A bye week review: Taking a look at the defense
I did a review of the offense so far this season yesterday. Today, I’ll take a look at the defense.
Feel free to agree or disagree with my selections. The comments section is open for it.
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.
Rankings:
** Rushing defense: 167.1 ypg (71st nationally, 8th ACC)
** Passing defense 203.4 ypg (32nd nationally, 3rd ACC)
** Total defense: 370.5 ypg (49th nationally, 5th ACC)
** Scoring defense: 24.0 ppg (48th nationally, 5th ACC)
High point: The defense hasn’t looked better than the final three-plus quarters of the Duke game. The Hokies stopped the run (Duke had 22 rushing yards), were aggressive (five sacks) and disruptive (four turnovers forced), just the kind of things you’d expect from a Bud Foster-coached defense. The Blue Devils scored on a long pass on their first drive, but the defense kept them out of the end zone the rest of the way, allowing for the biggest comeback in the Frank Beamer era.
Also considered: Run defense vs. Georgia Tech, first 3 quarters vs. Cincinnati, overall effort in Clemson game
Low point: It’s neck and neck between the Pittsburgh game and North Carolina, but I’ll pick the latter. The Hokies’ offense at least showed up in that contest, but the defense, which gave up 533 yards and 41 points (7 more came on a kick return), couldn’t hold its end of the bargain. What made that one worse was how it happened. The Tar Heels ran for 339 yards, getting 262 from Giovani Bernard. Those are stats you don’t see against Foster’s defense often, if ever. Missed tackles contributed to the issues. Overall, it was a very un-Hokie-like game on defense.
Also considered: Pittsburgh game, 4th quarter vs. Cincinnati, red zone defense vs. Clemson
Biggest surprise: In the spring, Kyshoen Jarrett was the cornerback-turned-safety that the coaches had the most concerns about. Eight games into the season, he’s been their most reliable defensive back. Jarrett, a sophomore, has 59 tackles and 4.5 tackles for a loss so far. He’s been more consistent at safety than Detrick Bonner and has taken command from a play-calling aspect on the back end. Against Clemson, he was practically playing a linebacker position and finished with nine tackles and a TFL. He’s just the kind of aggressive, run-supporting safety Tech likes.
Also considered: Jack Tyler, Antone Exum, Luther Maddy, Michael Cole
Biggest disappointment: It can’t be anything but the run defense. The Hokies had a great start, limiting Georgia Tech’s option offense to 192 yards, well below what the Yellow Jackets usually run for. But it’s been downhill from there. Pittsburgh gouged Tech for 254 rushing yards. North Carolina followed with 339 yards and four touchdowns. Even lesser teams like Austin Peay (159 yards) and Bowling Green (133) moved the ball against what was supposed to be a stout front seven for the Hokies. Seven ACC teams have been better against the run this year. That doesn’t happen often.
Also considered: Tackling, pass rush, Kyle Fuller, J.R. Collins
Defensive MVP: It’s close, but I’ll go with Tyler. Thrust into the starting lineup because of the injury to Tariq Edwards, he’s been a magnet to the ball. Tyler leads the team with 77 tackles, the third most in the ACC. he also is tied for a team-best 7.5 tackles for a loss with defensive end James Gayle. He has two sacks and seven quarterback hurries. He’s also improved his pass defense, considered the weak link in his game a year ago. Overall, he’s done everything Tech could have asked of him and more from the mike linebacker spot.
Also considered: Jarrett, Gayle, Bruce Taylor, Derrick Hopkins, Exum
Telling stat: The only time other than this season since 1994 that opponents have averaged more than 4 yards per rush was in 2010, when teams ran for 4.7 yards per carry against the Hokies. This year’s team is giving up 4.1 yards per rush.
Telling stat, Part II: Tech had 41 sacks last year. It has only 18 through eight games this year, putting it on pace for 25 in 13-game season.
Telling stat, Part III: The Hokies might be 32nd nationally in passing yards allowed, but they’re 80th in terms of pass efficiency defense (125.67). Teams might not throw for many yards on Tech, but they’ve been efficient at it when they do.
Outlook: It’s not that the defense has been bad. It’s been bad at times, but adequate most of the time. That’s just not what Hokies fans are used to. Couple that with an offense that has struggled to put things together with any kind of consistency, and Tech’s 4-4 record right now makes a whole lot more sense.
There have been bright spots for this group. Gayle (4 sacks, 7.5 TFL) is starting to live up to his All-ACC promise. Maddy, now that he’s healthy, has been unblockable in the pass rush the last two weeks. Tyler and Jarrett I’ve covered. Taylor, playing out of position, has turned in a good season. And Exum, despite a few forgettable moments from the Pittsburgh and Cincinnati games, has actually been the team’s most reliable cornerback.
It’s the whole that’s just not quite right. You heard Foster mention after the North Carolina game that the defense is designed to get a free hitter in a position to make a play and, more often than not, that player wasn’t getting the job done. That’s how the whole season feels (or at least did up through the first quarter of the Duke game).
The Duke and Clemson games showed signs that Foster’s crew is starting to put things together. Clemson’s 38 points notwithstanding, you can hardly blame all of that on the defense, not with the turnovers and short fields it had working against it. The pass rush is finally coming around. The missed tackles have been cut down. And the depth issues that were so severe early on, are becoming less troublesome (Tariq Edwards is getting closer to coming back at linebacker and Cole, now that he’s gotten some playing time, is starting to hold his own in the secondary).
This might not be the greatest defense Foster has coached (as some, myself included, said was a possibility before the season), but it’s certainly one that is capable of carrying this team if it plays like it did the last two weeks.
October 24, 2012 - 11:28 AM
I wholeheartedly agree with Tyler as the defensive MVP.
And Carry the team, it must.
No problem with choosing Tyler as defensive MVP, but Fuller and Maddy should at least be listed as considered. Our defense has fallen off substantially when one of them has had to leave the field or not been 100%.
Why Michael Cole? I appreciate his effort but he seems to be a liability at times. Again I appreciate his effort.
I tend to think the biggest thing this year is that it all went South at once. It feels like in the past, when we needed a game changing play, either special teams or defense got one. Not so the last couple years. 71st, 32nd and 49th is not what we expect. If we had a high powered offense, well, it would be ok. But just ok.
I feel like our offense starts from field position and always has. Coach trades for field position all the time. So many of the decisions they make over time are based on that premise. This year we aren’t getting that field position advantage consistently and it shows just how bad our offense really is.
The offense leading the ACC in most 3 and out possessions affects the D as well. Starting field position is important and the Hokies offensive struggles are making that a major issue. Also, VT’s D is designed to make a team 1 dimensional but when the offense can’t score to put a team behind, forcing them to throw, the opponents offense can choose to run or throw, making it tougher for the D to defend effectively.
Zman, I think it is because special team’s return average are less than average, particularly on punt returns.
Another factor this year is the direct relation between time of possession and defensive fatigue. In the past, Tech has always at the least had a strong, time consuming running attack that has allowed the defense to get off the field for a while and stay fresh. The running game is virtually non-existent this year and I think the effect on the defense shows. Particularly in the Clemson and UNC games. I realize that the bad calls by the refs killed potential game changing drives vs. Clemson, but it’s also clear that the defense was running on fumes late third quarter and fourth allowing the Tigers to pull away. Tech did have about a 7 minute TOP advantage in that game, but that is more due to the miscues that set up short fields for the Tigers than the Hokies actually holding the ball. That’s the one point I actually agree with Coach Beamer on in paring down the RB’s, find a workable, effective running back or two, stick with them, let them dictate the game or at least TOP and the positive effects trickle down to the defense. Certainly a step in the right direction, but again, should have been figured out about 7 games ago.
How can you have Exum as a surprise. He has been awful!!!!
Same with Cole, you can’t just look at the two picks he has this year.
#5 – Huge points just made, Zman. In years past, Bud’s suffocating defense would have hidden the weakness of the offense by continually giving them a short field. A really large component of Frank Beamer’s philosophy is based on taking advantage of field position, as well as momentum. That is why – more than anything else – Beamerball historically focused on blocking kicks/punts. Momentum change, huge advantage in field position. At least that was in the past, before evolution was required to stay current with the rest of college football.
To some extent Bud’s philosophy is also a high risk proposition, and perhaps that is not optimal for today’s college football. The weak link in Bud’s ‘chain’ on defense has always been giving up the long hitter. I know that there was a sense of urgency this summer regarding defense against ‘spread offenses’. That was due to the beatdowns from Clemson last year as well as Larry Fedora’s philosophy at UNC, which will keep moving up the ladder of ACC supremacy in the coming years.
So what are we facing? As Hokies? Our coaching staff, ALL of them need to put in some really hard work to keep up with the tide of college football. Inclusive ‘family’ atmospheres don’t get it done right now.
There are coaches that need to be replaced, without question. There are others who have proven adaptable, but they must accomplish that. That points to whether any of these guys will be held accountable by Frank Beamer. His history doesn’t prove reassuring in that department. Let’s also not pretend that this is just a one year occurrence. The recent recruiting performance will not help things, either.
The next few years will prove quite interesting…
I don’t think Exum has been awful. In fact, I think he’s been much better than Fuller at CB this year. People get hung up on the Pitt and Cincy games.
And for Cole to be on the field doing what he’s doing far exceeds any kind of expectations for him this year. Nobody even mentioned him as recently as this August. Now, he’s basically playing every snap. I’m not saying he’s an All-ACC player, but he’s exceeded expectations, that’s for sure.
Time of possession was one of Tech’s biggest strengths in year past. I don’t think the problem is the offense philosophy (ball control, chewing the clock), it’s the use of 4 tailbacks and rotating them in, throwing off whatever rhythm they have developed, and it doesn’t help when they keep running to the left where Wang is basically ineffective.
What does this have to do with the defense? Everything. In the past, when Tech put together a time-consuming offense drive, the defense are able to sit and rest before having to go back on the field. This season, Tech basically have had to play catch up, just to score points.
I felt, after the Cincinnati game, that the spread offense have become Foster’s Achilles heel because it basically forces him to be flexible and adaptable. It’s a pain in the butt, his words not mine, to defend. Nonetheless, he did prove that his defense was more than capable of slowing down Clemson, and unfortunately, the offense couldn’t get it done.
While we are on the subject of TOP, Georgia Tech was able to chew the clock, move the chain, with an outdated offense philosophy, but were done in by their ineptedness of the defense. So, if Virginia Tech decides to become a more run-heavy team, and I don’t see why they can’t, to manage the clock, I think it will go a long way in helping out the defense.
Well said Andy (in your article and your response). Cole was only supposed to play sparingly this season. A lot people on defense are playing new positions. The Hokie Nation is just not used to losing, and watching our defense get beat. Crucifying them in the media is not going to help.
With all the ranting and raving from the Hokie faithful?), it’s nice hear comments from and a knowledgeable, non-partisan viewpoint. Keep it up!
The rest of us need to remember that we’re still Hokies! We support our team in good times, and in bad.
Yesterday I said that with the offensive rating VT was at best 2-6 except for defense and scheduling. Today I look at the defensive ratings and think that at best VT should be 3-5 except for scheduling. But, I also believe the defensive rating are as low as they are partially due to the offense not being able to control the ball. So I’m back to 4-4 only because of defenses and scheduling. The rest of the year will be telling. Two wins to get bowl qualified is a push and then it’ll be the Peanut Bowl in Smithfield.
Supporting the team does NOT mean blind acceptance of everything that happens being wonderful when it is obviously not. Critical analysis can accomplish change when necessary. Meek acceptance of spoonfed cliched denials of anything negative accomplishes nothing.
I wish these “bedwetting” _please do not say anything negative or I will cry_ would find something constructive to write!! Tell how to fix one or more of the serious/permenent problems especially with coaching personnel and stop with the voodoo of saying “I think I can” three times while clicking my ESC key. Show that you know something about the GAME .
I wouldn’t be so certain that all the chirping in the past few years didn’t lead Beamer to make changes that have resulted in unintended consequences. We now have an unrecognizable offensive philosophy instead of the patented line up and run the ball down their throats for 350 yards per game and beat the defense into submission. Mix in the pass just enough to keep ‘em honest. When the d creeps up, throw over the top. That was pretty much our offense for many successful years. I’m fine with a 60-40 run-pass ratio as it helps keep the defense fresh. I agree that running by committee this year has hurt that aspect of the game. Two backs, at most, need to split the time and be on the field for enough consecutive snaps to get a sense of the defense. But losing Evans, Williams and Wilson and other key players before their time has been the biggest butt-kicker to this team. Planned and executed recruiting can’t make up for all the early departures.
By the way, it seems like we are not getting the sideline support from past players like we used to. Other than Bruce Smith, I haven’t heard much this season about the recent greats coming back to support the team. Please correct me if I’m wrong because I certainly hope I am.
I do have to correct myself on one thing in my previous post – our rushing offense hasn’t been anywhere near as strong as I intimated in a long time. You probably have to go back to the days of Jones/Suggs to even get close. BUT… my point still stands that we used to be a stronger ball control offense. We see what all these spread and pistol formations lead to – a ton of points allowed and the necessity to score on almost every possession.
Andy, if you could, go back and see how this defense has done against the top ranked teams. As usual in the ACC they have done well, but out of conference, bowl games not so much. When looking at change as most folks seem to want, it would be good to lay out the biggest games tech has played in. The one’s that are nationally televised. Also against top ranked QB’s.
DnF, the problem is that we didn’t arrive here in one giant leap. We have moved closer esach year that Stinespring has been in charge – which is eleven years now – more than a DECADE of ill conceived attempts. Frank beamer has NEVER defended anyone – except Marcus Vick – more emotionally than he has Stinespring. He absolutely refuses to even discuss the possibility that the offense might be misguided. Absolutely refuses.
Frank Beamer has never in his entire coaching career given any indication that he likes to makes substantive changes for betterment. He only makes those changes when faced with his own career survival. And that is NOT him deciding it, that is him being forced to do so or be fired.
Anybody who thinks Frank is changing anything is delusional. Look at his rationalization of the season thus far, and our loss to Clemson. His words, not mine – ‘We were only 4/5/6 plays from winning the ballgame…’
He refuses to even admit publicly that anything is wrong! His son, Shane? Tweeted this week that – emphasis here is mine but Shane’s words are exact – ‘ALL our preseason goals are still attainable…’ Exactly what would those goals be, since we’re sitting at 4-4, 2-2 in conference?
The level of denial is off the charts. Empty trophy case, indeed…
For a lot of us who thought the 10 win seasons meant we were on the verge of becoming a “top tier” program this year is especially difficult. In my heart of hearts I knew that probably wasn’t the case because every time we had the opportunity for a big time win against a top team we lost. We were so close a number of times (USC, Boise St., Bama) but we never came away with the “W”. Yet I’d approach each new year with the optimism that a lot of us have and think this is the year we put it all together. Now it seems like the previous success we had and the solid program we thought we were building was all a mirage.
All of this rating the O and the D now seems a little silly (no offense, Andy, you are doing a terrific job) because we were playing a weak schedule to begin with and the numbers we were putting up didn’t happen against the better teams in CFB. The national pundits knew that, but us Hokie fans had a different view of our team because that’s what us fans do. It’s almost as if we long for the good old days and our 10 win seasons even though they didn’t further our level of play or culminate in our program going to the next level.
I guess these blogs make us feel better now and no one on this site is abandoning the Hokies, at least not yet. It’s how we respond to this year that matters. We knew we had some glaring issues- it’s time to see what the people who are in a position to fix them do.
Andy, thank you for your work. Whether the Hokies are Good or bad love your columns and interesting perspective.
Along with many others, I have been very critical of the lack of, and unwillingness of Frank to change with the times and “update” his staff. This has been coming for years. What did not occur to me is that one of the reasons there has been no turnover in the staff is that NONE of them have been offered other jobs except for Bud! Think about a program as successfull as Techs in the last decade and NOBODY has left for a promotion or better job?? Ricky Bustle and Whammy Ward are the only ones I can think of and that both were years ago.What does that tell you Andy?? Anybody else??
#19 Eagle get lost. Why would someone who is not a VT fan, watch the games then come on to their blog and dis the teams? Please find a hobby. It must be incredibly boring to be you…
VT has never been considered to be a top tier program because they can never beat top ranked teams and their major bowl games are major debacles. Beamer could finish with 5,000 wins but until he beats some really good teams, it doesn’t really register. One of their goals is still very much attainable in winning the Coastal and maybe the ACC championship. That is not out of reason. The ACC is that screwed up my friend, anything can and probably will happen this year. VT could beat FSU and still lose to BC and UVA.
Anyone doubting Bud’s prowess as DC please check this out. Since ’99, his D has never ranked above #52. His D has finished #1 in the ACC 3 times and once in the BE. Nationally it has been ranked #1 twice and within the top 10 eight times. During those year his unit averaged being the 17th highest ranked D. Take away two years, ’03 and ’10, they averaged #10. In the ACC his D averaged being ranked 2.4.
Consider his counterpart Bryan Stinespring. During his tenure since ’02, the O has never finished better nationally than 35th and has averaged being ranked #65. From ’06 to ’08 his unit finished being ranked 99, 100 and 103.Currently they are ranked #66. In the ACC his unit has ranked an average of 6.25. It has never finished better than #3 in conference. Currently it is ranked #9 in the ACC.
I am fully aware that Beamer’s scheme includes a strong, dynamic D and special teams in concert with a ball control O which minimizes mistakes, chews up the clock and scores enough to win and thus perhaps, a straight statistical comparison could be misleading. But why should it? All the numbers above are total yards so I am left to wonder why the O should be expected to be less “productive”, i.e., successful, than the D. The disparity between these units is profound, obvious and frustrating. Given that VT has dominated the ACC since joining, it is apparent the D, and at times special teams, have been the prime contributors. We all know there have been down years in terms of personnel for both units, but it seems the D under Foster manages to come through respectfully in those lean years. Not so for the O under Stinespring; they are flat out awful in the lean years. I don’t believe that stats lie, they sometimes don’t tell the whole truth. In this case I think they do. They say a change is needed.
Rich, don’t know where you got the “fact” that VT is last in the ACC in 3 & outs since the NCAA does not keep that stat but on 3rd down conversions we are better than Duke, Md, BC and Wake in the ACC and better than #2 Fla and #6 LSU.
RE: post #21 Techmen – Your comment: “All of this rating the O and the D now seems a little silly because we were playing a weak schedule to begin with and the numbers we were putting up didn’t happen against the better teams in CFB.”
As a response to a mailbag reader s few years ago, I did some research when this same point was attempted to be made. It is a snapshot of a single season, but these were the facts. In 2009, the Hokies’ running game produced a second straight ACC record for rushing yards by a freshman as Ryan Williams amassed 1,655 yards and 21 TDs. Those totals included 433 yards and four TDs against run defenses which ranked second (Alabama), eighth (Nebraska), 10th (North Carolina) and 14th (Boston College). He began his career with 71 yards rushing, 42 yards receiving and two rushing TDs versus Alabama.
Williams had 107 yards and one TD against Nebraska. In 13 games, he had 10 games over 100 yards and five games over 150 yards.
By comparison, Mark Ingram, the Heisman Trophy winner, had five games under 100 yards, including 99 yards and zero TDs versus Tennessee in a 12-10 victory that required a blocked field goal to preserve the win. Williams had 117 yards and two TDs against that same Tennessee team in a 37-14 win.
Tech had 64 yards versus Alabama, but Texas only had 81, Florida 88, LSU 95, Tennessee 76, South Carolina 64, Mississippi 72 and Arkansas 63.
Yes, Tech had 86 yards versus Nebraska, but Texas had 18, Arizona 63 and Oklahoma 80.
Tech had 95 yards against North Carolina, but seven other teams had the same or less against the Tar Heels, and one other team managed just two more yards than the Hokies.
Virginia Tech’s team rushing total of 235 against Boston College was the most against the nation’s 14th-ranked run defense by 76 yards.
Against the nation’s 27th-ranked run defense of East Carolina that season, the Hokies had 242 yards rushing for the second-highest total against the Pirates.
Against the 31st-ranked rushing defense of Miami, the Hokies had 272 yards for the highest total against the ‘Canes by 119 yards.
As far as our own defense goes, there have been issues in some big games like Stanford where our doors were blown off in the second half, but generally speaking the defense is what kept us in games – most notably Alabama (eventual nat’l champs) where they had to keep kicking field goals early as the “D” kept us within earshot. Or USC where the Reggie Bush era-Trojans (eventual nat’l champs) didn’t pull away until we were rooked on a bogus offensive pass interference call against Jeff King.
I am as guilty as others, at times, of being overly critical because this is the ONE team I truly watch every second of. Ardent fans of every team are probably guilty of putting everything under a microscope.
I’m not dissing everything you said, or even railing against some of the other criticisms. There ARE due criticisms, but then there are those which, under further examination, just aren’t true.
Offense play calling in the Clemson game was too predictable. Every time we needed a couple of yards it was a dive from Logan over left tackle. Guess what everyone knows that including Clemson and they were waiting for it every time. Fake it a few times, roll out, seal the end, and a pass or run might get more consistent results. How about running right a few times too with Logan leading the charge or use those good tight ends across the middle for high percentage passes. Still love the team, Go Hokies.
How much does it really matter whether we have a fairly decent offensive showing for the year like the past couple years (with Tyrod bailing us out consistently the year before last), or horrid and dismal showings like years past? We all know, when we play a big time game or a bowl game against a top tier team, the truth will always come out. There is a reason 90% of people can see the difference in the offensive and defensive aptitudes as separate units. Stats will never matter when logic clearly gains favor from the obvious problems with situational playcalling, shoddy decision-making, horrid zone blocking schemes, predictability, nepotism, lack of accountability, lack of ability to make adjustments with and consistency and embarrassingly being called out publicly by analysts, commmentators and sports journalists nationwide, over and over for the better part of a decade. There isn’t a “problem” with defense. The defense has issues on and off, adjustments are made for the most part, sometimes there are mistakes, but the overall body of work is outstanding. Can you say this about the offense? My mom, God bless her, as friends with Beamer from a business persective and I love Coach Beamer. However, the most frustrating thing to me personally are his public statements which very much remind me of a modern day political speech, refusing to admit or cover the real issues.
*was friends with, as she is deceased now
Dave in Fla, just looking at rushing numbers against our opponents in 2009 isn’t much of an evaluation to say that my statement that we were playing weak teams isn’t true.
Let’s look at the previous 5 years-2007 thru 2011:
We played a total of 64 regular season and ACC Championship games during these 5 years. Our record was 51-13.
We played 20 ranked teams (included in these 64 games) with a 12-8 record or a winning percentage of 60%.
We had a 39-5 record against the remaining 44 unranked teams or a winning percentage of 89%.
In addition, we also played 5 bowl games with a 2-3 record or a winning Percentage of 40%.
The 20 ranked teams constitutes 31% of our 64 games. The other 44 games with unranked teams, where we had an 89% winning percentage, constitute 69% of our games.
I stand by my original statement.
Techerman – Win percentage had nothing to do with your original post that I debunked ($21) about rating the O and D against a weak schedule and claiming we did poorly in those departments vs. good teams. Obviously, I won the counter-argument with post #27. No one can disagree with your follow-up post (#31). But you can’t switch the argument and then claim you won the unrelated one.
Techerman – BTW, I had nothing against most of your comment in either post – was just nitpicking the one fundamental flaw – that’s all.
Techerman, – After doing 5 seconds of research, I was apparently too easy on you about your post #31. To preface, it doesn’t paint Virginia Tech in a bad light that our win pct. is lesser vs. ranked teams than unranked – that’s just the natural order of things – better teams are tougher to beat. To be 12-8 (60%) versus 20 ranked teams is not a bad thing. According to this site , a 60% win percentage vs. ranked teams would make us number one all-time if we continuously performed that well. As it stands, we’re No. 22 in history and we know which coach we can attribute most of that to.
DIF- my contention is that our winning, which can be measured by our winning percentage, has historically come against weak teams. I am not changing my thesis (which you apparently don’t understand), just trying to clarify it for you.
BTW, you do realize the “debunking” that you believe you have done is supported by statistically insignificant information. Your statement that “it is a snapshot of a single season” validates that charge, whether you realize it or not.
Our overall winning percentage over the past 5years has been greatly bolstered by our 39-5 record against unranked (weak) teams.
You’re trying too hard, my Fla man!
RE: #35
I understand your entire argument. You have brought us the earth-shattering revelations that our record is bolstered by great success versus unranked teams, and our defense puts up better stats against weak teams than strong teams. DUH!
What I have provided is statistical proof that we do better than most teams against strong opponents and that our record vs. ranked teams over the last 5 years would be a high enough winning percentage to be the best in history over ALL teams if we always prevailed in 60% of such games.
But I will bow to your superior ability to spout mundane opinions and irrationally stick to them.