Virginia Tech football has reasonable expectations and a hell of a head coach

Check out the advanced-stats glossary here. Below, a unique review of last year’s team, a unit-by-unit breakdown of this year’s roster, the full 2016 schedule with win projections for each game, and more.

On Wednesday’s Podcast Ain’t Played Nobody, Steven Godfrey and I fielded a question from a Kansas State fan about hard jobs and how they go back to being hard when a legend retires.

Nearly three decades ago, we made a tremendous hire in [Bill] Snyder. Since then, he’s fielded a lot of good teams and a few great ones. The university has made tens of millions of dollars in stadium and facility improvements. Additionally, fan support has greatly increased, through both donations and ticket sales.

However, we still struggle to recruit at even a top 50 or 60 level. And the general perception seems to be that we will fall back to pre-Snyder levels of incompetence when he finally retires for good.

My response to him was basically that even recruiting at a top-50 or top-60 level is a sign that KSU won’t fall to pre-Snyder levels of incompetence because that pre-Snyder bar is really, really low. I also noted that part of KSU fans’ concerns is that they saw what happened the first time Snyder left. Within three years, they were, per S&P+, the No. 90 team in the country. (I also defended Ron Prince’s performance in Manhattan a bit, and I don’t feel proud of that, so I’ll just move on.)

You could make the case that Virginia Tech fans could have similar worries. The Hokie program was not nearly in the sort of dire shape that KSU was in in the late-1980. Early-1980s Northwestern aside, no major-conference program can match that depth; still, before Frank Beamer, Tech had finished a season ranked in the AP poll just twice. The Hokies had been to six bowls.

During the 29-year Beamer era, on the other hand, they finished 16 seasons ranked and seven seasons ranked in the top 10. They bowled in each of his last 23 years. They are in the ACC because of Beamer.

Like Kansas State, Tech attempted to significantly enhance its infrastructure to maximize the effects of Beamer’s success. But should Tech fans be more worried about their lot in life now that Beamer retired?

Maybe, but probably not. Tech went out and replaced him with the most sure-thing hire of the offseason.

No hire is truly a sure thing, of course. You can never completely know a new coach’s fit within the culture of the program ahead of time, you don’t know which recruiting battles he’s going to win and lose, etc. You only know how good he’s been in his previous job(s).

Justin Fuente was completely and totally awesome at his. Gary Patterson’s former offensive coordinator at TCU, Fuente inherited a Memphis program in wretched shape in 2012 and almost instantly began improving the Tigers’ lot in life. They had gone 5-31 in the three years before his arrival, and they ranked 120th in S&P+ in 2011. In 2012-13, they went 7-17 with rankings in the 80s. In 2014-15, they went 19-7 and ranked 49th and 55th, respectively.

He made a great defensive coordinator hire in Barry Odom (now Missouri’s head coach), and the defense surged in the very first year and rose to 23rd in Def. S&P+ in 2014. The offense took a couple more years to turn around but did so, peaking at 27th in Off. S&P+ in 2014.

Fuente proved himself organized and extremely effective. If Memphis ends up in the Big 12 one day (not that the Big 12 is ever actually going to expand...), he might be the primary reason why. And the fact that he stuck the landing by retaining legendary defensive coordinator Bud Foster made his hire at VT seem even stronger.

Taking over for a legend is never easy, but Beamer did Fuente one final favor by lowering the bar a little bit. After winning at least 10 games in a season 13 times in 17 years between 1995-2011, the Hokies had settled into a seven-win existence, going either 7-6 or 8-5 in each of his final four seasons on the job.

The 8-5 team of 2013 was close to doing quite a bit better, but for the most part Tech has sunk from being a top-15 or 20 team each year to top-40. And in 2015, the Hokies ranked 59th in S&P+ with a fifth straight subpar offense and a surprisingly average defense as well.

Fuente inherits a team with talent and flaws, and he doesn’t have to win 10 games right out of the gates. This is a nice arrangement for both parties.

Beamer’s final season was, like quite a few other recent Tech seasons, marked by highs and lows. The Hokies looked brilliant in their handling of teams like Purdue (which wasn’t terrible at the beginning of the year) and NC State but would bottom out almost immediately. During a 3-5 start, they went 0-3 in one-possession games, but as you see from the win expectancy numbers above, there was justice in those results.

VT won three of its final four regular-season games to finish bowl-eligible, and while the overall level of play wasn’t much higher in these games, it was steadier. Tech hovered in the 50-70 range in terms of percentile performances instead of jumping from 90 to 20 and back.

Variance is a sign of a young team, and the Hokies were led by a freshman running back, sophomore receivers, sophomore linebackers, and freshman defensive backs. But they were pretty experienced at quarterback and on the defensive line, which means Fuente’s first team will not be without its turnover and question marks.

Perhaps the most impressive thing about Fuente’s performance at Memphis, the aspect of his coaching personality that leads us to assume he will do well in Blacksburg, is his adaptability. He doesn’t employ a system so much as he just observes his team’s strengths and weaknesses and sets about maximizing the former and minimizing the latter.

At Memphis in 2015, that meant a pass-first approach with lots of tempo and attempts to spread defenses out. The Tigers weren’t Leachian in their passing, and they actually ran the ball more frequently than the national average on passing downs (35 percent). But with an inefficient running game, their strength lied in passing the ball quite a bit on first down, and Paxton Lynch completed 67 percent of his passes on those downs.

Fuente’s urges usually drifted toward tempo and spacing, but while Lynch was more mobile than his lanky frame suggested (not including sacks, he rushed 70 times for 358 yards last year), the QB who starts for Tech in 2016 will probably carry a heavier rushing load.

The leading QB candidates at the end of spring ball appeared to be Brenden Motley and Jerod Evans. Motley spent part of the season in the starting lineup thanks to an injury to Michael Brewer, but he proved more efficient as a runner (45 percent opportunity rate) than a passer (56 percent completion rate). Evans, meanwhile, dominated at Trinity Valley Community College last year, completing 62 percent of his passes for 38 touchdowns and three interceptions. But in just eight games, he also rushed for 414 yards and four scores.

Neither Motley nor Evans is likely to pull a Denard Robinson or Taysom Hill and threaten to rush for 1,500 yards, but one assumes the read option will be in heavy rotation for Fuente and new offensive coordinator Brad Cornelsen, his co-coordinator at Memphis.

Note: players in bold below are 2016 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Ball distribution was pretty top-heavy for Tech in 2015. Travon McMillian carried 200 times as a redshirt freshman while the next three tailbacks on the list combined for 108. The trio of Isaiah Ford, Cam Phillips, and tight end Bucky Hodges combined for three-quarters of all of Tech’s targets.

That gives us a pretty good idea of who the starters will be, but Fuente’s Memphis offenses disseminated the ball quite a bit more -- four running backs carried at least 60 times in 2015, for instance, while seven receivers were targeted at least 25 times.

That McMillian, Ford, Phillips, and Hodges all return is unquestionably a good thing. Ford turned into a strong No. 1 target, and McMillian held his own as a freshman from both an efficiency and explosiveness standpoint.

Outside of the starters, though, it’s hard to figure out who might be a breakthrough candidate. Shai McKenzie is the second-leading returning tailback, and he carried 13 times. Deon Newsome is the third-leading returning wide receiver, and he was targeted twice with zero catches. If any of the top four get hurt, a very green player will be thrust into a big role.

Whatever happens with the skill guys in 2016, however, things will probably improve in 2017. The big four are all scheduled to return (though obviously NFL defection is possible) and whoever emerges as primary backups (and goodness knows there are plenty of candidates) will be back, too. There are plenty of well-touted options, and they will have their feet wet by 2017.

The whole of the Tech line was less than the sum of its parts for a few years, but the 2015 line showed promise, at least from a run-blocking perspective. (Neither Motley nor Brewer were particularly good at the “get the ball out of your hands quickly” thing and took a lot of sacks that might or might not have been the line’s fault.)

The 2016 line returns eight players from last year’s two-deep and five players who have combined for 90 career starts. Offensive line coach Vance Vice ran Memphis’ line last year with the opposite results -- the Tigers were 98th in Adj. Line Yards but 28th in Adj. Sack Rate. A lot of that has to do with offensive style, but Memphis was also dealing with major injury-related shuffling. Assuming Vice is able to click with his new personnel, then with a solid runner at quarterback, the Tech run game should be pretty solid.

Welcome back, Bud Foster. Now fix your pass defense.

I was over the moon about Tech’s defense heading into the 2015 season. Back then, I said, “Only injuries will keep Tech out of the Def. S&P+ top 5, and as we learned last year, even injuries will only drop the Hokies to 10th or so.” And then Tech went out and ranked 37th in Def. S&P+.

Injuries played a role, to be sure, pinpointing the one person Tech could least afford to lose (cornerback Kendall Fuller) and knocking him out for the season after just three games. But even without Fuller, I would have expected Tech to post a top-20 Passing S&P+ ranking. Instead, the Hokies ranked 48th.

The biggest issue was big plays. Great, aggressive defenses are willing to sacrifice the occasional big gainer in the name of three-and-outs and turnovers. But while Tech’s efficiency numbers were fine (10th in Success Rate+, eighth in Rushing Success Rate+), the big-play balance was skewed. Tech allowed 71 gains of 20-plus yards, 102nd in the country, which was a few too many considering the schedule didn’t feature too many passing heavyweights.

Tech’s havoc numbers were still strong, and while the loss of play-makers Luther Maddy, Dadi Lhomme Nicolas, and Deon Clarke is damaging, the Hokies do still return Andrew Motuapuaka at middle linebacker and Ken Ekanem and Woody Baron up front. But a secondary that was younger than expected last year has something to prove.

Baron and Ekanem are seniors, as is tackle Nigel Williams, who could play a larger role this year. But they are scheduled to be the only losses among the front seven when 2017 rolls around. Whoever else emerges at end (sophomore Vinny Mihota? Redshirt freshmen Houshun Gaines, Trevon Hill, or Darius Fullwood?), tackle (sophomores Ricky Walker or Steve Sobczak? Redshirt freshmen Tim Settle or Harry Lewis?), and linebacker (juniors Anthony Shegog or Sean Huelskamp? Sophomores Tremaine Edwards or Carson Lydon? Sophomore Raymon Minor?) will be back.

And if recruiting rankings and this defense’s history are any indication, they’ll do pretty well this fall.

Because Fuller got hurt, because Donovan Riley wasn’t as impressive at corner as he was at rover in 2014, and because safety C.J. Reavis was dismissed from the team, the Tech secondary was quite a bit younger than it was expected to be last year. (That’s what I’ll use as my primary excuse for being so wrong about this unit!)

Freshmen Adonis Alexander, Mook Reynolds, and Terrell Edmunds all played much larger roles than anticipated, and while they very much held their own, combining for six tackles for loss, four interceptions, and 14 break-ups, they were still freshmen, and freshmen are going to suffer some glitches.

Freshmen also become sophomores. Alexander and end Gaines were arrested on misdemeanor drug charges in April and suspended indefinitely, but until noted otherwise, I assume they will both play in 2016.

Assuming Alexander is eventually back, and assuming corner Brandon Facyson has recovered from an offseason knee injury -- I sure am using the word “assume” a lot here -- the Tech secondary should be fine in 2016. Chuck Clark is a stalwart at safety, and older players like Greg Stroman and Der’Woun Greene could probably play a decent role if asked.

And as Foster has employed freshmen pretty well in the past (2015 was a bit too extreme in that regard), one could see an early role for DuWayne Johnson or Khalil Ladler working out relatively well.

The BeamerBall mantra of stealing an advantage through special teams was not as effective in recent years as it was in Beamer’s heyday. Still, Tech graded out pretty well in special teams last year. The return game was very much all-or-nothing, but Joey Slye emerged as mostly automatic weapon in both kickoffs and place-kicking.

Slye was also asked to attempt 19 field goals of 40-plus yards, which is insane. But at least he made most of them.

If the quarterback position is settled -- especially if Jerod Evans, a junior, wins the job -- then Virginia Tech sure seems to have a lot of pieces in place for Fuente. I’m not completely sure what that means for 2016; a top-30 performance doesn’t at all seem out of the question, but beyond that we’ll see.

We’ll also see a pretty stout team in 2017. Only a few of Tech’s best players are seniors, and whatever the Hokies produce in 2016, they’ll likely produce more a year later.

Per S&P+, there are five likely wins on the schedule, two likely losses, and five games in which the Hokies have a win probability between 38 and 56 percent. That projects to about 7-5, but if Fuente is able to make a quick impact on the offense, that could easily drift toward nine wins or so.

Following a legend is never easy, but Fuente’s own résumé, combined with Tech’s late-Beamer slide, creates a pretty doable situation for a guy I would have voted Most Likely to Succeed in the 2015-16 coaching carousel class.