, than to have 7 guys in the box focused upon Wilson. An explosive passing game and a QB makes a running back like Wilson more effective. I vote with everyone else. VT is too predictable in the first three quarters. It is the same every year. We were clearly the best team on the field. We do not put them away early. Not taking the ball first speaks volumes to our strategy. PUT teams away early. Lastly, strip the and punch the football. I think we do a good job.
25. SPigninelli | January 12, 2012 at 9:18 am

    Idiots. Who do you think taught Foster the defense?? It is Frank Beamer’s defense. Who do you know that has offered Foster a job?
    If you are worried about the money you spend on VT football, stop spending it. Did somebody make you spend that money. Free up those seats so somebody who appreciates 10 and 11 win seasons can buy them.
    As far as salary goes, if you read the paper, Frank Beamer is one of the lowest paid in the ACC.
    None of you will ever be satisfied. You can not be reasoned with because you don’t want to hear reason. It messes up your immature brains.
26. Guest | January 12, 2012 at 10:37 am

    Um, not sure what you’re smokin’ when you say Beamer is one of the lowest paid coaches in the ACC. He is the highest paid coach in the ACC. Period. Try $2.2 million plus per year according to the USA Coaches Datase released in Nov., 2011. Mike London, UVA, makes $1.8 million.
27. Greg Bowyer | January 12, 2012 at 10:42 am

    Anyone who thinks Bud Foster isn’t one of the most respected defensive coordinators in the country should not be allowed to comment on college football. Both Georgia and South Carolina were willing and able to offer him the DC job at those SEC schools. But he withdrew his name from consideration when VT ponied up the 5 year annuity. Florida and Florida State also have shown serious interest in Foster taking over as DC over the past few years. He should have left for the SEC and still could if he wanted to. Follow me on twitter @gtbowyer
28. Rick H. | January 12, 2012 at 11:05 am

    The play calling didn’t hurt Tech as much as two plays did in the first half. I hate to pull the old Stinespring “lack of execution” card out of the deck, but Wilson’s -22 yard brain fart, and the inability to get 1 yard on 4th and 1 from the 4, in the 2nd quarter are what hurt Tech the most.

    Those were plays that kept Tech from getting an additional 4 points and any points at all. If Tech scores a TD on Michigan early, they bury them, because it was clear a defensive game plan was in place to stop Robinson from running wild, and get enough ahead to make him pass and it gets really easy. I’m not even sure there was a game plan to stop him, other than putting 11 guys on the field faster than he sees in the Big 10.
29. FIZ | January 12, 2012 at 11:13 am

    You cannot spell “Idiot” without “I” Maybe we should be happy with 10 or 11 wins per season. maybe we should be happy bowl games. But as Americans we are not. SPigninelli wants us to free up tickets so those who like the status quo have to opportunity to attend games and cheer for their “fella’s” Well let me say to you that. Your views are very European (not that there’s anything wrong with that) but to be complacent is death to anything that lives. We cannot be just happy with winning seasons because we have been lead to believe there is so much more out there. Why can’t we play with the big boys. Spigninelli, you need to find yourself a nice Division III school to go and tailgate and root for because if you are not moving forward you are moving backward and because of that we are required to have high expectations of our teams. Those that complain bleed Chicago maroon and orange (I bet you didn’t know it was Chicago Maroon did ya)
30. CLTHokie | January 12, 2012 at 11:28 am

    Bottom line is this:

    The overall coaching on this team is by far the biggest reason the program is stagnant and a failure in these big boy games. Just look at the past 5 or 6 years of big out of conference games/bowl games. The records and outcomes speak for themselves. Players come and go but the results are always the same. The problem I have with all of these performances is not necessarily the loses but how we lose. We either barely show up and get blown out or play close but find multiple ways to lose by shooting ourselves in the foot. I watch these games and it looks as if Beamer always plays not to lose. What stings the most is we have the players good enough to win these games, especially in a one game setting with extra time to prepare.
    On top of coaching, the O-line play needs to improve dramatically before this program even thinks about taking it to the next level. For years now the o-line has been mediocre at best. This also comes down to coaching. Beamer can’t have a power run first system like he wants to run with these o-line’s he puts on the field. This is a huge part of the problem. Either recruit bigger and more physical linemen or change the philosophy to more of a spread/fast paced offese which is more suitable to the linemen who are in the program. Year after year these guys get pushed around too often in these big games.
    Lastly, can we please stop hanging our hats on ACC championships as our saving grace? I’m glad we’ve been able to be head of the league but at the same time it’s like being the tallest midget! At some point we need to get beyond just winning the conference, especially the ACC.
31. Uptheriver | January 12, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    Didn’t say he wasn’t respected. Just said he’s only a legend in Blacksburg and in his own mind. All I see is Blame at Stinespring, Blame at Beamer, Blame at the AD, but never ever ever ever at Foster. Interesting.
32. Blue John | January 12, 2012 at 1:09 pm

    Ask yourself, how would my life be different if Tech won the Sugar Bowl? Other than the fools who bet on college sports the difference is none. It’s a game, neither the coaches nor the players are perfect. One could blame the regions parents for not producing blue chip players that want to stay closer to home.
    How many schools would love to have Tech’s “problem”?
33. Blue John | January 12, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    For those that think Tech is an embarrassment, check out #6 from this national website.

    http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefootball/lists/ranking-2011-2012-college-football-bowl-games-011012#photo-title=Allstate%20Sugar%20Bowl&photo=30548280
34. Mark r | January 12, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    During the early 70′s and 80′s, losing to elite teams like Miami, Alabama, and Nebraska were excused because Virginia Tech wasn’t on that level. Whats changed since Mr. Beamer’s proclamation of Delivering a national championship to Blacksburg? Nothing. We are actually less respected now than we were in 1996 when we won the first of several moral victories under the hostile takeover of the Beamer regime. Less respected you say? I say yes.
    Our stock in the college football universe has taken a series of round house haymakers from not just the teams we’ve played, not just the absolute pathetic coaching decisions, but from the very area that helped create this mirage of a championship caliber team– the media, specifically ESPN.
    ESPN covered Virginia Tech’s reputation as if we had pics of the CEO in compromising positions with a teenage hooker. But no more. The sugar bowl selection not only exposed Virginia Tech’s poor out of conference scheduling, it also drove another death nail into the pitiful and no competitive ACC. What’s worse is the lie that Beamerball exists was finally laid to rest on yet another big stage where the patriarch of special teams, Mr. St. Francis of Fancy Gap was exposed as an out and out fraud as a big time coach.
    Virginia Tech deserves more, much more than the play it safe and don’t make waves regime of Beamer and his cronies. It is indeed time to risk what we don’t know against we do already do about this program. It’s time for Mr. Beamer to step aside and give the donors ,contributors and just plain old fans what he always promised– a full trophy case with a national title.
35. CLTHokie | January 12, 2012 at 2:28 pm

    Blue John,
    People don’t think they are an embarassment, that is not what the majority are talking about. But most Tech fans (you may not be one of them) are tired of watching Tech year after year have endless opportunities to prove themselves and grow as a program only to end in disappointment. I think Tech fans are very appreciative, patient and knowledgable. But fans and supporters have every right as it stands today to expect to win some of these games and be competetive in all of them. Fans have every right to expect Tech to show up ready to play and for Beamer to do everything in his power to put his players and coaches in the best position possible to win these spotlight games. You can’t have it both ways: Coach Beamer talking about being a top level program and bringing in a national title, then be shocked when people lose their patience over the years when those expectations continuously aren’t met. What’s it going to be?? When you have coaches getting paid a ton of money and a program generating a ton of money people expect more. That’s the world of college football today.
36. Mark r | January 12, 2012 at 7:54 pm

    Can someone tell me what elite college program that builds a room to hold the “eventual” national championship trophy before they win it?
37. pete | January 12, 2012 at 9:35 pm

    Hey Mack r-
    C’ville is just right down the road. Why don’t you take your support there? Hey?? Good idea!! Pete
38. Mark r | January 13, 2012 at 12:05 pm

    Gotta love fans like justafan, always looking for the silver lining in the tsunami storm of ineptness.
    What if Danny Coale gained the yard on the fake punt? We’d still get shredded by Stanford! What if David Wilson didn’t run for a 20 yd loss inside the 5 yard line? We’d still get blown out by LSU. What if Ernest wilford caught the 2 pt conversion? Grant Noel would’ve thrown another interception.
    These people that support Frank Beamer are gluttons for punishment. The really smart people are finally realizing that it’s less about the players but the coaching staff that is holding back the progress of the Hokies football program. The Beamer-bots tireless support for failure could only be explained by a psyciatric evaluation.
    To justafan’s comment, it doesn’t matter the situation. Frank Beamer’s record is in big games vs top opponents is a failure and an embarrassment to any school that calls themself an elite program. Our hokies aren’t elite, we pretend to be elite when we beat James Madison ,…ooops did I say that? I mean Arkansas state. The dream ends when we play the real powers in the game.