It was a rocky year for the Virginia Tech offense. Guided by a first-year starting QB and a novice offensive coordinator, and plagued by inconsistent offensive line play and turnovers, the offense put in some dominating performances but often came up a minute late and a touchdown short in critical situations.

The 2002 season was Tech's first under the guidance of new offense coordinator (OC) Bryan Stinespring, a former VT tight ends and offensive line coach who took on OC duties for the first time in his career. Stinespring continued to coach the offensive line during the season, in addition to making up game plans and calling plays.

Heading into the season, the Hokies had question marks at quarterback, wide receiver, tight end, and fullback.

At QB, Grant Noel had put up a decent year in 2001 but had injured his knee in spring practice and faced an uncertain future. Bryan Randall, a true sophomore, was poised to challenge Noel for the starting job but was unable to take it away from Noel in spring football or fall preseason practices.

At wide receiver, record-setting flanker Andre Davis and long-time starter Emmett Johnson were gone, leaving behind a bevy of young, unproven pass catchers. The hope was that Ernest Wilford would have a breakout year, that Shawn Witten would provide steady support, and that someone else (Terrell Parham, perhaps?) would step up.

Bob Slowikowski and Browning Wynn, who had been co-starters at tight end for what seemed like forever, were both gone, leaving the position to Keith Willis, Jared Mazetta, and Jeff King. Willis was perceived as the best receiver of the three, with King the best blocker and Mazetta somewhere in between.

Meanwhile, walk-on legend Jarrett Ferguson had moved on after starting at the fullback position for the last four seasons, and the Hokies were scrambling to find a replacement. Doug Easlick, who had shown promise in a backup role, was first in line, and the Tech coaching staff had converted Josh Spence (from linebacker) and Cedric Humes (from tailback) in an effort to give Easlick competition.

The expectations for the offensive line were fairly high. Tackle Matt Wincek and center Steve DeMasi had departed, leaving three starters (Anthony Davis, Jake Grove, Luke Owens) and some good young talent, so while it was not expected to be a dominating O-line, it wasn't expected that it would be weak, either.

One position where the Hokies did not have any questions was tailback. Back from a knee injury was touchdown machine Lee Suggs, and he would be paired with true sophomore Kevin Jones, the Big East Rookie of the Year in 2001. The Virginia Tech Athletic Department built a promotional campaign around the two by holding a contest and nicknaming Suggs and Jones "The Untouchables," a moniker that Tech would later retract, for reasons that were never publicly stated, but at which one can guess (it made them a target, more so than usual).

With all that in mind, here are TechSideline.com's grades for the 2002 season for each position on the offense, plus the offensive coordinator. Grades are based on a combination of performance and expectations. While each position is graded with an eye towards, "How good was it, compared to how the best performs?" it was also graded with some consideration to expectations. For example, the tailback position was supposed to be strong, but not much was expected of the wide receivers, and that preseason expectation enters into the grading.

The Tech O-line was overpowering at times, and at other times, powerless. And sometimes downright inept. As run-blockers, they were generally good, but on many occasions, they were outnumbered by teams that stacked eight or nine men near the line of scrimmage. As pass blockers, they were mediocre at best, and at times terrible.

The offensive line dominated Marshall (66 rushes, 395 yards), and a good Boston College D-line (61 rushes, 334 yards), but they were unable to muster a strong ground game against good defensive teams like Pittsburgh (45 rushes, 130 yards), Texas A&M (48 rushes, 129 yards), and LSU (51 carries, 166 yards), to name a few.

The Hokies averaged 4.5 yards per rush this season, which is a middle-of-the-pack rushing average for a Beamer bowl team (Tech teams have averaged anywhere from 3.6 to 5.2 yards per carry in the last ten years).

In the passing game, one enduring memory of the 2002 season will be the sight of Bryan Randall running for his life. Admittedly, Randall often scrambled prematurely from a pocket that was holding up well, but he also had to bail out many times because pass rushers were breaking through. Randall was sacked 37 times, worst in the Beamer Bowl era (from 1993-2002; I would research further back than that, but media guides prior to the 1998 media guide require you to count sack statistics game-by-game, which gets tedious).

The next-closest season in terms of sacks given up was the 1998 season, with 32. Even accounting for the fact that this year's statistics cover 14 games (bowl game included) and prior seasons only covered 11 (bowl game not included), this season's 2.64 sacks-per-game average is the second worst of the ten-year Beamer Bowl era, second only to 1998 (2.91).

And this was with a mobile quarterback who would bail out at the drop of a hat.

The middle of the offensive line, anchored by junior center Jake Grove, junior right guard Jacob Gibson, and senior left guard Luke Owens, was solid but not up to the task at times. One of the great failings of the center of the offensive line was their inability to cram the ball into the end zone on a second-and-goal from the WVU one-yard line in a 21-18 loss (okay, so they actually did get it in on one of the plays, but not enough to convince the Big East refs who were on hand pretending they were officiating the game).

The Hokies struggled at the right tackle position. Sophomore Jon Dunn, who started early in the season, was a decent run blocker but a fish out of water in pass blocking, often giving up sacks on speed rushes by defensive ends. He was replaced later in the season by true freshman Jimmy Martin, who had excellent footwork and pass blocked well, but was too light (270 pounds) to be a truly effective run-blocker.

At left tackle, athletic senior Anthony Davis was hot and cold. He was capable of blocking three defenders on any given play (trust me, I saw it on film), but he would often lapse and totally miss a block. Davis is very big (6-4, 322) and surprisingly mobile, but needs to get more consistent to have a good pro career.

This line was often poor at pass-blocking, and just average at run-blocking. This is one area in which the Hokies really need to improve to challenge for the Big East championship in 2003.

It's hard to grade this position, because it was invisible in Tech's offense yet again this year. From 1993 to 2001, Hokie tight ends averaged 1.2 catches and 19.6 yards per game, and they caught 1.4 touchdowns per year.

This year, Hokie tight ends Keith Willis, Jeff King, and Jared Mazetta were just below those miniscule averages. They caught 10 balls for 225 yards (0.7 catches and 16.1 yards per game) and 2 TD's.

As blockers, much like their OL counterparts, the tight ends were hit-or-miss. Willis remains the best receiver of the bunch by far, with King being the most physical and having the best reputation as a blocker. King overtook the starting role as the season wore on, with Willis still getting the lion's share of the catches.

The tight ends were hurt by Bryan Randall's tendency to bail from the pocket. Randall would often make his primary read, and if that wasn't open, break out of the pocket and run. Since tight ends are almost never the primary read in the Tech passing game, that means they didn't get many throws this year.

Kudos to the tight ends for catching the few passes that were thrown to them. Had I not noticed Keith Willis missing a few blocks on film, I would have given them a higher grade, but overall, they had a solid, if mostly anonymous, year.

Ernest Wilford had the breakout year everyone was looking for, catching a Tech-record 51 passes for 925 yards (18.1 per catch) and 7 TD's. Wilford broke the long-standing VT record for catches in a season, 46, by Mike Burnop in 1972 -- we won't talk about how Burnop did it in 11 games, and it took Ernest 14 �

But more so than the numbers, Wilford became a go-to receiver, the kind of guy who can make the tough catch in tight coverage. Tech started throwing the fade route to him, which Hokie fans were glad to see, and several of his TD's came off of it. His eight catches for a Tech-record 279 yards and four TD's against Syracuse will never be forgotten.

After Wilford, Shawn Witten had the steady, great-hands kind of year you would expect: 25 catches, 306 yards, and 1 great TD catch (against Miami). Parham had 18 catches for 156 yards, and Richard Johnson had 14 catches for 147 yards. Justin Hamilton (5 catches, 56 yards) showed flashes of being an up-and-comer.

I was all set to give the wide receivers an A- when I remembered Richard Johnson's critical drop of a sure TD pass late in the Syracuse game. The score was tied 35-all with about three minutes to go when Randall laid what would have been a 74-yard, probable game-winning TD in RJ's hands � and he dropped it. Parham also looked lost a couple of times in his routes. Other than that, the wide receivers had a very good year, especially when you consider their horrible preseason reputation for not being able to hold on to the football. They acquitted themselves very well.

Doug Easlick, who impressed me in a reserve role in the 2001 season, fulfilled my own personal expectations for him. Easlick (5-11, 235, R-Jr.) has good mobility, showed himself to have a good set of hands (fourth on the team with 16 catches for 118 yards and a TD), and most importantly, was a very, very good blocker at times. There was little to no dropoff at fullback for the Hokies.

In a backup role, converted tailback Cedric Humes looked like, well, a converted tailback. At 6-1, 218 (listed), Humes is too light to be a truly effective fullback, particularly at that height. But as a receiver out of the backfield, he was good, catching 7 passes for 76 yards, including a 26-yarder against Miami.

I don�t think you could ask for much more at the top of the depth chart in Easlick, but Humes, unless he bulks up to 235 or 240 and develops a crusher mentality, is not suited for the position. He may be headed for a move back to tailback, especially if freshman walk-ons Jesse Allen and/or Luke Dales develop into good fullbacks.

Lee Suggs returned with a vengeance from his knee injury, rushing for 1,325 yards and 22 touchdowns on 257 carries (5.2 yards per carry). Kevin Jones added 871 yards and 9 TD's on 160 carries (5.4 yards per carry), giving the two of them 417 carries for 2,196 yards (5.26 ypc) and 31 touchdowns. That's 157 yards and over two TD's per game.

But underneath the gaudy statistics were four fumbles (all lost) by Suggs, and eight fumbles (five lost) by KJ, and concern over whether or not Kevin Jones can serve as an every down back for the Hokies starting next year. But that's next year. This year, KJ did a good job as the #2 tailback, and Suggs was his old self, except for those (gasp!) four fumbles.

I bounced back and forth over whether to give The Untouchables a B+ or an A-, and I decided that in the end, only high expectations for the two of them made me want to push their grade down to a B+. We expect a lot of TD Lee and KJ, so any perceived flaw (like "KJ fumbles too much and doesn't hit the hole hard") gets magnified. In the end, with a spotty offensive line, an often run-stubborn game plan, and only one true fullback to lead the way, these two guys did pretty well.

When you talk about the quarterbacks here, you're really only talking about one: Bryan Randall. Grant Noel started against Arkansas State and LSU, but he gave way to Randall early in the LSU game when he tweaked his knee, and he was barely heard from again, except for one awesome TD pass against Miami.

Frankly, I thought they should have put Noel in at the end of the Virginia game, his last home game, but that's another story.

True sophomore Randall put up some decent statistics: 158 of 248 (63.7%) for 2,134 yards, 12 TD's, and 11 interceptions. Early in the year, he helped win tough games against LSU and at Texas A&M, and he nearly set a record with 504 yards passing at Syracuse (and he did set a record with 5 TD's in that game). He threw well within his limitations -- no one will ever call his arm a cannon -- he was tough, and he made some big runs.

The closest comparison you can draw to Randall's situation in recent Tech history is Maurice DeShazo's first year as a starter, in 1992. When comparing Randall to other recent first-time starters at the QB position, I don�t think it's fair to compare him to Jim Druckenmiller, because Druck was a 23-year-old redshirt junior in his first year as a starter (1995). Ditto for Al Clark in his first year as a starter (1997), when he was a 22-year-old redshirt junior. And it's not fair to compare Randall to Michael Vick in Vick's first year as a starter, because Vick's Vick.

In DeShazo's first year starting, his stats were similar to Randall's, although Randall's completion percentage was much higher. In 1992, Maurice went 101 of 215 (47%) for 1,504 yards, 12 TD's, and 11 interceptions.

But more so than that, DeShazo lacked the ability to "will" the team to win that season. He lacked the ability to pick up a struggling defense and carry it to victory. Bryan Randall had the same characteristic this year; he could play well enough to keep Tech in it, but he couldn't carry them. In overtime against Syracuse, he made the critical mistake of throwing a first-down interception in overtime to end the game, and against WVU, he threw a game-ending end zone interception when the Hokies were in great position for the tying field goal.

From that standpoint, though you can see a lot of good in Randall's season, you can also see him for what he is: a true sophomore, from which will come some good and some bad.

Randall finished tenth in the nation in passing efficiency, which is pretty darn good for a first year starter (props to QB coach Kevin Rogers). He made some exceptional plays, but he also turned the ball over with regularity as the season wore on, losing 6 fumbles and 9 interceptions in Tech's last 8 games. The turnovers and the ill-advised game-ending interceptions against Syracuse and WVU kept his grade from being higher, but overall, it was a good year for a guy starting for the first time.

New OC Bryan Stinespring got everyone all hot and bothered with his playcalling in last season's Gator Bowl, where the team flashed a semblance of a passing game, and then the Hokie coaches spent all offseason hinting at a new, more balanced, more wide-open offense.

What prevailed instead through the first nine games was a run-first, run-last attitude, with very little inventiveness in the playcalling, very little willingness to experiment with the passing game, and almost no effort at disguising plays or formations.

The approach worked well enough on the way to an 8-0 start, but things bottomed out in game 9, when the Hokies put up a predictable, bland offensive game plan that the Pitt defense snacked on like a vanilla wafer.

From that point on, Stinespring got more inventive with his playcalling. He passed more, and distributed the ball to more receivers, including running backs, and the play-action pass suddenly became a part of the playbook again. For the most part, the Hokie playcalling vastly improved from game #9 onward.

What Stinespring still lacks is a sense of the rhythm of a game, and what a defense is vulnerable to at any given time. He also needs to put some misdirection running plays into the playbook, some traps, some counters, more pulling offensive linemen, etc.

QB Coach Kevin Rogers had an interesting comment on the January 6th edition of the Hokie Hotline. When asked to evaluate Stinespring as an OC, Rogers said that it's difficult for offensive line coaches to become offensive coordinators, because they "live in a world of inside drill," of running between the tackles. He said that Stinespring did a better job of expanding his outlook, as well as the offense, as the season went on.

Bingo. Stinespring's insistence on pounding the opposition with the running game through the first half of the season -- Randall didn't throw 20 passes until game #8 against Temple -- helped set Randall up to make mistakes passing late in the season.

Instead of keeping opposing defenses off-guard with varied formations, misdirection, and inventive playcalling, Stinespring lined up and tried to run it down the throat of every team the Hokies faced, even though he had an offensive line that wasn't always up to the task.

Stinespring is also guilty of committing a cardinal sin for an OC: not using all the weapons at his disposal. Ernest Wilford caught just ten passes in the Hokies' first six games. Given that he would catch 41 in the last eight games, or more than five catches a game, using him so sparingly in the first six games looks like a big mistake.

Of course, the Hokies won those six games, but still, Stinespring should have made every effort to have this offense clicking on all cylinders long before the Pitt game, when the heart of the Big East schedule arrived and things got serious. Instead, he insisted on overusing the rushing game early in the year.

None of this is a surprise, given Stinespring's youth, his background as an offensive line coach, and the fact that offensively-conservative, run-oriented Frank Beamer is the only coach he has ever worked for. Stinespring improved greatly as the season went on, and the key for him is to continue to study, continue to watch film, and continue to plan and think.

An important point: I don�t know how big a hand Frank Beamer played in offensive strategy, so it's possible that Stinespring, in this review, might be taking some heat for decisions that weren't entirely his.

Here's a recap of the grades so far.

Overall, the offense was not as good as I had hoped it would be this year. It had its bright spots, most notably Lee Suggs, Ernest Wilford, and Doug Easlick, with a nod to Randall, but it was held back by an average offensive line and a new offensive coordinator who was cutting his teeth on the job.

This year's Tech team averaged 30.6 points per game, its lowest scoring average since 1997 (29.2 points per game). But 30.6 ppg is still good enough to be the seventh-highest scoring team in Tech history. Funny how you can be a little disappointed in an offense, and yet it's one of VT's best ever.

Next time around, we'll review and grade the defense.

TechSideline Pass Home