VMI game

Southern Conference Champions - 2003, 2007, 2010, 2012, 2017
FCS Playoffs - 2003, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2016
FCS Playoff Semifinalists - 2003
FCS Playoff Quarterfinalists- 2016, 2017

Moderators: BestOfBreed, dungeonjoe

Re: VMI game

Postby Ruckus28 on Sun Sep 09, 2018 6:51 pm

(GASP) SURELY TO ALL THAT IS HOLY AND GOOD, YOU ARE NOT SUGGESTING THEY RUN THE TRIPLE OPTION?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!
Ruckus28
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 4:08 pm

Re: VMI game

Postby youngterrier on Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:54 pm

the implication of that comment on a meta-level is that we're comparable programs.

Which is hilarious
Study hard, Work Hard, Party Hard, Go Terriers!
User avatar
youngterrier
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:25 am

Re: VMI game

Postby Eyes of Old Main on Sun Sep 09, 2018 8:59 pm

While I wouldn't want VMI to run a similar offense, it would give them a better chance. They need any advantage they can get right now.

Stepping down in level wouldn't help. They didn't magically get more competitive in the Big South. In D-II they'd have to deal with those that have zero academic standards. I hope they figure something out. The SoCon needs them to be better.
SoCon Champs '03, '07, '10, '12, '17
FCS Playoffs '03, '07, '08, '10, '11, '12, '16, '17
FCS Semifinals '03
D-II Playoffs '90, '91
NAIA Finals '70
SC Little 4 Champs '48, '49, '50, '51, '52, '54, '56, '57, '61, '62, '63, '64
Cigar Bowl Participant '50
User avatar
Eyes of Old Main
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 2817
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 11:20 pm
Location: 507 Miles from Wofford

Re: VMI game

Postby Ruckus28 on Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:04 pm

As hilarious as Mike Ayers underachieved and held our program back for 30 years by running inferior schemes? What meta level is that?
Ruckus28
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 4:08 pm

Re: VMI game

Postby youngterrier on Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:02 am

I never claimed that Mike Ayers underachieved for 30 years. I just think since about 2011 or so the argument that the only we could be successful was by running the option lost its validity. We stuck with it without many wrinkles and underachieved. I'd argue we even underachieved last year with our small margin of error.

That argument rested on the assumption that we couldn't recruit top tier players for the FCS. Looking at the roster and the input of players who played 10 years ago, that doesn't seem to be true.

VMI may have similar academic standards but they don't have success and they have the military school persona which doesn't help either. They need the option to build a baseline level of success that they can recruit and grow upon. We already have that.

Mike Ayers built this program, but we aren't the little school we were in 1988 and white swan thinking is what held us back in the last few years. It wasn't until 2016 that we started playing true freshmen regularly, just to name one example, and it wouldn't have happened had we not been objectively horrible for 3 years straight.
Study hard, Work Hard, Party Hard, Go Terriers!
User avatar
youngterrier
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:25 am

Re: VMI game

Postby boulder3m on Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:06 am

I really agree that the SoCon needs VMI to be better. As the Big South expands around us with some interesting up and coming schools one wonders where the SoCon is headed. With our TV package shrinking and becoming more limited the SoCon needs to figure out a way to become higer profile and at least compete for an audience. As shown by the success of Samford against FSU the product is pretty good if we can figure out our niche.
boulder3m
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 2887
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: 150 mi away from where my heart lies

Re: VMI game

Postby Ruckus28 on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:14 am

“Objectively horrible” despite having a winning record?
“Underachieving” while going 10-2?
YT, you must have a different dictionary than I do.
BTW - Tarek Odom, Mike McCrimon (who started from the first day he stepped foot on campus), Bersin, Breitenstein, Illig, Allen, Eberhart, Nelson, Redfern, Kevious Johnson, Romero, Graves, Lorenzo Long, Lee Basinger, K. Bethay, Bodor, Nate Fuqua are just a few who played or started as true F. And they go back from 2000 forward. Not sure what that has to do with white swans or Ayers underachieving but whatever.
Ruckus28
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat May 05, 2018 4:08 pm

Re: VMI game

Postby youngterrier on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:24 am

Ruckus28 wrote:“Objectively horrible” despite having a winning record?
“Underachieving” while going 10-2?
YT, you must have a different dictionary than I do.
BTW - Tarek Odom, Mike McCrimon (who started from the first day he stepped foot on campus), Bersin, Breitenstein, Illig, Allen, Eberhart, Nelson, Redfern, Kevious Johnson, Romero, Graves, Lorenzo Long, Lee Basinger, K. Bethay, Bodor, Nate Fuqua are just a few who played or started as true F. And they go back from 2000 forward. Not sure what that has to do with white swans or Ayers underachieving but whatever.


We went 5-6 twice and 6-5 between 2013-2015. When got to 6 wins with 2 sub d-1 wins. We lost to big south door may Gardner Webb twice. We were objectively horrible.

Once again, you're naming anecdotes and missing the trend. We probably had more freshmen start/play in 2016-2017 than the past decade combined, but you're nitpicking a throwaway point so you don't have to address the core argument. You never actually defend the merits of the option and its costs and benefits.

When you beat 1-10 teams by less than a touchdown, you're underachieving. When you beat 3-8 teams in OT you're underachieving.
Study hard, Work Hard, Party Hard, Go Terriers!
User avatar
youngterrier
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:25 am

Re: VMI game

Postby youngterrier on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:30 am

Also I'm pretty sure many of your examples did not start as freshmen. EB got PT but didn't start, Allen was a redshirt. Heck, the reason people we're hype about Tarek Odom was because he didn't redshirt (and he lived up to it). Meanwhile, they openly made a change in philosophy in 2016 (Shanesy wrote an article about it) and we seemed to improve overnight.

Change happens but "white swan" thinking attributes success/outcomes based on every little attribute of a system, over-weighting minor things (like the option) in the outcome.

When you stick to this thinking you miss the actual causal factors to those outcomes. All swans are white until you see a black one. All swans may be white, but not all white birds are swans
Study hard, Work Hard, Party Hard, Go Terriers!
User avatar
youngterrier
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:25 am

Re: VMI game

Postby WocoSix on Mon Sep 10, 2018 2:12 pm

Surprisingly we handled business this weekend vs VMI. The question remains are we that dominant of a team or is VMI just an inept football program. VMI's first 2 games were versus the 2017 MAC and SoCon champions(which both are predicted to repeat or contend for 2018 title), so it would be unfair to the VMI program and the progress made from last season. VMI plays ETSU this weekend and if they can pull off the win it would show program progress. Rarely do you go from 0-11 to 11-0 in one or two seasons. So really we are still in the process of determining whether we really are a solid top 5 FCS team or did we have advantage of playing two subpar teams opening the season. A mid tier Mountain West opponent should be a good barometer.

As for the VMI game itself, I saw some things on Offense and Defense that are encouraging for future SoCon games. Offensively our QB hand was dealt. Joe Newman is a pure athlete and one of a kind talent you have to keep on the field. Homerun threat on every snap. High risk High reward. Miller Mosely, looked to be the field general and would probably be the guy you can open the playbook. He seems to make timely and right decisions during the game. Game manager and has the enough athleticism that defenses have to respect him. Jimmy Weirick is the better passer of the 3. I can see how quick his release and how hot his throws come out. Not enough plays to determine accuracy but enough to determine he is a true DUAL threat. Also noticed the past 2 games that the OL has not dropped off a bit. In fact the OL seem to be a more aggressive and cohesive group.

On defense, noticed personnel changes and the use of a nickel on passing downs. Loved what I saw from Paschal and Redwood. With the meat of our schedule coming up and the way Samford, UTC, Mercer, and WCU air it out we are going to need them for significant reps during the season. Redwood had a nice pick where he robbed the QB and took it in for 6, while Paschal was in VMI's WR pockets on a few long balls. But the biggest surprise has to be the depth at LB. Beckley and Brown have done a nice job thus far. Both have filled run lanes and making plays on the other side of the LOS. TJ Neal seems to be another LB with a little more athleticism, but the plan may be to put on him 15 pounds and play him as a LB. But he looks like a natural Strong Safety. Love the schemes Wofford has implemented thus far and cant wait to see the full defensive playbook unleashed. Samford's Coaches Hatcher and Callaway vs Wofford's Conklin and Siefkes will be a chess match for the ages.
User avatar
WocoSix
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 6:56 pm

Re: VMI game

Postby youngterrier on Mon Sep 10, 2018 2:26 pm

I like the adjustments we made and I liked that our offense seemed to have it together. Last year, we had roughly the same amount of yardage as VMI and VMIs mistakes and turnovers kept them from being too competitive. We overmatched them offensively in all aspects but scoring.

I'll admit I'm not a defensive guy. I don't have an eye for that sort of thing. I liked how we switched in and out personnel in the secondary, presumably because of different situations. If we did that last year, I didn't notice it. I'm used to seeing our DL run in and out of the game, but I don't think we normally did that with the secondary.

I think whether or not VMI is worse or we are better is a false dichotomy. It's a little bit of both. We got lucky on the defensive side of the ball because, to be frank, their QB and wide outs just weren't good. Lots of drops, overthrows, misses, stuff we can't expect from "Duck" Hodges and the Bulldogs.

From an overall offensive output, we've played good these last two games, with clear production increases against both of our opponents compared to the season before, as well as general improvement on the defensive side. VMI had more yards Saturday than last year, but 2/3 of them came in garbage time against the back ups.

Having said that, I don't think we have enough information to determine if we're better or worse compared to last season. Last season we had a small margin of error and somehow pulled it off. The turnovers in the Citadel game were something of an outlier. Had we not had them we would have clearly improved in terms of the feel of the game. But I like what I've seen this season so far between both games.
Study hard, Work Hard, Party Hard, Go Terriers!
User avatar
youngterrier
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:25 am

Re: VMI game

Postby Oak Grove on Mon Sep 10, 2018 4:48 pm

The talk on this thread and others about moving away from the option to achieve our potential is tiresome and pointless. JC has made clear his opinion concerning the value of WL’s system for our situation, and I agree with him 100 percent.
Oak Grove
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 1840
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:52 am
Location: Oak Grove, SC

Re: VMI game

Postby SmallTownTerrier on Mon Sep 10, 2018 7:55 pm

I bet Alan Smith is glad he wasn’t on that bus Saturday night heading back to Lexington, VA.
SmallTownTerrier
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 7:33 pm

Re: VMI game

Postby youngterrier on Tue Sep 11, 2018 5:43 pm

Looking at the IWF for this game, I really do like our offensive game plan with the RPOs, screen plays and pump fakes. Obviously, we're not gonna ever be an air raid team (no one wants that) and I don't think it's reasonable to expect that level of passing efficiency in every game.

But what I do like is the general strategy. As I've said many times, the trade off with an option team is the ability to make those 3rd and long plays consistently relative to other offenses and I think these wrinkles will help alleviate that weakness. As it was already noted by Conklin and the coaching staff, we're going to keep the option. That's fine with me. What I like is that, with the athleticism and depth we have at the skill positions, we're finding more creative ways to get them the ball beyond what an exclusively TO offense could do. The scheme of an exclusively TO offense limits the amount of space potential players can touch the ball, so defenses load the box. It looks like we're trying to add two options and pivot playcalling ever-so-slightly so defenses can't do that.

I think the trajectory of our offense is more West Virginia under Rich Rodriguez than it is Navy or the service academies and I think it's a better strategy, given our depth and athleticism.
Study hard, Work Hard, Party Hard, Go Terriers!
User avatar
youngterrier
True Terrier Fan
 
Posts: 3508
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:25 am

Previous

Return to Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests