Virginia Tech's season opener with Central Florida is just 48 days away. As we prepare for football practice to start in a few weeks, here's a list of ten important things that need to happen if the Hokies want a shot at the Big East championship.

If you take a look at Virginia Tech's 1999 run to the national championship, one thing really sticks out about that squad (other than the obvious): the team suffered no major injuries. Michael Vick was hobbled all year long with a bad ankle, and John Engelberger played hurt at times, but there were no season-turning injuries, save for some nail-biting injuries to cornerback in that year's Pittsburgh game. The bulk of the team played healthy, and if memory serves correctly, the Hokies put the same starting defensive lineup on the field for every single game (wow).

Their luck changed a little with the Sugar Bowl. Possession receiver Ricky Hall hurt himself in bowl practice and wasn't able to play, and starting tailback Shyrone Stith was knocked out of the actual game. But neither one of those injuries had a significant impact on the game itself, which was settled by special teams play, defensive backfield play, Peter Warrick, and coaching.

In 2000, injuries to Vick and Andre Davis ruined any chance the Hokies had of hanging with Miami in Tech's only loss of the season. In 2001, an early injury to Lee Suggs meant the Hokies had to go with finesse runner Keith Burnell and not-ready-for-prime-time freshman Kevin Jones. In 2002, injuries to linebacker Vegas Robinson and several defensive tackles took the bite out of a young defense that performed well early in the season.

In 2003, Tech needs to stay healthy, most notably at cornerback (DeAngelo Hall), free safety (Jimmy Williams), defensive tackle, center (Jake Grove), offensive tackle, running back (KJ), and fullback (Doug Easlick). Injuries to any one of those players/positions could derail the Hokies' chances for a Big East championship.

Overpowering offensive lines were the hallmark of the mid-90's Hokie teams that played in the Independence Bowl, Sugar Bowl, and Orange Bowl. By 1997, poor OL recruiting in 1995 had started to ravage the Hokie OL. They regrouped and put together some good units in 1999 and 2000 (in which they put together Tech season records of 46 rushing TD's and 5.2 yards per carry).

But offensive line play, particularly poor pass-blocking and blitz containment, have hampered the Hokies since about the 2000 season. The tackle position has gotten very dicey, as last year any offensive tackle not named Anthony Davis was treated like an open window by opposing blockers. OT play reached its nadir when Pittsburgh's prevent defense, with a three-man rush, sacked Tech QB Bryan Randall by simply mowing through the tackle position.

For the Hokies, good offensive line play is paramount for a successful 2003 season. Davis is gone, so redshirt-junior Jon Dunn (6-7, 343) and true sophomore Jimmy Martin (6-5, 283) have got to step up. Dunn has size but suffers from a lack of strength (personal record bench press: 320 pounds) and foot speed. Martin has foot speed and mobility, but as a true freshman lacked size (270 pounds).

Behind Dunn and Martin, the Hokies have converted defensive tackle Chris Pannell (6-4, 274, r-So.), little used Reggie Butler (So., 6-5, 333), and true freshman Tripp Carroll (6-4, 306). Things are shaky here.

At guard, the Hokies have more options, with Jacob Gibson (r-Sr., 6-4, 306), Will Montgomery (r-So., 6-3, 298), and Jimmy Miller (Jr., 6-6, 304). At center, All-America candidate Jake Grove (r-Sr., 6-3, 300) anchors the line and is backed up by promising Danny McGrath (So., 6-2, 297) and Robert Ramsey (r-Jr., 6-2, 307).

In 2003, the Hokies were 32nd in the country with a turnover margin of +0.57, which doesn't sound too bad. But when you find out that the Hokies led the nation (along with Oklahoma) with 24 interceptions and had a respectable 13 fumble recoveries, you ask yourself, why wasn't VT's turnover margin higher?

The answer? Fumbles. The Hokies had a whopping 18 fumbles lost, tying them for -- get this -- 110th in the nation. Ouch. QB Bryan Randall fumbled 13 times, losing 8, and Kevin Jones fumbled 8 times, losing 5. Even the reliable Lee Suggs fumbled 4 times, losing all 4.

Randall and Jones will have the rock in their hands all game long in 2003, and they need to cut their fumbles down from last year's total of 21 to something more like 10 or 12, maximum, with fumbles lost totaling around 7.

Also, Randall threw 11 interceptions last year, which isn't bad in a 14-game season, and you would hope that with experience, he'll keep it to 8 or fewer this season.

If those fumble and interception projections are accurate, that would turn Randall and Jones' combined turnovers from 24 in 2002 to just 15 in 2003, and those extra 9 turnovers could make all the difference in the world.

If Ernest Wilford stays healthy, he should have another great season. Last year, he set Tech records for receptions in a season (51) and TD's in a game (4, against Syracuse).

Wilford plays split end for Tech, and what is needed is production from the flanker spot. Last year, Shawn Witten was the primary flanker, and though he had 25 catches, he only averaged 12.1 yards per catch and had just one TD.

Flanker has recently been more of a possession receiver for VT, but it would be nice to have a more explosive player over there, one who is a threat to go deep or break a short one into a long gainer.

Enter DeAngelo Hall, who is currently listed as the #1 flanker. Hall will play both ways this season and has shown great natural ability as a receiver. Only time will tell how successful the Hall-to-receiver experiment is, but it's important for VT to have a strong receiving threat line up opposite Ernest Wilford, or Wilford will get eaten alive by heavy coverage.

In 1999, the Hokies had 58 sacks in 11 games. In the next three seasons, the total fell to 28 (2000), 30 (2001), and 42 (2002, in 14 games).

The reason why has been two-fold: No VT defensive end has registered more than 10 sacks since Corey Moore had 17 in 1999, and the VT blitzes are (this is a subjective assessment) less frequent and less successful.

The best Tech defenses of the past (1995, 1996, 1999) have all averaged more than 4 sacks per game, unlike the 3 (or fewer) sacks per game averaged by the 2000, 2001, and 2002 defenses.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: For VT to be successful, not just defensively but as a team, the sack production has to increase. In particular, the Hokies need a can't-be-stopped sack machine, a player who gets at least one a game, preferably more.

Tech's DTs were doing okay last year, until they started to get hurt, and youth and lack of strength started to become a problem.

I appreciate good defensive tackle play more than I used to. DTs don't get many tackles, but they do disrupt plays. I watched a lot of film of Tech's D-tackles getting pushed backwards, allowing the QB and running backs of the opposing team to operate in the backfield unmolested, thus enabling them to get every play off to a good start.

The Hokies need to get a better push upfield from this position, which will create more sack opportunities for the defensive ends on pass plays and will break up the running game, both up the middle and on sweeps and counters.

Fortunately, Tech is in good shape here, with five good-to-decent tackles to pick from: the undersized but fierce Jason Lallis (r-Jr., 6-0, 250), big Jonathan Lewis (So., 6-1, 292) and brother Kevin (r-Jr., 6-1, 292), and the developing Tim Sandidge (r-So., 6-1, 283). UNC transfer Isaac Montgomery (r-Jr., 6-4, 297) also looks promising, giving Tech five defensive tackles to work with.

None of those guys are David Pugh or Chad Beasley just yet, but one or more of them may step up.

Lost in the hoopla over substandard play from the linebackers and defensive tackles last year was the run-stopping ability -- or lack thereof -- of Tech free safety Willie Pile and rover Michael Crawford. Rover is an important run-stopping position for the Tech defense, and Crawford was not the equal of Cory Bird and Kevin McCadam in this respect.

Pile was not a good run defender, either, mostly due to persistent shoulder injuries over the years that probably made him hesitant to bring the lumber (his whiff of Brandon Miree on the game-winning TD run for Pitt last year is painful to watch). His replacement for 2003, Jimmy Williams, has no such problem. Williams may or may not be the cover safety and playmaker that Pile was in the passing game, but he will be superior to Pile in run support.

Crawford's biggest shortcoming compared to Bird and McCadam is his lack of weight -- at 209, he weighs about 10 pounds less than Bird and McCadam did -- and sheer physicality. If reputed hitter James Griffin, a transfer from Pasadena (CA) City College, can put on some weight, bulk up from his listed weight of 193, and learn the position, he could challenge Crawford for playing time.

Not only does Bryan Randall have a year of experience under his belt, but Tech offensive coordinator Bryan Stinespring does, too. Stinespring is a work in progress, and one hopes that he will strike more of an offensive balance than he did last year. The Hokies started out relying strictly on the run, went pass-happy against Syracuse, and settled down somewhere in the middle the rest of the year.

The Hokies rarely threw deep last year, allowing defenses to key on the run, and they also ran very little misdirection with their running game or passing game. Stinespring did a good job of working in flare passes out of the backfield as the season went on, but the Hokies need to use the tight end more (a familiar refrain) and try to throw opponents off-balance.

Hopefully, Stiney has been studying film over the spring and summer and consulting with former Syracuse and Notre Dame OC Kevin Rogers, who now coaches VT's quarterbacks. Whether he has, and whether it will add up to anything, remains to be seen.

A message board poster (whose name I can't recall) had a great comment the other day. He said that one problem with Virginia Tech's defense is that it was designed as a blitzing, attacking defense that valued speed over size, and recruited players to fit that system � but it doesn�t blitz much anymore and plays more like a straight-up assignment defense.

In the passing game, VT's defense is designed to pressure the QB while isolating the receivers on the cornerbacks. When the Hokies can pressure the quarterback, it works, because the QB can't get the ball to the receivers.

The problem is, teams like Pittsburgh have learned to max-protect, keeping running backs and tight ends in to block, and have taken advantage of Tech's single coverage. So the Hokies blitz less than they used to, and it's not effective, because blitzers are running into traffic jams of blockers.

VT defensive coordinator Bud Foster, who has made his reputation tinkering this defense that former DC Phil Elmassian designed, must now take a good hard look at whether it can continue to work in its present configuration, philosophy, and personnel. Tech's defense was once state of the art, but these things run in cycles, and teams familiar with VT's defense seem to be able to counter it successfully. Teams that bomb away with the passing game, like Miami, Florida State, and Pittsburgh, cause the Hokies fits.

If VT's linebackers and linebackers play better than they did last year, it may be a moot point, and Bud Foster won't need to do anything. Great players can cover for system flaws that actually may not even be there. But if Pittsburgh and Miami continue to treat the VT defense as something to be scored on at will, and not feared, then Foster will face his biggest challenge at Tech: reinventing the feared Hokie D as Tech enters the ACC.

This item goes hand-in-hand with improved DT and OL play. The Virginia Tech offensive and defensive lines need to just get stronger and more physical than they were last year. They were handled, sometimes manhandled, by Pitt, WVU, and Miami, and Boston College and even Western Michigan battled them to pretty much a standstill.

VT strength and conditioning guru Mike Gentry is coming under fire for the first time in his career from some Tech fans by putting lines on the field that are not up to VT standards. Is it all Gentry's fault? Of course not. It can be the fault of the players themselves, recruiting, or the coaching staff.

In any event, Tech needs to get back the reputation of being tough SOBs by earning it the one place you can earn it: in the trenches.

There are, of course, other things that need to happen for the Hokies to win the Big East championship. They need to find a healthy, consistent placekicker, and of course, they just need to get lucky.

TechSideline Pass Home