Depth Chart Released

'07 Football General NCS Football80

Link to pdf. Daniel Evans is listed as the #1 QB, Beck is his backup. Based on what we have read and heard, none of the QBs looked that good in the preseason, and it remains a position to be concerned about. All 3 RBs (including Eugene) are listed as “co-starters.” Interesting.

Demario Pressley is also not listed on the 2-deep. Hopefully, we’ll hear some details during O’Brien’s press conference.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

'07 Football General NCS Football

80 Responses to Depth Chart Released

  1. vtpackfan 08/27/2007 at 7:16 PM #

    Look, DE has even himself noted in one interview that he stunk up the show down the stretch last season (not his exact words ofcourse). He said that the way he reacted to adverse siuations was the root of alot of his difficulties. He wants to be more poised and more of a leader in difficult situations, and for that one reason alone he could be the best pick TOB made for any starting position.

    Thanks for the heads up on the RS issue folks. I still can’t understand why he would list players like Roberts, Vermiglio, and Kuhn as back ups if he didn’t expect them to get in this season. Holmes is another player I am hoping gets redshirted, but it seems kind of moronic to expect Kuhn and Holmes to get RS if Augustine CAN”T EVEN SNIFF THE DEPTH CHART! What happened to this guy.

    Hopefully McCuller makes it back soon, our OL looks like it could really unravel fast. Anyone see about Skippy’s golden boy out in Greenville? Maybe it’s just the nerves getting the best of him before facing that D up at VPI.

  2. burnbarn 08/27/2007 at 7:34 PM #

    I am worried about injuries to this team and the impact they could have on the season. Our OL is scary if anyone gets hurt.
    Hoping for the best, but it could get rough.

  3. noah 08/27/2007 at 7:35 PM #

    Those true freshmen are listed as backups because our OL was absolutely one of the worst lines in college football last year.

    It’s why I picked us to go 3-9 or 4-8. There’s some talent on our defense…not a ton, but some. The offense has some talent at WR and RB, but the line and QB positions were total crap last year.

    I think in three or four years, we’ll have a pretty good team.

  4. Dogbreath 08/27/2007 at 7:57 PM #

    Its pretty simple. We need to average 5 yards per rush on 1st down to have a chance at all of moving the ball down the field, because this team will not be able to pass the ball effectively.

    Our offensive line situation is without doubt the worst legacy of the Amato tenure.

  5. BJD95 08/27/2007 at 8:59 PM #

    Mr O – even if you could excuse away every single pick, there would still be the 6.0 YPA and the 1 TD over his last 7 games.

    I certainly hope he’s light years better this season – because he has to be if we are to exceed 3 or 4 wins.

    The argument to be made for Evans is that he can be better under the tutilege of O’Brien and Bible, not that he was anywhere near good or even ok last year.

  6. waxhaw 08/27/2007 at 9:19 PM #

    I’m hoping the OL shows the most improvement. If we have better run and pass blocking, the QB will look better.

    I’ve seen enough of Evans to know that he isn’t going to be a gunslinger. Hopefully he can lead the team.

  7. choppack1 08/27/2007 at 9:32 PM #

    Mr O – I think the most effective arguments for Evans are his performances before the concussion and the installation of a simpler offense and better execution of said offense.

    In those games vs. UVa, UMd, and UNC were classic cases where we didn’t have a lead because he didn’t move the team. Also, we had what – 1 TD vs. Clemson? He has to do a better job of moving the team.

  8. Mr O 08/27/2007 at 10:11 PM #

    BJD95: I haven’t even mentioned being coached by TOB and Dana Bible, two guys with a long track records of successful offensive coaching, as a reason to be hopeful about Daniel Evans this year.

    The point I was making is that we had a lot of problems last year that put D. Evans in positions where he had to force things which led to most of his mistakes(as I pointed out by his interceptions). I saw him make enough good throws last year that I think he has the tools to manage games for us – like Riley Skinner did last year for Wake Forest. He is accurate, seems to be smart, and has made some big plays.

    You seem to think that we have to have great QB play to have a winning season. That would certainly help, but personally I think our best chance at a winning season is an offensive line that can consistently run block, a defense that creates TOs, and a kicking game that can win field position. I am more concerned with the new kickers we have and our OL play than I am Daniel Evans.

  9. VaWolf82 08/27/2007 at 10:35 PM #

    ….. should be fine

    The names keep changing, but this has been said each and every year for the last four years. Sorry, but I need to see more production before I will give this any credence.

  10. choppack1 08/27/2007 at 10:40 PM #

    VaWolf – the biggest difference between this year nd the last 3 is that we now have a staff that has proven it can develop OL and QBs. The last 2 OCs had no such track record. It may not show this year, but I suspect it will in the future.

    I will be surprised if we don’t see Evans TDs either equal or exceed his INTs.

  11. RochesterRedWolf 08/27/2007 at 11:46 PM #

    They asked TOB in the press conference (free download on ncstate.rivals.com) about Kuhn, Vermiglio, and Desmond Roberts being on the 2-deep chart. TOB said basically “they outplayed their competition.” You have to remember what TOB/Bible’s philosophy is…Curtis Crouch was one of the best offensive lineman in the nation when he came out of High School. And TOB/Bible basically told him he’s too big and slow for the kind of offensive lineman they want, which is why he’s lost i think 40 something pounds. They need lineman to be quicker and move and block down field, actually get penetration.

    I also think Daniel Evans is really more auditioning. I know this is a serious game, and we could lose it, but TOB/Bible wants to see what he and harrison beck can do in a real game. Maybe Beck is ridiculous in an actual game, maybe he’ll totally suck, God knows. So we as fans shouldn’t look at it like its set in (marcus) stone, the first 5 games are to see what the QB’s are really made of, so let’s see. Unfortunately an important game with BC is thrown in there

  12. Mr O 08/27/2007 at 11:46 PM #

    Officially, I picked us to go 4-8 this year, so my positive remarks about D. Evans should not be taken that I think that I am optimistic about this year. I just don’t see D. Evans as big of a weakness as others. I just don’t think there is any hope to have GREAT QB play with who is in the program. If Beck and Burke can’t take the position from D. Evans after being in the program this long, then I just don’t see either one of them ever being a factor. Plus I saw the Spring game and thought both were horrendous. Maybe they can still get better?

  13. sf59 08/28/2007 at 12:15 AM #

    Good stuff O. I would also add (not to excuse away all of DE’s picks) that 2 were a direct result of Ant Hill not finishing his routs. DE can lead this team but not carry it. I think we can all agree he is not being asked to carry.

    If you have some time to kill, check out the QB interviews on gopack.com. They are free. Compare the 2 QBs and tell me who you think can lead a huddle and who you think needs time to mature….it aint rocket science, the choice is very easy.

  14. RochesterRedWolf 08/28/2007 at 1:38 AM #

    ive saw beck in that interview and have read others, he seems like he’s got some kind of chip on his shoulder, its odd. I can’t put my finger on it.

  15. bTHEredterror 08/28/2007 at 5:23 AM #

    Call it a concussion, poor play calling, and inexperience as defensible excuses for DE. But the O-line was not quite as horrid as has been implied. They were 2nd in the ACC in Sacks allowed, 3rd in sacks/attempt at one every 19.95 (ACC avg. 15.1), and 5th in yards per rush. These stats were no doubt bolstered to some degree by some holds and clips of course, but in my opinion the stats that brought down our overall efficiency were largely QB related. Int/att (½3 tenth in the ACC) 51.9 Comp % 10th, and 5.8 YPA 11th. DE was slow to pull the trigger, and often indecisive. The Wake INT for example was a double clutch, wounded duck over the middle late, with two downs and 20 seconds left. Could’ve been the product of the concussion he suffered that day, but many of his decisions were poor and I felt like he held the ball too long most of the time, thus cutting down YAC (as receviers are only open for so long) and increasing sacks and holding calls.

    I’m concerned about the O-line depth like everybody else, and freshman on the two deep as almost always a red flag, but I’m also less pessimistic about their prospects than some of you seem to be. I’ll watch Evans Saturday and hope for improved decision making, and I expect to see it, because he is a hard worker and has a superior attitude. But I’m not holding my breath that he will be a game changer, hopefully he can make plays like Skinner LY, early on in unexpected situations, so he doesn’t have to carry us late quite so often as last year and we can lean on our RB’s. Call it a concussion, poor play calling, and inexperience as defensible excuses for DE. But the O-line was not quite as horrid as has been implied. They were 2nd in the ACC in Sacks allowed, 3rd in sacks/attempt at one every 19.95 (ACC avg. 15.1), and 5th in yards per rush. These stats were no doubt bolstered to some degree by some holds and clips of course, but in my opinion the stats that brought down our overall efficiency were largely QB related. Int/att (½3 tenth in the ACC) 51.9 Comp % 10th, and 5.8 YPA 11th. DE was slow to pull the trigger, and often indecisive. The Wake INT for example was a double clutch, wounded duck over the middle late, with two downs and 20 seconds left. Could’ve been the product of the concussion he suffered that day, but many of his decisions were poor and I felt like he held the ball too long most of the time, thus cutting down YAC (as receviers are only open for so long) and increasing sacks and holding calls.

    I’m concerned about the O-line depth like everybody else, and freshman on the two deep as almost always a red flag, but I’m also less pessimistic about their prospects than some of you seem to be. I’ll watch Evans Saturday and hope for improved decision making, and I expect to see it, because he is a hard worker and has a superior attitude. But I’m not holding my breath that he will be a game changer, hopefully he can make plays like Skinner LY, early on in unexpected situations, so he doesn’t have to carry us late quite as often as LY and we can lean on our RB’s.

  16. vtpackfan 08/28/2007 at 9:12 AM #

    “They were 2nd in the ACC in Sacks allowed, 3rd in sacks/attempt at one every 19.95 (ACC avg. 15.1),”

    I’m not saying this is totally false, but we all know stats can be misleading. IMO, either by Trestsmans design or Amato’s demands, the scheme for passing totally changed. They were so totally paranoid of giving up sacks (field position, TO’s, ect.) that they ditched everything but short drop back pass attempts.

    Everything relied on simple single moves from the receivers and initial reads and check downs by the QB on the line odf scrimmage. Add to that they they almost never allowed a basck of of the backfield to catch a pass, again keeping in as many pass blockers as humanly possible.

    I’m not as smart or as talented as the people who were entrusted with this football team the past couple years, by no means. It kind of makes sense to me that after two games of tape (with DE at the helm) teams saw some shockingly simple and conservative play calling in the passing game and set up their defense accordingly. Add to it that fact that DE wasn’t going to mix it up with scrambling like a Marcus Stone would and it’s quite possible that any defense, even App State, would have handled our passing game with relative ease.

    To conclude, while the the states for pass protection seem impressive, I think we all know we paid for them dearly in other areas. What you want ideally is to achieve those goals through working on technique, formulating a scheme, and executing with efficiency. All these things we know were not being addressed by some of the comments our returning OL made about the difference in the HC’s philosophies regarding OL play.

    I’m not tossing our OL under the bus yet, not before they get to prove themselves one way or another. I think there are some intriguiging prosepects with Williams getting the tough task of protecting our slight framed QB’s blind side, and the re emergence of McCUller once he has atoned for his off field mistake. Crouch, and Lathan are the two who can really come on strong early under the guidance of TOB. They are big, strong, talented and have they experience the others don’t have yet. Heppe is a bit of a question mark, and so are alot of the back up’s (except for the center Barbee?, who I’ve heard is coming along well). We’ll get a chace to see real soon. Go Pack!

  17. partialqualifier 08/28/2007 at 9:38 AM #

    The one reason I have not cared much AT ALL about who the starting QB will be……….

    1- None of them are gonna take us to the ACC Championship Game THIS season. If we are gonna win at all THIS season it will be because TOB gets something out of that O-Line (and our wonderful backs rush for 200 yards or so), and Archer works miracles with that defense. If that can happen then we can win field position, control the clock, maybe get a few gimmes with TO’s or in the special teams (see Blackmon), and pull out some ball games.

    P.S. I am not a proponent of such game strategy. Normally I would say you need an offense that tries to score every time it has the ball. My fav coach is Steve Spurrier if that tells ya anything! But this team is sorely lacking a QB to run that kind of offense.

  18. CaptainCraptacular 08/28/2007 at 9:40 AM #

    ^^ Choppack: *VaWolf – the biggest difference between this year nd the last 3 is that we now have a staff that has proven it can develop OL and QBs. The last 2 OCs had no such track record.*

    Come on now, lets be real here… Trestman has an extensive resume of developing QBs: Bernie Kosar’s national championsip year at UM as well as his school record breaking year the following season, Kosar again at Cleveland when they went to the AFC title games, Scott Mitchell in his one good year @ Detroit, Jake Plummer in the season he led Arizona to the playoffs and a win over Dallas in the WC game, plus Rich Gannon’s MVP season with the Raiders.

    You can’t say he hadn’t proven himself worthy of developing QBs. If anyone could have developed our QBs into All-ACC performers, it should have been Trestman. If Evans improves only slightly, I’d chalk that up to one more year of experience under his belt rather than Bible/TOBs influence. If Evans improves tremendously, well then Bible/TOB deserve a ton of credit and Trestman is a fraud, Kosar/Gannon/Mitchell notwithstanding.

  19. BJD95 08/28/2007 at 9:48 AM #

    I actually agree with alot of what Mr. O said in the last post. If Burke (and especially Beck) couldn’t beat out Evans for any reason other than a spectacular camp by Evans (not the case), then it doesn’t speak well to their likely future prospects. I expected all along that the job was not Evans’ to lose, but rather there for Beck or Burke to step up and win. That didn’t happen. The coaches would likely want to see what they have in Beck or Burke (Evans more of a known quantity), but they can’t just give them the job and essentially throw the season away.

    Which is why I really HOPED that Beck or Burke would win the job. Not b/c I dislike Evans at all, but rather because it would be a bad harbinger for the other two – which puts a great deal of pressure on Glennon’s shoulders. He might be the only real option as early as his redshirt freshman year. I would rather have multiple good options, as QB prospects have a very high “burn” rate.

    FWIW, I don’t think we necessarily need GREAT QB play to have a solid season, but it has to at least be GOOD. In hoops, we talk about just needing a “league average”/placeholder PG to have success. We say that b/c we have great skill and phenomenal depth at every other position on the court. Simply put, the PG just needs to not screw us up.

    You absolutely can’t say that for football. We have a great kick returner and above-average RBs. That’s it. Every other unit on the field projects as average AT BEST, and many below average. Our depth is virtually non-existent. Our QB has to give us a lift, and not just manage games – if we are to be a bowl-caliber team.

    Hell, even with good QB play, a bowl bid wouldn’t be assured. There are that many questions. TOB and crew are excellent coaches, but they’re not freaking magicians.

  20. vtpackfan 08/28/2007 at 10:01 AM #

    I think we have a chance at having an “above average” secondary, especially with Archer’s philosophy of letting them look into the play and react all while playing solid zone coverage. Man-to-man sucks IMO unless you can get a great pass rush.

  21. tcthdi-tgsf-twhwtnc 08/28/2007 at 10:04 AM #

    I won’t go back and look but are those that are bringing up Evans numbers as to why we lost the last seven games the same folks that wouldn’t credit Stone for winning after replacing Davis? If I remember correctly Stone had nothing to do with winning it was the play calling. I don’t disagree with that notion and would assert that Evans numbers where awful in a great part due to the play calling.

  22. BJD95 08/28/2007 at 10:31 AM #

    Play calling alone can’t contribute to numbers THAT bad. It could certainly contribute.

    However, I always thought that a controlled, short passing game would be more in line with Evans’ strengths.

  23. noah 08/28/2007 at 10:58 AM #

    Wasn’t that exactly what we ran last year?

  24. waxhaw 08/28/2007 at 11:02 AM #

    As bad as our offense was last year, we could have won 2-3 more games with fewer penalties and a better turnover ratio.

    If we have significant improvement in those two areas, the OL is much improved and Evans is decent, we can win 6 games. (possibly 7)

  25. BJD95 08/28/2007 at 11:11 AM #

    ^^ yes, that was my point. I don’t see why the style of play-calling would be to Evans’ detriment.

1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply