The big 4th down play in the 2nd quarter really turned the tide in this one. Our offense was lacking, but performed well on the ground. Defense was solid, but couldn't hold on in the end. We'll look to Mangas & Jimmye to open up the playbook next week vs. Norfolk State!
Check out our analysis of this week's game below, including the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly! LET'S GO TRIBE.
I don't think you can say that the Tribe played multiple QB's. That's technically correct, but a misleading sentence.
I don't think the pass defense was bad. As Rocco has pointed out, last year's numbers are deceptive in that the defense couldn't stop the run, and teams didn't have to pass. I found UVa's last drive after the INT to be interesting in that the Hoos did not try to run.
Finally, "The Ugly". I agree with every word, but watch out, you may be called naive and an armchair QB!
:-)
(This post was last modified: 09-04-2017 10:54 AM by nj alum.)
(09-04-2017 10:52 AM)nj alum Wrote: Finally, "The Ugly". I agree with every word, but watch out, you may be called naive and an armchair QB!
:-)
Then you agree with this...
"We don’t know what happened on Saturday. Were the receivers getting shut down? Were the receivers open and Tommy wasn’t seeing them?"
Everyone was disappointed in the passing game productivity. Admitting you don't know what happened relieves you of the "Armchair QB" label. Badmouthing the guy making his first start, and the coach who chose to play him will remain a stretch when you admit you don't know what happened.
(09-04-2017 10:52 AM)nj alum Wrote: Finally, "The Ugly". I agree with every word, but watch out, you may be called naive and an armchair QB!
:-)
Then you agree with this...
"We don’t know what happened on Saturday. Were the receivers getting shut down? Were the receivers open and Tommy wasn’t seeing them?"
Everyone was disappointed in the passing game productivity. Admitting you don't know what happened relieves you of the "Armchair QB" label. Badmouthing the guy making his first start, and the coach who chose to play him will remain a stretch when you admit you don't know what happened.
I think you're confusing me with someone else ... I didn't badmouth the QB ... I didn't badmouth the coaches ... I questioned the offense ... I purposefully don't call out players or coaches ...I expect more out of JL's offenses...the passing game was beyond disappointing for a JL squad.
I don't know what happened. I twice posted during the game ... what's happening in the secondary because you can't tell on TV.
But I do know one thing that happened ... the offense scored ten points. Not good!
If we hang 70 on Norfolk, I will never understand yesterday.
If we have offensive troubles against Norfolk, I've seen this movie before, and it's not good.
(09-04-2017 10:52 AM)nj alum Wrote: Finally, "The Ugly". I agree with every word, but watch out, you may be called naive and an armchair QB!
:-)
Then you agree with this...
"We don’t know what happened on Saturday. Were the receivers getting shut down? Were the receivers open and Tommy wasn’t seeing them?"
Everyone was disappointed in the passing game productivity. Admitting you don't know what happened relieves you of the "Armchair QB" label. Badmouthing the guy making his first start, and the coach who chose to play him will remain a stretch when you admit you don't know what happened.
There were also two 4th down runs. The difference in 3rd down playcalling is largely due to yardage needed, as W&M faced a lot more 3rd and long situations. My eyes are drawn to the differences in 1st and 2nd down playcalls, and that's without even looking at the distances of the passing attempts. VT's defense was better in 2014 than UVA's defense is expected to be in 2017. Also in 2014 W&M had guys get hurt early in the game, while I don't believe any skill position guys were hurt during the game on Saturday.
W&M's average drive start was their 21 yard line. UVA's average drive start was their 37.5. UVA had 12 drives. That's 198.5 hidden yards UVA had to work with.
Despite the statistical difference, the defense held fairly well.
A lot of really great defensive plays with significant improvement in pressuring the QB.
-2 of UVAs touchdowns occurred shortly following a UVA fumble but kept possession.
-A 3rd touchdown occurred on a 4th and long.
-4th TD occurred after an unfortunate bounce and subsequent INT at our own 25yd.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2017 07:56 AM by nogretheogre.)
Agree on our defense. I think our defense will keep us in every game, though JMU concerns me. That sound of a whipping of an FBS team is notable. I think part of that is ECU is really, really bad this year, but JMU is a very strong team. If we can get in a rhythm offensively, Zable could be rocking for Homecoming.
There were also two 4th down runs. The difference in 3rd down playcalling is largely due to yardage needed, as W&M faced a lot more 3rd and long situations. My eyes are drawn to the differences in 1st and 2nd down playcalls, and that's without even looking at the distances of the passing attempts. VT's defense was better in 2014 than UVA's defense is expected to be in 2017. Also in 2014 W&M had guys get hurt early in the game, while I don't believe any skill position guys were hurt during the game on Saturday.
thanks for the breakdown, Rocco.
The 2nd-4th quarter of the game, I really felt like we were playing to not get embarrassed rather than playing to win (on offense). The play calling was frustrating to watch, because I don't see how we had anything to lose, really.
Agree with others on the defense. I was pretty pleased with their play - especially given some of the situations they were in. The secondary could do a little better on switching/helping, but I wasn't displeased with their play, at all.
Noah Giles has potential, and the offensive line played great. However, I wouldn't mind seeing Battle under center and McKee as the starting tailback for a series or three. I haven't been super impressed with McKee's arm strength (although there were few chances for him to air it out anyway), but if you watch the game replay, you'll see him running like a man possessed when he took off.
So let me make sure I've got this straight....we've got a guy who hasn't played a running back position for at least the 3+ years he has been on campus (and I assume didn't in high school)....we've got other competent running backs who are true running backs (in that they have been that since they stepped on campus and I would assume played in high school) and suddenly we feel we should move the starting QB (granted for one game) to running back?
I'm not a FB coach, and never have been, but just from my untrained eye, a running QB (or one who has decent enough footwork to run) is vastly different than a true running back who also has to catch passes out of the backfield, pick up an oncoming blitzer or assist in pass protection. It's not just running with the football.
I honestly am not trying to bash any poster but I am trying to understand the thought process in converting a QB to RB after the opening game of a season against an FBS opponent.
(09-05-2017 02:11 PM)Tribe1693 Wrote: So let me make sure I've got this straight....we've got a guy who hasn't played a running back position for at least the 3+ years he has been on campus (and I assume didn't in high school)....we've got other competent running backs who are true running backs (in that they have been that since they stepped on campus and I would assume played in high school) and suddenly we feel we should move the starting QB (granted for one game) to running back?
I'm not a FB coach, and never have been, but just from my untrained eye, a running QB (or one who has decent enough footwork to run) is vastly different than a true running back who also has to catch passes out of the backfield, pick up an oncoming blitzer or assist in pass protection. It's not just running with the football.
I honestly am not trying to bash any poster but I am trying to understand the thought process in converting a QB to RB after the opening game of a season against an FBS opponent.
Same crew calling to bench Tommy and fire coaches. Let's all be very thankful that our experienced professional staff is in charge. Whew.
I'm hesitant to get too excited about the defense for two reasons:
1) It's unknown yet if UVA is a smoldering dumpster fire or if they're just a standard-issue Bad Football Team;
2) I remember 2012 where the defense looked great against Maryland and the season went to hell in a handbasket after that.
That's not to say the defense was bad. I don't want to offend anyone by not being sufficiently effusive. The first number is what UVA did on Saturday, the 2nd number is what UVA did against Richmond last season, and the last number is what UVA did on average in 2016:
The 3rd down conversion rate was alarming, but that's probably a function of bad luck and will probably regress if the defense continues to play well on 1st and 2nd down.
(09-05-2017 02:54 PM)Rocco Wrote: I'm hesitant to get too excited about the defense for two reasons:
1) It's unknown yet if UVA is a smoldering dumpster fire or if they're just a standard-issue Bad Football Team;
2) I remember 2012 where the defense looked great against Maryland and the season went to hell in a handbasket after that.
That's not to say the defense was bad. I don't want to offend anyone by not being sufficiently effusive. The first number is what UVA did on Saturday, the 2nd number is what UVA did against Richmond last season, and the last number is what UVA did on average in 2016:
The 3rd down conversion rate was alarming, but that's probably a function of bad luck and will probably regress if the defense continues to play well on 1st and 2nd down.
So we held UVA to the same yards/play as the average ACC defense last season? That's got to be a good sign. I'll agree that I was very unimpressed with UVA on Saturday (which only heightened my frustration) but I thought the defense looked legitimately good.
Also can we please not talk about the Maryland game? Or 2012?
(09-05-2017 02:54 PM)Rocco Wrote: I'm hesitant to get too excited about the defense for two reasons:
1) It's unknown yet if UVA is a smoldering dumpster fire or if they're just a standard-issue Bad Football Team;
2) I remember 2012 where the defense looked great against Maryland and the season went to hell in a handbasket after that.
That's not to say the defense was bad. I don't want to offend anyone by not being sufficiently effusive. The first number is what UVA did on Saturday, the 2nd number is what UVA did against Richmond last season, and the last number is what UVA did on average in 2016:
The 3rd down conversion rate was alarming, but that's probably a function of bad luck and will probably regress if the defense continues to play well on 1st and 2nd down.
So we held UVA to the same yards/play as the average ACC defense last season? That's got to be a good sign. I'll agree that I was very unimpressed with UVA on Saturday (which only heightened my frustration) but I thought the defense looked legitimately good.
Also can we please not talk about the Maryland game? Or 2012?
Not quite- in ACC play UVA averaged 4.36 yards/play. Last year UVA dropped 569 yards on Central Michigan. Not only was UVA bad last year they were inefficient- they had 3 games of 80+ plays but didn't do much of anything with the ball in those games, including an 84 plays for 253 yards performance against UNC which is just gross. It's still not the worst stat in the world, and it was done against the backdrop of an offense either incapable of or unwilling to move the ball. Conversely if I were a fan of UVA I wouldn't be too happy that my offense couldn't move the ball on the ground against a team that was paved repeatedly last season and is smaller up front than anyone else they will play.
(09-04-2017 04:30 PM)Rocco Wrote: ... snipped but quote tags left for reference ...
Does that account for runs that were called pass plays? I'm not sure how to account for that in the stats other than counting QB runs as passes, but busted pass plays might account for some of the play calling differences.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2017 06:46 PM by WMInTheBurg.)
(09-04-2017 04:30 PM)Rocco Wrote: ... snipped but quote tags left for reference ...
Does that account for runs that were called pass plays? I'm not sure how to account for that in the stats other than counting QB runs as passes, but busted pass plays might account for some of the play calling differences.
It doesn't, because a) the PBP doesn't differentiate between runs and scrambles and b) it's not always clear when a QB run was meant to be a pass.
