If you're checking the boxes of all the items we listed that we would like to see improvement in when VaTech came to town, you have a lot of checks. Running game has to look like last season: check. Benson and Toafili accounted for ~265 yards of offense. Benson averaged 18.2 yds/carry; Toafili averaged 8.3. QB needs to run the ball more often; check. JT was second to only Benson w/ 10 run attempts for ~41 yards (2 sacks took away 16 yards) QB needs to spread the ball around more; check. JT threw 17 passes; 9 targeted WRs, 7 targeted TEs, 3 targeted RBs, and 3 targeted slot receivers. He completed passes to 9 different receivers. Defense needs to get off to a fast start; check. VT had 1 yard of offense in the first quarter. Defense needs to force more turnovers; check. We had 3 forced fumbles and recovered 1. We need to play more of the young talent on defense; check. Nichelson was in in the first quarter and was in on a tackle. Hussey looked like an AA. In just a few snaps in the fourth quarter, he had 3 TT, 1FF, 1FR and a pass breakup. Rumor has it he also sold popcorn at halftime and tidied up the locker room 
. Defense needs to play more like they did in the second half of the Clemson game; check. Defense held VT to 10 points. We need to get back players that we've been missing; check. Scott played and played well. Dent had 4 TT and a FF. Need to win by a good margin; check. We virtually covered the spread with a 22 point margin.
So check off a easy nice win, right? Not so fast, my friend. A funny thing happened on the way to victory. We took a wrong turn in the second quarter and nearly checked out of the game. The defense gave up all of its 10 points in the second quarter. They were 3 of 3 in third down conversions and picked up 2 more from penalties. The ACC (Always Confounding Constables of officiating) called 12 penalties on us for 99 yards. Called six on VT, but only one offensive holding and their OL was getting pretty intimate w/ Fiske and Payton most of the game. The combination of penalties, poor tackling and bad pursuit angles allowed them to keep the ball 11+ minutes of the second quarter and created some major adversity for FSU. They went from being essentially out of the game at the end of the first quarter to closing the deficit to 10 and feeling like they could win by the end of the second quarter. Why? Well, I already listed the penalties, tackling and poor pursuit angles. So the next logical question is why did those errors show up in succession 3 minutes into the second stanza as if choreographed somehow? I'm not going for a tinfoil hat fitting, but while I don't think for a minute it was actually planned or choreographed by our staff, it was certainly aided by their substitutions and play calling in the second quarter. I haven't heard if Bethune was hurt. He is listed w/ only one tackle, but I couldn't even find when that took place reading the official box score. Instead we played Graham for most of the second quarter w/ DeLoach and Lundy. You have a strong RB who loves contact and a QB the size of an aircraft carrier who also loves contact and you substitute Bethune out? Verse and Lovett sat out most of the second quarter, too. Instead we played a lot of not so effective Turner and some Edmonds who looked a little lost. One bright spot was the play of Ray. Then on offense, Benson and Toafili had monstrous first quarters and just a few snaps. Clearly they were not tired. But we substitute Hill and Holmes who seemed invisible in pass pro. and Travis gets sacked. To add insult to injury, the refs decide to call Smith for an illegal snap infraction. Turner wipes out one the best interceptions ever by Thomas on a questionable roughing the passer call. Then we come out and KO to VT to start the half. Do we kick it deep as Fitz did consistently to keep it away from Shipley at Clemson? No, for some reason we kicked to the back outside the end zone 4 straight times and he returned all of them except one past the 25 plus a 99 yard TD. Guess what? after that TD all our KO for the rest of the game went deep into their end zone for touchbacks.
All this coincidence? That can't be ruled out, but in my most considered uninformed opinion, we did some substituting and play calling as a staff that had to be deliberate. CMN repeats that this team was built to respond to adversity. Well we certainly built some yesterday and, to the teams credit, they fully responded favorably. I believe CMN is systematically preparing this team to play for a championship. Maybe not a national championship, but he knows that the way teams win championships is by overcoming adversity and pressure to perform in key moments of games. We know the staff attempts to create these moments in practice. Would it be out of character to maybe not plan it, but when it begins to happen as it did clearly in the second quarter, do you bring back you starters or substitute you seconds and thirds? If you choose the latter and win, you have gained invaluable experience for those seconds and thirds that can only be grasped when you are in real game situations. Could CMN have so much trust in Travis and his other leaders that he might take such a calculated risk? Well, he tells us and them regularly, he knows what they are capable of and he wants them to realize their full potential. It's only a working postulate. But I'm not ruling it out yet.
Scalp 'Cuse
. Defense needs to play more like they did in the second half of the Clemson game; check. Defense held VT to 10 points. We need to get back players that we've been missing; check. Scott played and played well. Dent had 4 TT and a FF. Need to win by a good margin; check. We virtually covered the spread with a 22 point margin.So check off a easy nice win, right? Not so fast, my friend. A funny thing happened on the way to victory. We took a wrong turn in the second quarter and nearly checked out of the game. The defense gave up all of its 10 points in the second quarter. They were 3 of 3 in third down conversions and picked up 2 more from penalties. The ACC (Always Confounding Constables of officiating) called 12 penalties on us for 99 yards. Called six on VT, but only one offensive holding and their OL was getting pretty intimate w/ Fiske and Payton most of the game. The combination of penalties, poor tackling and bad pursuit angles allowed them to keep the ball 11+ minutes of the second quarter and created some major adversity for FSU. They went from being essentially out of the game at the end of the first quarter to closing the deficit to 10 and feeling like they could win by the end of the second quarter. Why? Well, I already listed the penalties, tackling and poor pursuit angles. So the next logical question is why did those errors show up in succession 3 minutes into the second stanza as if choreographed somehow? I'm not going for a tinfoil hat fitting, but while I don't think for a minute it was actually planned or choreographed by our staff, it was certainly aided by their substitutions and play calling in the second quarter. I haven't heard if Bethune was hurt. He is listed w/ only one tackle, but I couldn't even find when that took place reading the official box score. Instead we played Graham for most of the second quarter w/ DeLoach and Lundy. You have a strong RB who loves contact and a QB the size of an aircraft carrier who also loves contact and you substitute Bethune out? Verse and Lovett sat out most of the second quarter, too. Instead we played a lot of not so effective Turner and some Edmonds who looked a little lost. One bright spot was the play of Ray. Then on offense, Benson and Toafili had monstrous first quarters and just a few snaps. Clearly they were not tired. But we substitute Hill and Holmes who seemed invisible in pass pro. and Travis gets sacked. To add insult to injury, the refs decide to call Smith for an illegal snap infraction. Turner wipes out one the best interceptions ever by Thomas on a questionable roughing the passer call. Then we come out and KO to VT to start the half. Do we kick it deep as Fitz did consistently to keep it away from Shipley at Clemson? No, for some reason we kicked to the back outside the end zone 4 straight times and he returned all of them except one past the 25 plus a 99 yard TD. Guess what? after that TD all our KO for the rest of the game went deep into their end zone for touchbacks.
All this coincidence? That can't be ruled out, but in my most considered uninformed opinion, we did some substituting and play calling as a staff that had to be deliberate. CMN repeats that this team was built to respond to adversity. Well we certainly built some yesterday and, to the teams credit, they fully responded favorably. I believe CMN is systematically preparing this team to play for a championship. Maybe not a national championship, but he knows that the way teams win championships is by overcoming adversity and pressure to perform in key moments of games. We know the staff attempts to create these moments in practice. Would it be out of character to maybe not plan it, but when it begins to happen as it did clearly in the second quarter, do you bring back you starters or substitute you seconds and thirds? If you choose the latter and win, you have gained invaluable experience for those seconds and thirds that can only be grasped when you are in real game situations. Could CMN have so much trust in Travis and his other leaders that he might take such a calculated risk? Well, he tells us and them regularly, he knows what they are capable of and he wants them to realize their full potential. It's only a working postulate. But I'm not ruling it out yet.
Scalp 'Cuse
