Does Virginia Tech deserve the hype?

Nashville Jacket

Nashville Jacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
7,818
I’ll let the 2008 stats and a few more facts speak for themselves.

We’re all aware that VT barely beat GT last year, which was early in the season in Blacksburg and before GT’s offense kicked into high gear. GT brings back more starters than VT, plus GT should be way more efficient on offense. The defense is less certain for GT, but VT’s defense will likely be pretty darn good as usual.

2008 Statistics - GT stats shown first then VT. The team with an edge is bolded.

Average Scoring 24.4 - 22.1
Opponent Scoring 20.3 - 16.7
Yards Gained Rushing 3,847 - 2,853
Passing Yardage 1,290 - 3,614
Total Offense 4,842 - 4,248
Total Plays 805 - 936
Average Per Play 6.0 - 4.5
Kick Return Yardage 883 - 947
Punt Return Yardage 182 - 242
Fumbles Lost 20 - 18
Defensive Int’s 18 - 20
Penalty Yardage 570 - 485
Time of Possession 30:31 - 33:00
3rd Down Conversion 37% - 38%
Field Goals/Attempts 12/20 - 23/29

While VT had the edge in a lot of categories last year, most weren’t a lot better than GT’s numbers. So why is everyone so high on VT? I haven’t figured that out yet.
 
Last edited:
Oh it's the weekly 'VT is overrated' post! Next up 'which true freshman will likely play in Fall' post, after which 'why LSU game doesn't show the blueprint' post.

the off-season..
 
The only stats that truly matter are wins and losses. VT wins a lot (regular 10+ game winners) and when it counts (the ACC Championships prove that). Until Ramblin' Wreck, or other team, knock them off...they belong on top.

Let's take care of business this year!!!!
 
I think a lot of people like the VT pick over GT because Frank Beamer's system has been in place for many years at VT and has shown to create great success. CPJ's system is still new to GT. We could go undefeated next season, but in terms of odds and hedging your bets, VT seems to be a safer pick. I think that anyone will still say that it is wide open. I haven't found anyone who would be shocked if we were the victors in the ACC instead of VT.

This will be a much better question to ask during week 8.
 
Here's a stat from 2008 for you:

ACC Championships
VT: 1
Rest of ACC: 0

Could have been a fluke though. Let's look at 2007:
ACC Championships:
VT: 1
Rest of ACC: 0

Result--yes, they do deserve the hype.
 
To win a conference with a 5-3 record is absurd. There should not have been an ACC champ last year. Every contender was mediocre at best. And people wonder why the ACCCG gets such poor attendance.

If you support VT in this thread you are weak, they suck. If you support GT in this thread you also are weak. GT needed to beat Uva at home or this so-called overrated VT and pissed both games away with turnovers.
 
JWE37 said:
To win a conference with a 5-3 record is absurd. There should not have been an ACC champ last year. Every contender was mediocre at best. And people wonder why the ACCCG gets such poor attendance.

If you support VT in this thread you are weak, they suck. If you support GT in this thread you also are weak. GT needed to beat Uva at home or this so-called overrated VT and pissed both games away with turnovers.
Click to expand...

I assume you're not an ACC fan, jolly good fellow.
 
Nashville Jacket said:
I assume you're not an ACC fan, jolly good fellow.
Click to expand...

I think he is. His comment may be harsh but it's probably valid, at least the part about attracting fans from distant locations to a championship game when neither would be on the map for a NYD bowl game if it weren't for an automatic bid.

If there's a reason VT deserves national hype, it's because nobody in the ACC does and they are the default with their history of winning the conference.

If I were listing predictions for a typical preseason mag, I'd list nobody as a favorite, about 6 teams as dark horses and maybe 3 more as up and comers who might break through someday soon.
 
Nashville Jacket said:
I assume you're not an ACC fan, jolly good fellow.
Click to expand...

I am a:

1) GT fan (obsessive)
2) ACC fan
3) college football fan (obsessive)
4) Realist

It bothers me that the top ACC teams (VT, GT, BC, FSU) were so damn mediocre last year. I don't see any reason to sugar coat it.
 
JWE37 said:
To win a conference with a 5-3 record is absurd. There should not have been an ACC champ last year. Every contender was mediocre at best. And people wonder why the ACCCG gets such poor attendance.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that a conference winner has to be undefeated (or close) in conference to deserve it? The ACC was very competitive last year and tore itself apart. It also sent 10 teams to bowl games. I think last year was a great year for the ACC. Maybe you should watch PAC-10 football.
 
I'd rather have lots of good teams (great teams preferred) in the conference than a bunch of lousy teams dominated by two great teams year in and year out. The uncertainty of who was going to win the Coastal division last year was exciting for me. The records didn't bother me.
 
Does VPISU deserve this hype? Um, sure. They unimpressively beat a lousy Cincinnati team as the champions of a parity filled ACC to end last season. We lost to a good LSU team in a game that we blew with horrible special teams. Do I think that VPISU will live up to this hype? Not on my life. Do I understand it? Sure. Hell, if anything, it's good for us. It helps the SoS out.
 
Do you think they'll do better or worse than Clemson did? The hype levels are probably about the same, and they've got that first game on national TV just like Clemson did.

For the ACC's sake, I hope they do a bit better.
 
gth816f said:
Do you think they'll do better or worse than Clemson did? The hype levels are probably about the same, and they've got that first game on national TV just like Clemson did.

For the ACC's sake, I hope they do a bit better.
Click to expand...
This season is different though. Last season, Clemson was positioned as the USC(west) of the ACC. Big fish in a mediocre pond. This season, both us and VPISU will start with high ranks, and FSU and Miami will get some love as well. If VPISU fail, it won't reflect poorly on the ACC, unless everyone stinks this year.
 
gth860h said:
Are you saying that a conference winner has to be undefeated (or close) in conference to deserve it?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. My point was that VT was not a Championship (conference) calibur team last year. Some posters on this thread are defending VT that they deserve hype because they have won the ACCCG the past 2 years. I disagree that they deserve hype just for winning a conference that has not fielded a "good" team recently.

FWIW, my definition of "good" is a team that can play on the same field with any team in the country. And yes, I am saying that Florida, Oklahoma, and USC would have won easily against any ACC team last year.

With all that said, GT, UNC, and FSU are moving in the right direction. Clemson and Miami will be there with coaching changes. VT only needs a game changing type player (Vick, D.Hall) to get it back. As a conference we are close to getting back in the game from a National perspective. Will it be 2009? I sure hope so, but I think we're still 2 years away from having a MNC contender.
 
JWE37 said:
Not necessarily. My point was that VT was not a Championship (conference) calibur team last year. Some posters on this thread are defending VT that they deserve hype because they have won the ACCCG the past 2 years. I disagree that they deserve hype just for winning a conference that has not fielded a "good" team recently.

FWIW, my definition of "good" is a team that can play on the same field with any team in the country. And yes, I am saying that Florida, Oklahoma, and USC would have won easily against any ACC team last year.

With all that said, GT, UNC, and FSU are moving in the right direction. Clemson and Miami will be there with coaching changes. VT only needs a game changing type player (Vick, D.Hall) to get it back. As a conference we are close to getting back in the game from a National perspective. Will it be 2009? I sure hope so, but I think we're still 2 years away from having a MNC contender.
Click to expand...
If your scenario is right, then the ACC is hosed. The league parity will ensure no undefeated teams, and the ACC bias will hurt. The ACC's only hope for an MNC is a great team surrounded by poop, like USC(west). Only the SEC and maybe Big 12 will get credit for being a tough league.
 
To those who say VT sucks, how bad does that make the rest of the ACC?

Of course they deserve the hype. They win.
 
JWE37 said:
Not necessarily. My point was that VT was not a Championship (conference) calibur team last year. Some posters on this thread are defending VT that they deserve hype because they have won the ACCCG the past 2 years. I disagree that they deserve hype just for winning a conference that has not fielded a "good" team recently.

FWIW, my definition of "good" is a team that can play on the same field with any team in the country. And yes, I am saying that Florida, Oklahoma, and USC would have won easily against any ACC team last year.

With all that said, GT, UNC, and FSU are moving in the right direction. Clemson and Miami will be there with coaching changes. VT only needs a game changing type player (Vick, D.Hall) to get it back. As a conference we are close to getting back in the game from a National perspective. Will it be 2009? I sure hope so, but I think we're still 2 years away from having a MNC contender.
Click to expand...
So you're saying to be good you have to be the caliber of FL, OK and USC? So how do you get to be great? The ACC had a number of good teams last year, just no great ones.

And there's no way VT will crumble like Clemson if they get off to a bad start. They've won 10+ games a year for 5 straight...that's pretty damn good, even if it isn't national championship caliber.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top