ADVERTISEMENT

Isn't it obvious?

JWtruthsquad

Freshman
Oct 13, 2014
510
0
16
Isn't it obvious what needs to be done? I really feel for you guys as you are caught up in what I call "deranged Bowden Syndrome". It was painfully obvious to the FSU fans that the game had passed him by, but we also had that large, deranged contingent of "fans" who were Bobby fans and not FSU fans. Ironically it was Wake Forest that was the beginning of the end for our dilemma too. We lost to them 30-0 at home. The next day Jeff Bowden "retired" and it was the beginning of the end for Bobby. I loved Bobby as much as anybody, but it was painfully obvious to everybody but him and his personal fans that the game had passed him by. You guys have to decide if you are VT fans or Frank Beamer fans and do what is right for your university and for the ACC in general. In a way you are also doing FB a favor. Right now he is destroying his legacy by hanging on too long. Bobby did the same thing. It is never easy, but there comes a time we have to tell our parents it is time to hang up the keys. That time is now for VT. Thank him for all he has done, throw a celebration, build him a statue and move on. It is time.
 
Watched the WF game. I live in Fla and had been reading a number of stories about your problem for years before the game. Having been there you know pretty much what we have been living with and this is where we are.
 
We don't need a new coach. We just need a new OC and a new QB. Beamer seemed to be doing just fine before all of the changes. Maybe we need new boosters and fans because they are the ones that demanded change and were unhappy with BCS bowls, and are just as responsible as anyone for the mess we are in now.

You cannot compare FSU to VT, unless you think a new coach at VT could get top ten recruiting classes in his own backyard like Jimbo can. And, FSU was down Bowden's last 8 years. We are only in year 3 for Beamer.
 
Originally posted by JWtruthsquad:


Isn't it obvious what needs to be done? I really feel for you guys as you are caught up in what I call "deranged Bowden Syndrome". It was painfully obvious to the FSU fans that the game had passed him by, but we also had that large, deranged contingent of "fans" who were Bobby fans and not FSU fans. Ironically it was Wake Forest that was the beginning of the end for our dilemma too. We lost to them 30-0 at home. The next day Jeff Bowden "retired" and it was the beginning of the end for Bobby. I loved Bobby as much as anybody, but it was painfully obvious to everybody but him and his personal fans that the game had passed him by. You guys have to decide if you are VT fans or Frank Beamer fans and do what is right for your university and for the ACC in general. In a way you are also doing FB a favor. Right now he is destroying his legacy by hanging on too long. Bobby did the same thing. It is never easy, but there comes a time we have to tell our parents it is time to hang up the keys. That time is now for VT. Thank him for all he has done, throw a celebration, build him a statue and move on. It is time.
I think most VT fans are onboard with this.
 
Originally posted by JWtruthsquad:

Isn't it obvious what needs to be done? I really feel for you guys as you are caught up in what I call "deranged Bowden Syndrome". It was painfully obvious to the FSU fans that the game had passed him by, but we also had that large, deranged contingent of "fans" who were Bobby fans and not FSU fans. Ironically it was Wake Forest that was the beginning of the end for our dilemma too. We lost to them 30-0 at home. The next day Jeff Bowden "retired" and it was the beginning of the end for Bobby. I loved Bobby as much as anybody, but it was painfully obvious to everybody but him and his personal fans that the game had passed him by. You guys have to decide if you are VT fans or Frank Beamer fans and do what is right for your university and for the ACC in general. In a way you are also doing FB a favor. Right now he is destroying his legacy by hanging on too long. Bobby did the same thing. It is never easy, but there comes a time we have to tell our parents it is time to hang up the keys. That time is now for VT. Thank him for all he has done, throw a celebration, build him a statue and move on. It is time.
Yea they are onboard, but you should have referenced this as a copy and paste for good measure.. I read this exactly word for word somewhere recently.
 
Originally posted by pckank1:
We don't need a new coach. We just need a new OC and a new QB. Beamer seemed to be doing just fine before all of the changes. Maybe we need new boosters and fans because they are the ones that demanded change and were unhappy with BCS bowls, and are just as responsible as anyone for the mess we are in now.

You cannot compare FSU to VT, unless you think a new coach at VT could get top ten recruiting classes in his own backyard like Jimbo can. And, FSU was down Bowden's last 8 years. We are only in year 3 for Beamer.
You are assuming that with no changes, VT would be bound for a BCS bowl this year. Do you really believe this? If so, you are in complete denial. The downward trend started many years ago and has finally caught up to VT. Beamer's experiment with Loeffler has not turned out well. Based on his experience at Auburn, this may have been expected by many. Yes, VT needs a new OC and a new QB, but don't assume that Beamer is immune to being fired as well. A new OC and QB may flourish under Beamer, but at what point do you admit that Beamer may be hanging on too long?
 
Originally posted by HokieNation:
Originally posted by pckank1:
We don't need a new coach. We just need a new OC and a new QB. Beamer seemed to be doing just fine before all of the changes. Maybe we need new boosters and fans because they are the ones that demanded change and were unhappy with BCS bowls, and are just as responsible as anyone for the mess we are in now.

You cannot compare FSU to VT, unless you think a new coach at VT could get top ten recruiting classes in his own backyard like Jimbo can. And, FSU was down Bowden's last 8 years. We are only in year 3 for Beamer.
You are assuming that with no changes, VT would be bound for a BCS bowl this year. Do you really believe this? If so, you are in complete denial. The downward trend started many years ago and has finally caught up to VT. Beamer's experiment with Loeffler has not turned out well. Based on his experience at Auburn, this may have been expected by many. Yes, VT needs a new OC and a new QB, but don't assume that Beamer is immune to being fired as well. A new OC and QB may flourish under Beamer, but at what point do you admit that Beamer may be hanging on too long?
I am not assuming we would be BCS bound without changes, but what we know is that the 9 seasons before the change at OC, we won 11 games 4 times, 10 games 4 times, and 7 games once. Way more often than not, we beat the teams we should have, and way more often than not, we won at home. Looking at some of the losses we have had the last 2 years, I think it is safe to say we win quite a few more games if we don't change things. We still have Bud and his defense, and we still have Beamer as head coach, and our schedule has gotten easier, not harder, so we cannot blame it on that. So, what has changed? Our OC and QB, right?

I realize our 7 win season was the season right before the changes, but if we review that 7-6 season a little bit, we will see that we lost one of the games to UNC 48-34, another to Cincinnati after we scored a late TD to take the lead, but the defense gave up a late one at the end, and another one to FSU after we scored a late FG to take the lead, but the defense gave up a late TD at the end. Am I blaming the defense? Of course not, I love Bud and our defense, but how often does our defense give up 48 points and how often does our defense give up a late score to lose a game? Very rarely, right? So, my point is why panic and make changes when our defense did things it so rarely does, and if they make the stops we are used to seeing, we win 10 games again?

We will just have to disagree on the "downward trend started many years" ago talk. We survived some low ranked offenses from 06-08 with 10 and 11 win seasons, ACC titles, and BCS bowls, beating FSU, Clemson, Miami, and Nebraska to name a few. Hard to say a downward trend started then when we were dominating our conference. Call it weak if you want, but how come no one else did what we did those years? We won 20 ACC games those 3 years, and no one else won more than 16. We won with a young, inexperienced QB in Tyrod, we won with Glennon, we won with a 2 star RB in Ore, and we won with a bunch of young WRs.

Then, from 09-11, we had offenses ranked 50th, 41st, and 35th, and beat FSU, Tennessee, Miami, and Nebraska, to name a few. We went 22-4 in the ACC, and no other team had more than 17 wins. We won with a now star in Tyrod and we won with his replacement in Logan. We won after losing Evans for the season at RB. Calling the ACC weak then is a weak argument because our ACC schedule has been much weaker the past 2 seasons than it ever was and we are 6-9 in conference.

I can understand why so many are frustrated with Beamer, but I do think we should give him a couple of years if he gets the right OC in here. However, if a change is not made at OC and QB, then I will change my tune and say it is time for a new head coach.
 
Beamer is not going to let an elite OC come into Blacksburg and change the way he wants the game played and no elite OC is going to go there and be told "we need the offense to help the defense win". I dont know why some think "the right OC" is going to make a difference...THERE IS NO RIGHT OC with Beamer except the one that does what hes told. For GODs sake he was thrilled to death with a zero to zero score at the end of regulation with a shitty Wake Forest team! Yeah thats what a good OC wants in a boss...
 
Originally posted by pckank1:

So, my point is why panic and make changes when our defense did things it so rarely does, and if they make the stops we are used to seeing, we win 10 games again?
In other words, offense is immaterial in your scenario and if that's the case, then what's the problem with Loeffler?

Let's look at close losses under Loeffler:

This year against Boston College, VT leads 24-23 with 7 minutes to go in the fourth quarter before sacrificing two scores. BC goes on to win 33-31. Against ECU, the defense gave up 21 points fast, forcing our offense to adjust its scheme. We eventually crawled back into that game only to give up a quick TD in the last minute to lose 28-21. Against GT, we led by 7 with 5 minutes to go before sacrificing 10 points to lose 27-24. Against Wake we lost by 3, and Pitt only five. Two more winnable games. 5 losses by a total of 20 points.

In 2013 at BC we led going into the fourth quarter, only to give up 17 points and lose by a TD. Duke was also a winnable game here, obviously, but according to the law of mathematical probabilities Stinespring & company would have inevitably lost to Duke. In fact, the only years we decisively beat them were 2010 and 2012, winning 44-7 and 41-20 respectively. Other years saw scores of 34-26, 14-10, and 14-3. To suggest this is really different here is a leap of faith on your part. We also lost to Maryland by 3 points in 2013, another winnable game. That's two games we lost by a total of 10 points and if flipped to W's would have given us first place in the Coastal, and 10 wins on the season.

Similarly, our previous staff was 0-3 against Swinney's Clemson, 1-1 against Jimbo Fisher, 0-1 against Fedora, 0-1 against Graham, and 1-1 against Al Golden. What does this spell out? A 2-4 record against the "new ACC." What's more, the previous staff never faced off against Edsall or Addazio, so you are at best conjecturing to their success if retained, especially on the heels of a 7-6 season with that previous staff in tact. And not to belabor a point, but Stiney & company would have likely lost to Duke eventually with all those close brushes.

So, really, how far away are we? Why in 2012 do you decide to blame a top 20 defense for our problems, and then look the other way at our 81st ranked offense who couldn't score enough to win? Why is what Stinespring & staff did in 2012 so much different than what Loeffler's done, and why do you refuse to acknowledge the development of a trend outside of coaching changes?

Whether you intended to or not, you inadvertently pointed out that the fundamental strength of Beamer's philosophy is also its fundamental flaw: when you espouse a piddly, conservative do-the-bare-minimum offensive strategy, you are already putting yourself in a precarious position by dint of over-burdening your defense. Then there's also a psychology behind it which might explain late-game swoons by Foster defenses. At any rate, you've only demonstrated that the offense sucks a little bit more now. Loeffler is marginally worse than Stinespring at the most, and you fail to acknowledge the significance of coaching changes, developing trends, personnel issues and changes as well in your analysis. But the biggest issue here is one you touched on at the top: that unless our defense is top 10 quality, we are likely going to be bad. Just look at 1997, 2003 and 2012. That's a Frank Beamer issue... not a Stinespring vs. Loeffler issue.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT