The big 2014 Virginia Tech football guide: Only have to be good to win big

Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.

1. "Virginia Tech is going to be pretty good in 2014"

I basically punted on making a Virginia Tech prediction last year.

Tech was just not very good in 2012. The symptoms were basically the same in 2012 as in 2008 -- an offense that lost the plot, a strangely poor special teams unit, and a defense that was still quite good but not elite -- but the edges were a little duller last fall, the talent a little more difficult to spot.

There is still some talent in Blacksburg, but there might be one more year of tumbling before we get a good glimpse of it. The offense lost its direction last year, and it is now run by a coach who was the coordinator of a directionless offense last year. The defense should hold steady in the nearly elite fringes but probably won't improve enough to drag the offense back toward the suburbs.

There's hope. The offensive line will be laden with seniors next year. The corps of running backs should stabilize. And while there are quite a few senior studs on defense, there is also a wealth of young, fun talent that should be able to hold its own. If Beamer has another bounce-back (a Beamer, if you will) in him, you'll see it unfold in 2014-15. Just don't expect much improvement this year.

I was right and wrong in that summary. Technically Virginia Tech improved, but really the Hokies just became more pronounced. A bad offense got worse, and a good defense became great despite a swath of what could have been devastating injuries. The Hokies got romped by very good teams, played well against decent teams, and completely underwhelmed against mediocre teams.

It made for one of the stranger 8-5 seasons on record. With a 3-3 record in one-possession games, they were just a handful of plays from either five wins or 11. The defense deserved to play in a BCS bowl, while the offense didn't deserve the postseason at all.

In the end, the Hokies did improve when I said they wouldn't. What happens next? I'm 12 months on the record saying they could break through in 2014, so why don't I feel it now? Perhaps it's because the Tech defense almost literally can't get any better, meaning the offense might have to improve just so the team breaks even? Perhaps it's because head coach Frank Beamer set the bar so high -- eight straight seasons with 10+ wins and 11 in 13 years -- that 15 wins in two years feels like an unsalvageable program collapse?

Regardless, here's what we know: the offense gets a fresh start (for better or worse), the defense will again be very good, and if Tech can just improve back to a top-20 or top-25 level, there could be a lot of wins waiting on the schedule.

2013 Schedule & Results

Record: 8-5 | Adj. Record: 12-1 | Final F/+ Rk: 27
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Adj. Score	Adj. W-L	5-gm Adj. Avg.
31-Aug	vs. Alabama	2	10-35	L	15.8 - 6.3	W
7-Sep	Western Carolina	N/A	45-3	W	28.8 - 17.5	W
14-Sep	at East Carolina	40	15-10	W	18.6 - 13.3	W
21-Sep	Marshall	52	29-21	W	26.9 - 10.7	W
26-Sep	at Georgia Tech	34	17-10	W	24.7 - 12.4	W	10.9
5-Oct	North Carolina	38	27-17	W	27.6 - 19.2	W	10.7
12-Oct	Pittsburgh	54	19-9	W	19.0 - 12.9	W	9.6
26-Oct	Duke	41	10-13	L	21.5 - 12.0	W	10.5
2-Nov	at Boston College	65	27-34	L	24.5 - 23.1	W	7.5
9-Nov	at Miami	36	42-24	W	40.9 - 23.3	W	8.6
16-Nov	Maryland	63	24-27	L	22.4 - 21.4	W	7.1
30-Nov	at Virginia	79	16-6	W	23.2 - 21.8	W	6.2
31-Dec	vs. UCLA	15	12-42	L	18.9 - 28.2	L	2.4

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk	Spec. Tms.	Rk
F/+	-5.9%	85	+23.3%	3	-0.3%	75
Points Per Game	22.5	100	19.3	11
Adj. Points Per Game	24.1	98	17.1	3

2. Cracks finally began to show

It was like Virginia Tech was playing a different sport than everybody else.

Whether the Hokies were on offense or defense, the forward pass was still a hit-or-miss proposition, one that punished the greedy and convinced offensive coordinators that hurling a running back into the backs of offensive linemen was the sanest option. Passes were seemingly batted away as frequently as they were caught. Place-kicking was anything but automatic. It was as if Virginia Tech played all of its games in the year 1968.

After about two months of this, the Tech defense began to give a bit.

• Adj. Points Per Game (first 8 games): VT 22.9, Opponent 13.0 (plus-9.9)
• Adj. Points Per Game (last 5 games): VT 26.0, Opponent 23.6 (plus-2.4)

The Hokies were still well above average on that side of the ball, but after allowing greater than 4.1 yards per play just once in the first eight games, they did so in each of the final five. After allowing 3.3 yards per play to Alabama, they allowed 4.3 to Virginia. The loss of corner Kyle Fuller to injury, combined with the simple grind of carrying an entire team for a year, added up.

3. Blowout losses to good teams? Check. Upset losses to iffy teams? Check.

In this week's Miami preview, we talked about the art of making a false impression. Miami's offense was pretty awful in the three Miami games most fans were likely to have seen in 2013 (Florida, Florida State, Louisville) but ended up 12th in Off. F/+ because it was pretty fantastic the rest of the way (and because the three defenses that dominated it were all very good).

Virginia Tech pulled off its own variation of this, getting blown out by a combined 77-22 against the two truly good teams on the schedule (Alabama, UCLA) and suffering two immaculately frustrating, tight home upset losses to Maryland and Duke. (They also got Andre Williams'd against BC, but that's more forgivable because Williams was amazing.)

Those five results are pretty awful. But in the other nine games, mostly against decent to pretty good teams (none great, only one terrible), the Hokies went undefeated.

• Actual Points Per Game (vs. top 30): Opponent 38.5, VT 11.0 (minus-27.5) (record: 0-2)
• Actual Points Per Game (vs. No. 31-60): VT 22.7, Opponent 14.9 (plus-7.8) (record: 6-1)
  
• Actual Points Per Game (vs. No. 61-90): VT 22.3, Opponent 22.3 (plus-0.0) (record: 1-2)

They beat a strong ECU team on the road. The beat Georgia Tech on the road when the Jackets were at their best. They handled decent UNC and Pitt teams by 10 points each. They erupted offensively and pulled away from Miami.

Again, because Tech produced such consistently solid results for so long, any upset loss still kind of feels calamitous, and it leaves us with an impression of a team in free fall. But because of that defense, this was still a top-30 team. And if you leave individual results aside and look at the team as a whole, it doesn't take too many ifs to make this team really good again.

But it takes a few.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.12	74	IsoPPP+	103.6	43
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	38.0%	106	Succ. Rt. +	91.1	89
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	28.1	29	Def. FP+	102.4	30
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	3.8	101	Redzone S&P+	83.8	110
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	20.4		ACTUAL	19	-1.4

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	102	85	90	87
RUSHING	110	105	105	98
PASSING	63	65	69	60
Standard Downs		81	89	51
Passing Downs		84	90	46

Q1 Rk	53	1st Down Rk	88
Q2 Rk	85	2nd Down Rk	89
Q3 Rk	67	3rd Down Rk	69
Q4 Rk	118

Quarterback

Note: players in bold below are 2014 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Player	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Rivals	Comp	Att	Yards	TD	INT	Comp Rate	Sacks	Sack Rate	Yards/ Att.
Logan Thomas				228	403	2909	16	13	56.6%	30	6.9%	6.2
Mark Leal	6'1, 218	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	15	29	155	0	2	51.7%	3	9.4%	4.1
Brendan Motley	6'4, 219	So.	3 stars (5.5)
Michael Brewer (Texas Tech)	6'0, 202	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	7	10	65	1	0	70.0%	2	16.7%	3.9
Chris Durkin	6'3, 230	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)
Andrew Ford	6'3, 195	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)

4. Ode to Logan

Logan Thomas' Sun Bowl performance was a nearly perfect microcosm of Thomas' career as a whole. Thomas showed off spectacular size and physical potential in nearly pulling a Tommie Frazier against the UCLA defense.

He also completed just three of 11 passes for 46 yards, and when he was injured and lost for the game in the second quarter, his supporting cast proved that it didn't exactly have much to offer, either in his assistance or in his absence. UCLA and Virginia Tech were tied at 7-7 when he got hurt, and UCLA outscored the Hokies, 35-5, the rest of the way.

For a couple of different reasons, Thomas never got a fair shot. His athletic gifts, combined with Virginia Tech's history of producing a few outstanding dual-threat quarterbacks, put him on "future Heisman contender" lists before the converted tight end had even taken a college snap. On potential alone, he was put pretty high on draft lists. The bar for him was set at a level that few could exceed, and he was in no position to even come close to exceeding it.

First of all, he was only a decent quarterback. His decision-making had some flaws, to put it politely. But beyond that, he simply had no help. In 2013, his top three running backs combined to average 4.0 yards per carry. In 2012, the top three averaged 4.5. The line, stocked with quite a few high-ranking recruits, gave him almost no support. He tended to have some pretty good receivers (Marcus Davis and Corey Fuller in 2012 and a decent trio of Willie Byrn, Demitri Knowles, and Josh Stanford in 2013), but his own limitations and a steady stream of passing downs assured that he would only have so much passing success.

Now Thomas is gone. In his place will be either senior Mark Leal (last year's backup who struggled in the Sun Bowl, again to put it politely), sophomore Brendan Motley (the end-of-spring first-stringer who was below Leal on the depth chart last year), a true freshman, or graduate transfer Michael Brewer, Texas Tech's assumed 2013 starter who got hurt and fell behind a freshman on the depth chart.

Which might work best in this offense? Hard to say.

On one hand, the best pure passer of the bunch might be the best option, because a good passer can do serious damage with the trio of Byrn, Knowles, and Stanford (combined: 1,941 receiving yards, 14.3 per catch, 60 percent catch rate) at his disposal.

On the other hand, a mobile quarterback is almost a must -- even with Thomas' short-yardage power, Tech still ranked an abysmal 105th in Rushing S&P+. Until Trey Edmunds began to emerge late in the year (41 carries for 228 yards and five touchdowns in his last three games before injury), Thomas was the Tech running game. Without a good runner at QB, does the run get even worse? Is that even possible?

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Rivals	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Carry	Opp. Rate
Trey Edmunds	RB	6'1, 217	So.	4 stars (5.8)	166	675	10	4.1	5.5	28.3%
Logan Thomas	QB				132	559	4	4.2	3.2	36.4%
J.C. Coleman	RB	5'7, 191	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	84	284	1	3.4	1.8	32.1%
Chris Mangus	RB	6'0, 182	So.	3 stars (5.7)	27	142	1	5.3	11.2	25.9%
Joel Caleb	RB	6'2, 205	So.	4 stars (5.9)	8	41	1	5.1	1.7	62.5%
Jerome Wright	RB	6'2, 224	So.	3 stars (5.5)	7	27	0	3.9	2.5	42.9%
Carlis Parker	WR	6'3, 195	So.	3 stars (5.6)	6	40	0	6.7	1.7	83.3%
Sam Rogers	FB	5'10, 215	So.	NR	5	9	0	1.8	N/A	0.0%
Demitri Knowles	WR	6'1, 178	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	4	23	0	5.8	2.8	50.0%
Mark Leal	QB	6'1, 218	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	4	9	0	2.3	3.9	25.0%
Shai McKenzie	RB	5'10, 212	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)
Marshawn Williams	RB	5'11, 224	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Rivals	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	%SD	Yds/ Target	NEY	Real Yds/ Target	RYPR
Willie Byrn	FL	5'10, 183	Sr.	2 stars (5.1)	82	51	660	62.2%	20.4%	46.8%	8.0	31	8.0	82.2
Demitri Knowles	FL	6'1, 178	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	78	45	641	57.7%	19.4%	40.3%	8.2	64	8.9	79.8
Joshua Stanford	SE	6'1, 196	So.	3 stars (5.5)	68	40	640	58.8%	16.9%	49.2%	9.4	133	9.5	79.7
D.J. Coles	SE				48	25	387	52.1%	11.9%	52.3%	8.1	48	8.4	48.2
Kalvin Cline	TE	6'4, 243	So.	NR	39	26	321	66.7%	9.7%	66.7%	8.2	12	8.3	40.0
Ryan Malleck (2012)	TE	6'4, 241	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	29	17	174	58.6%	7.1%	58.6%	6.0	N/A	5.9	18.8
Trey Edmunds	RB	6'1, 217	So.	4 stars (5.8)	25	17	155	68.0%	6.2%	43.5%	6.2	-45	6.1	19.3
Sam Rogers	FB	5'10, 215	So.	NR	20	12	78	60.0%	5.0%	68.4%	3.9	-73	3.2	9.7
J.C. Coleman	RB	5'7, 191	Jr.	4 stars (5.9)	18	11	79	61.1%	4.5%	37.5%	4.4	-58	4.5	9.8
Chris Mangus	RB	6'0, 182	So.	3 stars (5.7)	12	9	72	75.0%	3.0%	50.0%	6.0	-29	6.0	9.0
Carlis Parker	SE	6'3, 195	So.	3 stars (5.6)
Darius Redman	TE	6'4, 272	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)
Bucky Hodges	TE	6'6, 243	RSFr.	4 stars (5.8)
Deon Newsome	WR	5'11, 186	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)
David Prince	WR	6'1, 185	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)
Cam Phillips	WR	6'1, 185	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)
Xavier Burke	TE	6'3, 245	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)
Isaiah Ford	WR	6'2, 180	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)

5. Forget everything you know

If we forget for a moment the sight of Tech's eternal offensive stagnation and look at individual pieces, it's not impossible to think this could turn into a completely different O with a new player in charge, even if that new player isn't much better than Thomas. You could potentially craft a decent identity around...

• the aforementioned trio of strong wideouts (only one of whom is a senior).
• a pair of tight ends -- Kalvin Cline and Ryan Malleck -- that has shown decent potential in the last two years.
• a healthy Trey Edmunds, who was explosive but woefully inefficient (a common problem with freshmen) in 2013.
• a constellation of potentially decent backup runners: J.C. Coleman (pretty good in 2012, pretty bad in 2013), Chris Mangus (major explosiveness potential), Joel Caleb (major short-yardage potential), Jerome Wright (big), and either of two true freshmen -- Shai McKenzie and Marshawn Williams. There are a lot of recruiting stars there, and there has been just enough production to suggest that they could do significant damage with a stronger offensive line.
• a stronger offensive line that returns four starters and six players with starting experience (73 career starts). Thomas was big and strong but didn't always make the best decisions in the option game, and if the new quarterback makes better choices and the line makes better blocks, voila.

The burden of proof on the offense is infinite. You could have painted just as rosy a picture last year. But offensive coordinator Scot Loeffler, who has his own burden of proof after leading offenses that ranked 111th in 2012 (Auburn) and 85th in 2013 (VT), does have pieces to work with here, and he's going to be more familiar with his personnel in his second year on the job.

Offensive Line

Category	Adj. Line Yds	Std. Downs LY/carry	Pass. Downs LY/carry	Opp. Rate	Power Success Rate	Stuff Rate	Adj. Sack Rate	Std. Downs Sack Rt.	Pass. Downs Sack Rt.
Team	87.7	2.63	2.46	32.7%	48.0%	21.7%	91.2	4.8%	8.9%
Rank	109	107	121	121	124	102	79	70	97

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Rivals	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Andrew Miller	RG				34
David Wang	C	6'2, 298	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	23
Caleb Farris	C	6'3, 303	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	18
Jonathan McLaughlin	LT	6'5, 314	So.	3 stars (5.6)	13
Brent Benedict	LG	6'5, 302	Sr.	4 stars (5.9)	13
Laurence Gibson	RT	6'6, 274	Sr.	4 stars (6.0)	6
Matt Arkema	C				2
Mark Shuman	RT	6'7, 312	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0
Alston Smith	LG	6'2, 281	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0
Augie Conte	RG	6'6, 293	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0
Wyatt Teller	LG	6'5, 296	RSFr.	4 stars (6.0)
Parker Osterloh	LT	6'8, 321	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)
Kyle Chung	C	6'3, 281	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)
Braxton Pfaff	RG	6'5, 307	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.22	97	IsoPPP+	97.9	72
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	32.1%	2	Succ. Rt. +	137.3	2
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	30.7	57	Off. FP+	104.5	17
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Trip in 40	3.9	36	Redzone S&P+	114.3	21
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	26.4		ACTUAL	26.0	-0.4

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	4	2	2	3
RUSHING	10	5	2	7
PASSING	8	2	3	3
Standard Downs		3	2	35
Passing Downs		8	7	89

Q1 Rk	7	1st Down Rk	1
Q2 Rk	3	2nd Down Rk	14
Q3 Rk	4	3rd Down Rk	1
Q4 Rk	3

6. Bud Foster's finest coaching job

There was no question that Virginia Tech was going to have a pretty good defense in 2013. It returned most of a salty defensive line, it had Jack Tyler back at linebacker, and it had upside galore in the secondary.

But to lose star corners Antone Exum (who missed 10 games) and Kyle Fuller (who missed four) to injury and basically end the season with four freshman corners on the two-deep and to still improve from 22nd to third in Def. F/+, was just spectacular. Bud Foster is one of the all-time greats as a defensive coordinator, and he pulled off perhaps the best performance of his coaching career in 2013.

Defensive Line

Category	Adj. Line Yds	Std. Downs LY/carry	Pass. Downs LY/carry	Opp. Rate	Power Success Rate	Stuff Rate	Adj. Sack Rate	Std. Downs Sack Rt.	Pass. Downs Sack Rt.
Team	130.2	2.30	2.56	29.6%	58.1%	24.1%	164	11.9%	7.8%
Rank	3	6	12	1	17	15	5	1	41

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Rivals	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Luther Maddy	DT	6'1, 291	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	13	41.5	6.7%	13.5	6.5	0	2	0	0
J.R. Collins	DE				13	37.5	6.1%	11.0	5.0	0	1	1	0
Derrick Hopkins	DT				13	37.5	6.1%	9.0	5.0	0	0	0	1
James Gayle	DE				13	32.0	5.2%	10.5	6.0	0	1	1	0
Dadi Nicolas	DE	6'3, 218	Jr.	NR	13	27.0	4.4%	7.0	4.0	1	3	0	0
Corey Marshall (2012)	DT	6'1, 257	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	13	18.0	2.5%	3.0	1.5	0	1	0	0
Tyrel Wilson	DE				12	10.5	1.7%	1.5	1.0	0	0	0	0
Nigel Williams	DT	6'2, 289	So.	3 stars (5.6)	13	10.5	1.7%	7.0	2.0	0	0	0	0
Woody Baron	DT	6'1, 264	So.	3 stars (5.6)	13	6.0	1.0%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Matt Roth	DE				7	2.5	0.4%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Ken Ekanem	DE	6'3, 245	So.	4 stars (5.8)	11	2.0	0.3%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Dewayne Alford	DE	6'2, 243	So.	3 stars (5.5)
Seth Dooley	DE	6'5, 245	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)
Wade Hansen	DT	6'6, 291	Jr.	NR
Ricky Walker	DT	6'2, 265	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)
Vinny Mihota	DT	6'5, 249	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Rivals	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Jack Tyler	LB				13	67.5	11.0%	11.0	4.5	0	1	1	0
Tariq Edwards	LB				13	56.0	9.1%	11.0	3.5	1	3	0	0
Ronny Vandyke (2012)	OLB	6'3, 204	Jr.	4 stars (5.8)	13	19.0	2.6%	2.0	0.0	0	0	1	0
Josh Trimble	OLB	6'0, 222	Jr.	NR	13	12.5	2.0%	2.0	1.0	0	1	0	0
Dahman McKinnon	LB	6'1, 208	So.	3 stars (5.6)	12	8.5	1.4%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Chase Williams	LB	6'2, 215	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	11	7.5	1.2%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Deon Clarke	LB	6'2, 221	So.	4 stars (5.8)	9	7.5	1.2%	0.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Derek DiNardo	OLB	6'0, 207	Sr.	NR	13	6.0	1.0%	0.5	0.0	0	0	1	0
Devin Vandyke	LB	6'0, 218	So.	3 stars (5.7)
Andrew Motuapuaka	LB	5'11, 241	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)
Jamieon Moss	LB	6'1, 212	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)
Raymon Minor	LB	6'3, 215	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)
Melvin Keihn	LB	6'2, 215	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)

7. New faces up front

This year, Foster faces a different issue. Everybody not named Exum or Kyle Fuller returns for the Tech secondary, and Tech's pass defense should be elite once again. But there's pretty serious turnover in the front seven. Starting tackle Derrick Hopkins, three of the top four ends (including J.R. Collins and James Gayle, who combined for 21.5 tackles for loss), and both inside linebackers (Tyler and Tariq Edwards) are gone.

There's potential here, of course -- this is Virginia Tech, after all. Dynamic tackle Luther Maddy is back, as is undersized, fast-as-hell end Dadi Nicholas. But a trio of sophomores who struggled to crack the rotation last year (end Ken Ekanem and tackles Nigel Williams and Woody Baron) will need to come up big. Williams is a potentially fantastic playmaker (7.0 of his 10.5 tackles were behind the line last year), and both Baron and Ekanem have had buzz associated with their names at times. But if they're not ready to thrive, this unit will suffer.

The same goes for the linebackers. Ronny Vandyke looked like a missile at outside linebacker but went off-course because of injuries. There are quite a few sophomores and freshmen with potential, but the two proven entities are gone.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Rivals	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Kyshoen Jarrett	ROV	5'11, 191	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	13	56.0	9.1%	1	0	2	2	0	0
Kendall Fuller	CB	5'11, 195	So.	5 stars (6.1)	13	48.0	7.8%	2.5	0.5	6	11	1	1
Detrick Bonner	FS	6'0, 194	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	13	40.5	6.6%	2	0	2	6	0	0
Brandon Facyson	CB	6'2, 191	So.	3 stars (5.7)	12	23.5	3.8%	2	0	5	8	1	0
Kyle Fuller	CB				9	20.5	3.3%	2	0	2	10	1	0
Chuck Clark	CB	6'0, 208	So.	3 stars (5.5)	12	15.0	2.4%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Der'Woun Greene	CB	5'10, 189	So.	3 stars (5.7)	13	6.5	1.1%	0	0	0	1	0	0
Desmond Frye	ROV	6'2, 202	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	13	5.5	0.9%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Antone Exum	CB				3	4.0	0.6%	0	0	0	1	0	0
Donovan Riley	CB	5'11, 207	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	13	2.0	0.3%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Zach Snell	ROV	5'10, 205	So.	NR
Anthony Shegog	ROV	6'1, 211	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)
Erikk Banks	CB	5'9, 171	RSFr.	NR
Holland Fisher	DB	6'2, 210	Fr.	4 stars (5.9)
C.J. Reavis	DB	6'0, 190	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)
Zakeel Muhammad	FS	5'10, 170	Fr.	NR

8. The secondary: a work of art

There's no question that the secondary suffered a bit when the older Fuller went down. There was clear regression at that point. But with an offseason to account for his and Exum's losses, there's just no doubt in my mind that this will be one of the two or three best secondaries in the country in 2014. Kendall Fuller, Kyle's brother, was one of the most highly  touted recruits to ever sign with Tech, and he proved himself from Day 1. He finished the year with some of the best havoc stats (2.5 tackles for loss, 17 passes defensed, one forced fumble) of any corner in the country, freshman or older. Brandon Facyson (two TFLs, 13 PDs, one FF) was almost as good.

Safety Detrick Bonner is a lovely ball hawk, and Kyshoen Jarrett is a nearly perfect Rover for Foster's flexible 4-4. Another pair of four-star freshmen will try to enter the rotation this fall, but thanks to last year's injuries, the second stringers are pretty experienced, too.

An injury to Fuller or Facyson would be a pretty big setback, of course, but after last year's injuries, we won't talk about more cornerback injuries.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
A.J. Hughes	6'1, 212	Jr.	78	44.1	8	16	24	51.3%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Mitchell Ludwig	5'11, 195	So.	39	61.5	13	0	33.3%
Michael Branthover	5'9, 202	Sr.	17	62.1	3	0	17.6%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Cody Journell			24-26	5-8	62.5%	5-8	62.5%
Erik Kristensen	5'11, 162	So.	4-4	4-5	80.0%	0-0	N/A
Michael Branthover	5'9, 202	Sr.	1-2	1-1	100.0%	0-1	0.0%
Ethan Keyserling			0-3	0-2	0.0%	0-1	0.0%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2014 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Demitri Knowles	KR	6'1, 178	Jr.	22	21.8	0
Chris Mangus	KR	6'0, 182	So.	5	16.8	0
Kyshoen Jarrett	PR	5'11, 191	Sr.	26	5.3	0
Willie Byrn	PR	5'10, 183	Sr.	10	3.7	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams F/+	75
Field Goal Efficiency	104
Punt Return Efficiency	68
Kick Return Efficiency	78
Punt Efficiency	41
Kickoff Efficiency	30
Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency	118

9. BeamerBall?

The template I use for filling in all of the player data above only allots two slots for place-kickers. That works just fine for 99 percent of FBS, but I had to carve out a couple of extra spaces for Tech in the wake of 2013's disastrous place-kicking situation.

Cody Journell, suspended multiple times for off-the-field incidents, was finally kicked off the team in November. His replaceemnts were shaky. Tech used four kickers in all, though it does appear that sophomore Erik Kristensen might end up being a keeper. Might.

When you develop a reputation for elite defense and special teams, people will rather predictably hammer away when one of those units struggles. While the defense was perhaps Tech's best ever (statistically), Tech special teams have oscillated between elite (first in Special Teams F/+ in 2007 and 2010, eighth in 2009) and distinctly mediocre (80th in 2008, 68th in 2011, 62nd in 2012, 75th in 2013). Stability at kicker will help, but it wasn't the only issue. The return game was more lifeless than we're used to seeing, and while everybody in the return unit is back, somebody needs to improve. (There aren't many worries in punting or kickoffs, though.)

2014 Schedule & Projection Factors

2014 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. Rk
30-Aug	William & Mary	NR
6-Sep	at Ohio State	4
13-Sep	East Carolina	57
20-Sep	Georgia Tech	44
27-Sep	Western Michigan	117
4-Oct	at North Carolina	35
16-Oct	at Pittsburgh	39
23-Oct	Miami	30
1-Nov	Boston College	69
15-Nov	at Duke	56
22-Nov	at Wake Forest	83
28-Nov	Virginia	62

Five-Year F/+ Rk	19.1% (18)
Two-Year Recruiting Rk	20
TO Margin/Adj. TO Margin*	7 / 6.0
TO Luck/Game	+0.4
Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.)	15 (9, 6)

10. A top-25 team might go 10-2

With a slightly above-average (and no better) offense in 2013, Virginia Tech would have been a top-20 team even despite the special teams issues. If change at quarterback, experience on the line, and upside at the skill positions can converge to form a decent offense, Tech could plow through a good portion of the 2014 schedule.

I was biting my lip while I typed that last sentence. For anybody who actually watched Tech's offense last year, it's hard to imagine any serious level of competence, but if the line gels, or Brewer or some other new starter is able to lead the offense forward, then it certainly bears mentioning that Tech misses Florida State, Clemson, and Louisville in inter-division play and gets Miami and Georgia Tech at home. The schedule features only one team projected better than 30th and only three road opponents projected better than 56th.

If, somehow, the offense is able to play a positive role in making Tech a top-20 team, the Hokies will once again win 10+ games.

A top-35 or so team, however, is honing pretty squarely in on another 7-6 year, especially if there's another home upset involved. The defense will need a little bit of help because of the inexperience in the front seven. Will it get that help?

Follow @SBNationCFB Follow @SBNRecruiting