»
Topic: VT didn’t play to win the game.
Replies: 20   Last Post: Dec 6, 2020, 10:56 AM by: Lakedude®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 20  

VT didn’t play to win the game.

emoji_events [5]
Dec 5, 2020, 11:16 PM
flag  

They played to shorten the game and not get blown out. I’m glad Clemson finally pulled away but I wish the score would have been a lot worse. I hope VT leadership learned from this and fires the head coach. You always want to go into a game trying to win. I’ve seen paint dry that’s more interesting then the VT offense.

military_donation.jpg link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.

[1]
Dec 5, 2020, 11:18 PM
flag  

Beauty contest crap doesn’t matter at this point. Just win

link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.

[2]
Dec 5, 2020, 11:22 PM
flag  

That’s my point though. Even when it was a 2 score game VT didn’t seem to be trying. I get it they don’t think they can go toe to toe with Clemson. However you need to try something different if you go down multiple scores but still have lots of game still left to be played.

military_donation.jpg link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.

[1]
Dec 5, 2020, 11:24 PM
flag  

yeah the late first half possession reinforces your point.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgringofhonor-74tiger.jpg link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.


Dec 5, 2020, 11:25 PM
flag  

Probably just a product of Fuente trying to save his job. Look at me! I held Clemson to 45!

link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.


Dec 6, 2020, 12:40 AM
flag  

Well you are wrong there. Maybe you haven;t heard of the playoff committee?

link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.

[1]
Dec 5, 2020, 11:21 PM
flag  

And they still got blown out

military_donation.jpg link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.


Dec 5, 2020, 11:23 PM
flag  

I hope they continue to get blown out until they actually try to play football instead of trying to play keep away.

military_donation.jpg link

Re: Thanks Herm....

[1]
Dec 5, 2020, 11:26 PM
flag  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5-iJUuPWis

link

Re: Thanks Herm....


Dec 6, 2020, 1:04 AM
flag  

End of day they didn’t have the personnel win that game so they did what they could

2021 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg link

Whooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!


Re: Thanks Herm....


Dec 6, 2020, 1:04 AM
flag  

End of day they didn’t have the personnel win that game so they did what they could

2021 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg link

Whooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!


Re: Thanks Herm....


Dec 6, 2020, 1:13 AM
flag  

Aaaahhhh, come oooonn!

2021 white level member link

The spread was 22

[2]
Dec 6, 2020, 1:20 AM
flag  

we made adjustments and took control the second half, and played vanilla as all get out. No fancy calls (ran zone read about 25x) and no exotic looks on Defense.

2021 white level member link

Exactly


Dec 6, 2020, 2:08 AM
flag  

Was glad CBV fixed the run D.... as expected.

2021 white level member link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.

[1]
Dec 6, 2020, 10:18 AM
flag  

Their game plan increased their chance of winning if a ball or two bounced their way.

2021 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg link

Agree. Think they were smart. Tiger offense has tended to


Dec 6, 2020, 10:56 AM
flag  

be slow to get started, and they had a plan to delay that happening. It worked. Tight game at the half, and their D stayed fresh. With their big OLine and the running QB it was working. That works until Venables adjusts and you get more than one score behind. Would have been interesting I think if they didn't have any QB injuries. Closer, but still a Tiger win. They needed a lot of breaks to win as well, and it didn't happen.

2021 white level member link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.


Dec 6, 2020, 10:28 AM
flag  

Shortening the game and Trevor's possessions was exactly how to win the game, and they did a great job of exactly that in the first half.

link


Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.


Dec 6, 2020, 10:30 AM
flag  

They stayed in striking distance 3/4 of the game .
Then they fumbled in their own red Zone which put them down by 14 was the back breaker. Our O struggled the whole 2nd half . If they don’t fumble 2-3 times we barely win this game .

link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.


Dec 6, 2020, 10:39 AM
flag  

...well yes and no....we can never assume how the next play/series would have gone after the game I over...like ohio state saying they would have won if they were granted a fumble returned for a TD in the 3rd qtr of a game, just not the case.

Vt had a good scheme on D and it was working, however, if the game had been close then we could assume we would kick it up a notch on O and score...however when its a 3 score game and the other team has mustered a meager 10 points (essentially on 2 big plays through 40 minutes of play) then its hard to maintain intensity. As a person who has watched the tigers since 1979, I had no doubt we would win after the 1st qtr.

We all like the style points and we didn't get them last night for sure however the goal was to win, and was there ever any doubt who would win?

link

Re: VT didn’t play to win the game.


Dec 6, 2020, 10:33 AM
flag  

The strategy was a lot like the Texas A & M game last year ..... waiting until there were about 2 seconds on the clock to snap the ball. There is nothing wrong with using every tool available to try and win and in their case it was to shorten the game.

military_donation.jpg link

I agree, in fact I asked last night if that was his resignation letter


Dec 6, 2020, 10:45 AM
flag  

Looked like a SC State gameplan. Embarrassing.

link

Replies: 20  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: Selling 2 tickets to the Clemson vs Georgia game. Section 524 Row 24 seat 3 & 4. Asking $350 each.

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
3083 people have read this post