Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 42
  1. #11
    fathersonhokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 27, 2012
    Location
    Sunnyvale
    Posts
    4,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Hokie CPA View Post
    It really is this simple... Curt Newsome left the OL cabinet pretty dadgum bare. And I have every confidence in thinking the reason Coach Grimes has been able to sign so many of his OL targets is he already knows these guys can come in and make an immediate difference, which is quite rare for offensive line players. If Grimey is willing to play freshmen in lieu of giving them a redshirt year, then that ought to tell you just how depleted our OL talent is. Without talent on the OL, we simply cannot create running lanes.
    3 votes now, on the players.
    Sent using two cans and a string.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    July 01, 2013
    Posts
    605
    I think not having reliable depth is creating a problem. Our starters could be banged up and fatigued from having to play so many snaps. It's amazing to me how little emphasis Coach Beamer placed on OL when he wants to run a run-first predictable offense. If you want to run that offense you don't hire some nobody, unproven VA coach just because he's got some recruiting pull in a few VA high schools. Or was it just 1 or 2 High Schools? IMO it would be extremely difficult for anyone to recruit well enough to counteract Newsome's OL results

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by fathersonhokie View Post
    Why are we completely unable to run the ball? I mean completely.

    Is it really on JC or Trey? The kids are athletes.
    It HAS to be scheme, doesn't it? Or does it?

    If we hand off and get back to LOS, it is a "good" result.

    Is it that our OL can't execute, can't block...or is it the scheme that they're asked to carry out is bad?

    We can not rush, at all.
    Something's goofy.
    In all my years of watching VT football, I've never seen us wholly unable to run the ball as we seem to be this yr.

    Why?
    What gives?

    (I recall one poster last week suggesting we just line up a few TEs in the backfield, so that at least LT would have an extra "real" blocker or two... it is a funny idea, but its beginning to make sense to me, if it is a given that all we can do is get back to L.O.S. on any given rush)
    What I find interesting is that we gave LT3 plenty of time today to throw the ball. No issues with pass protection, just run blocking.

  4. #14
    Hokie CPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 28, 1999
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    61,763
    Quote Originally Posted by VTallday View Post
    I think not having reliable depth is creating a problem. Our starters could be banged up and fatigued from having to play so many snaps. It's amazing to me how little emphasis Coach Beamer placed on OL when he wants to run a run-first predictable offense. If you want to run that offense you don't hire some nobody, unproven VA coach just because he's got some recruiting pull in a few VA high schools. Or was it just 1 or 2 High Schools? IMO it would be extremely difficult for anyone to recruit well enough to counteract Newsome's OL results
    Lack of depth is a direct result of the bare cupboard to which I referred above.
    *.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*. *.*.*.*.*.*

    I just wish we would STOP with the zone blocking read option crap and line up in the I, put a hat on a hat and run the tailback behind the fullback through a designated gosh-danged hole. There is NO REASON why this program shouldn't be able to find 5 fat guys who can move some people out of the way and clear a lane for a back to get through!

  5. #15
    Hokie CPA's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 28, 1999
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    61,763
    Quote Originally Posted by HokieinTampa View Post
    What I find interesting is that we gave LT3 plenty of time today to throw the ball. No issues with pass protection, just run blocking.
    Having played OL, I always thought pass protection was easier to do physically, though it was tougher mentally. Run blocking is pretty much knowing where the football was going and plowing a lane for it. It is physically demanding as you have to push a guy out of the way who is fighting you every step of the way. Pass blocking is determining where the pressure is coming from and then keeping anyone from beating you inside, then looking outside and riding the pass rusher out of the play.
    *.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*. *.*.*.*.*.*

    I just wish we would STOP with the zone blocking read option crap and line up in the I, put a hat on a hat and run the tailback behind the fullback through a designated gosh-danged hole. There is NO REASON why this program shouldn't be able to find 5 fat guys who can move some people out of the way and clear a lane for a back to get through!

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    July 01, 2013
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by HokieinTampa View Post
    What I find interesting is that we gave LT3 plenty of time today to throw the ball. No issues with pass protection, just run blocking.
    Under Newsome they COULD pass block. All these years under Newsome they've always been able to pass block ok. But with a team that wants to run the ball...it's a fairly strange and unexplainable strategy

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    July 01, 2013
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by Hokie CPA View Post
    Having played OL, I always thought pass protection was easier to do physically, though it was tougher mentally. Run blocking is pretty much knowing where the football was going and plowing a lane for it. It is physically demanding as you have to push a guy out of the way who is fighting you every step of the way. Pass blocking is determining where the pressure is coming from and then keeping anyone from beating you inside, then looking outside and riding the pass rusher out of the play.
    They are just plain ol' WEAK!

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Hokie CPA View Post
    It really is this simple... Curt Newsome left the OL cabinet pretty dadgum bare. And I have every confidence in thinking the reason Coach Grimes has been able to sign so many of his OL targets is he already knows these guys can come in and make an immediate difference, which is quite rare for offensive line players. If Grimey is willing to play freshmen in lieu of giving them a redshirt year, then that ought to tell you just how depleted our OL talent is. Without talent on the OL, we simply cannot create running lanes.
    I don't know about *immediate* difference, but they are the type of players that he wants to recruit, and after a few years of recruiting, we should have enough developed talent to field a good line. There's a reason that Mack Brown wanted to make him the highest paid OL coach in college football.
    No trees were harmed in the making of this post. However, billions of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    July 01, 2013
    Posts
    605
    Quote Originally Posted by Freddyburg Hokie View Post
    I don't know about *immediate* difference, but they are the type of players that he wants to recruit, and after a few years of recruiting, we should have enough developed talent to field a good line. There's a reason that Mack Brown wanted to make him the highest paid OL coach in college football.
    I wouldn't be surprised at immediate. I predict we'll all see just how bad Newsome's talent evaluation was

  10. #20

    Join Date
    October 06, 2005
    Posts
    4,254
    UNC was daring VT to pass by selling out to stop the run. UNC always had a free hitter to stop any run.

    1st half we burned them with the passing game. 2nd half we were trying to run the clock out.

    Quote Originally Posted by fathersonhokie View Post
    Why are we completely unable to run the ball? I mean completely.

    Is it really on JC or Trey? The kids are athletes.
    It HAS to be scheme, doesn't it? Or does it?

    If we hand off and get back to LOS, it is a "good" result.

    Is it that our OL can't execute, can't block...or is it the scheme that they're asked to carry out is bad?

    We can not rush, at all.
    Something's goofy.
    In all my years of watching VT football, I've never seen us wholly unable to run the ball as we seem to be this yr.

    Why?
    What gives?

    (I recall one poster last week suggesting we just line up a few TEs in the backfield, so that at least LT would have an extra "real" blocker or two... it is a funny idea, but its beginning to make sense to me, if it is a given that all we can do is get back to L.O.S. on any given rush)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •