SWC75
Bored Historian
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,856
- Like
- 65,277
- The Hokies are simply better than we are, just as they were last year, when they crushed us 38-10. They lost to Vanderbilt, who later beat Alabama and almost Texas, in overtime, Rutgers, a solid Big Ten team, by 3 and #6 U of Miami by 4 on a controversial play. Then they won three in a row, over Stanford, who beat us, by 24, Boston College by 3 touchdowns and Georgia Tech, who we beat by 3, 21-6.
- Meanwhile, our team went off the rails at Pitt. We’re not sure what they are and I wonder if they are.
- Tech has similar strengths to Pitt: they have an excellent pass defense that can cover receivers like a blanket. They put pressure on the other team’s backfield. And, they can run the ball and pass it as well. They can take advantage of opportunities and finish drives.
- Tech and every subsequent opponent can look at the Pitt film and see how to take this Syracuse attack apart.
- Once again, we are searching for a guy who can kick the ball through the uprights on something other than chip-shots while the other team has a wonderful kicker, (with a wonderful name): John Love. Tech loves him. We won’t.
- Kyle McCord is in the cross-hairs of Antwaun Powell-Ryland, who has 11 sacks for 71 yards.
Stats that favor Virginia Tech (23):
OFFENSIVE RUSHING YARDS SU- 90.30 VT – 195.50
OFFENSIVE AVERAGE ON RUNNING PLAYS (- sacks) SU- 3.94 VT – 5.86
OFFENSIVE PASSING YARDS PER COMPLETION SU- 11.32 VT – 12.76
SCORING DEFENSE SU- 27.00 VT – 20.40
DEFENSIVE AVERAGE ON RUNNING PLAYS (- SACKS) SU – 5.34 VT – 4.92
DEFENSIVE PASSING YARDS SU- 217.00 VT – 196.25
DEFFENSIVE PASSING YARDS PER ATTEMPT SU- 7.34 VT – 6.89
DEFENSIVE PASSING EFFICIENCY SU- 140.53 VT – 120.12
DEFENSIVE COMPLETION PERCENTAGE SU- 67.15 VT – 53.95
DEFENSIVE RED ZONE POINTS SU- 97/21 = 4.62 VT – 131/33 = 3.97
SACKS SU- 15 VT - 26
TACKLES FOR A LOSS SU- 40 VT – 54
PUNT RETURNS SU- 8.64 VT – 13.10
OPPONENT PUNT RETURNS SU- 11.71 VT – 6.40
OPPONENT PUNTS RETURNED SU- 11/29 = 37.93% VT – 19/41 = 46.34%
NET PUNTING SU- 37.74 VT – 41.62
FIELD GOAL PERCENTAGE SU- 5/11 = 45.45% VT – 9/10 = 90.00%
LONGEST FG SU- 33 VT - 57
40 YARDS + SU- 0/5 = 00.00% VT – 6/6 = 100%
TURNOVER MARGIN SU- 11/8 = -3 VT – 9/14 = +5
PENALTIES SU- 6.71/55.71 VT – 5.375/43.25yds
STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE SU- #68 VT - #37
(Everybody has their own system for this: I used this page as a source: NCAA College Football Strength of Schedule Rankings & Ratings
COMMON OPPONENTS:
(Finally, some common opponents!)
We lost to Stanford 24-26 at home. They beat Stanford 31-7 on the road. Advantage +26 for Virginia Tech.
We beat Georgia Tech at home 31-28. They beat Georgia Tech 21-6 at home. Advantage +12 for Virginia Tech.
The Hokies run the ball way better than we do, which allows them to pass the ball deeper. They have a much better passing defense which gives up a touchdown less a game than we do. They get more sacks and TFLs. They return more punts, but also give up more returns – but they cover them better. Our turnover ratios crashed and burned vs. Pitt. Theirs is good. This is another game where the other team has a terrific placekicker we wish we had. They have done far better against our common opponents.
- Meanwhile, our team went off the rails at Pitt. We’re not sure what they are and I wonder if they are.
- Tech has similar strengths to Pitt: they have an excellent pass defense that can cover receivers like a blanket. They put pressure on the other team’s backfield. And, they can run the ball and pass it as well. They can take advantage of opportunities and finish drives.
- Tech and every subsequent opponent can look at the Pitt film and see how to take this Syracuse attack apart.
- Once again, we are searching for a guy who can kick the ball through the uprights on something other than chip-shots while the other team has a wonderful kicker, (with a wonderful name): John Love. Tech loves him. We won’t.
- Kyle McCord is in the cross-hairs of Antwaun Powell-Ryland, who has 11 sacks for 71 yards.
Stats that favor Virginia Tech (23):
OFFENSIVE RUSHING YARDS SU- 90.30 VT – 195.50
OFFENSIVE AVERAGE ON RUNNING PLAYS (- sacks) SU- 3.94 VT – 5.86
OFFENSIVE PASSING YARDS PER COMPLETION SU- 11.32 VT – 12.76
SCORING DEFENSE SU- 27.00 VT – 20.40
DEFENSIVE AVERAGE ON RUNNING PLAYS (- SACKS) SU – 5.34 VT – 4.92
DEFENSIVE PASSING YARDS SU- 217.00 VT – 196.25
DEFFENSIVE PASSING YARDS PER ATTEMPT SU- 7.34 VT – 6.89
DEFENSIVE PASSING EFFICIENCY SU- 140.53 VT – 120.12
DEFENSIVE COMPLETION PERCENTAGE SU- 67.15 VT – 53.95
DEFENSIVE RED ZONE POINTS SU- 97/21 = 4.62 VT – 131/33 = 3.97
SACKS SU- 15 VT - 26
TACKLES FOR A LOSS SU- 40 VT – 54
PUNT RETURNS SU- 8.64 VT – 13.10
OPPONENT PUNT RETURNS SU- 11.71 VT – 6.40
OPPONENT PUNTS RETURNED SU- 11/29 = 37.93% VT – 19/41 = 46.34%
NET PUNTING SU- 37.74 VT – 41.62
FIELD GOAL PERCENTAGE SU- 5/11 = 45.45% VT – 9/10 = 90.00%
LONGEST FG SU- 33 VT - 57
40 YARDS + SU- 0/5 = 00.00% VT – 6/6 = 100%
TURNOVER MARGIN SU- 11/8 = -3 VT – 9/14 = +5
PENALTIES SU- 6.71/55.71 VT – 5.375/43.25yds
STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE SU- #68 VT - #37
(Everybody has their own system for this: I used this page as a source: NCAA College Football Strength of Schedule Rankings & Ratings
COMMON OPPONENTS:
(Finally, some common opponents!)
We lost to Stanford 24-26 at home. They beat Stanford 31-7 on the road. Advantage +26 for Virginia Tech.
We beat Georgia Tech at home 31-28. They beat Georgia Tech 21-6 at home. Advantage +12 for Virginia Tech.
The Hokies run the ball way better than we do, which allows them to pass the ball deeper. They have a much better passing defense which gives up a touchdown less a game than we do. They get more sacks and TFLs. They return more punts, but also give up more returns – but they cover them better. Our turnover ratios crashed and burned vs. Pitt. Theirs is good. This is another game where the other team has a terrific placekicker we wish we had. They have done far better against our common opponents.
