With the Texas Tech job opening up, I feel it is our duty to speak this into existence!
With Texas Tech (surprisingly at midseason) opening up, Justin Fuente could actually be a name to watch. Stock might be down but many in the industry consider VT failures more due to bad fit and not that indicative. Texas Tech more in his recruiting connection wheelhouse https://t.co/J4bQK2JFkP— Tim Thomas (@TimThomasTLP) October 25, 2021
would be nice to not be on the hook for any millions, but I doubt this happens unfortunately.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Someone else in another thread mentioned Sonny Dykes. If he leaves SMU, SMU would be in a good spot to hire Fuente.
Stranger things have happened, but I don't expect Fuente to willingly take the SMU job without getting canned.
And honestly, VT fans shouldn't want Fuente to take a job like that without being fired. I think that perception is damning for the program.
It all depends how the next coach does. If fuente's follow does fine, then it was a fit issue. If not, it's a VT issue.
WVU went through something similar when Dana left for Houston. They were able to upgrade to Neal Brown.
Tbh I think the jury's out on whether Neal Brown is really an upgrade. I do like what he's building there but if he can't get that offense going I'm not sure his results will be any different than Holgerson's when it's all said and done
I don't think anybody cares where your head coach goes if he leaves your program. You care far more about who's coming in. I think if the job is offered to Fuente, he takes it for the same reason we wouldn't want CFB or BF to take it - the likelihood of amassing more L's on the resume.
With the amount of context around the situation, I don't think anyone thinks Fuente taking a G5 gig would be anything but a "mutual parting of ways". Fu keeps a firing off of his resume, and Whit gets a head coach opening which will help many folks move forward. That's a win win for both. I'm guessing they might even negotiate on the buyout to help make it look even more "mutual".
Or if they hire the coach from UTSA Fuente can go there....
This is actually something I can see happening. UTSA's coach likely won't be there past this year given what he has done in such little time. They are transitioning to the AAC, a conference that Fuente has had success in. I think Fuente to Texas Tech is extremely unlikely given how much they value offensive output, but any coach who had an ounce of success at the P5 level can get a head coaching job at a G5 school.
This would be cool actually. I've been on the wagon since they started the program with Coker (meepin before meepin was cool). and I think Fuente's scheme would definitely do better in a conference that can't recruit enough legitimately good athletes to fill out an entire defense.
pls
whit pls
If whit isn't on the phone w Lubbock right now he should be ashamed of himself
I don't think that's how this works...
Not with that attitude
Agreed
Haha the idea of Whit on the phone with other ADs trying to sell our coach is equal parts funny and sad
Fantasy Football, could see some creative trade offers through this.
I mean, Saban is rumored to have done this to get Lane the HC job at FAU, thus stopping him from being a coordinator at LSU. But that's a very different scenario.
Fuente will work out a contract extension and greater buyout from this.
I'd be on my way to Lane with a jackhammer
LOL! Is this another Twitter burner account? I'd love to know who the sources are on this hot take.
I think the "sources" are probably looking at it from a recruiting (regional familiarity) standpoint.
But honestly -- Fuente has been here for 6 seasons. If he can't establish the familiarity in Virginia by now, then there are likely a lot of other things "wrong" with him being a HC.
I will also add this caveat -- Virginia high school players just aren't as likely as players from other states to stay home. But either way, coaches being successful shouldn't just rely on regional recruiting success. There are plenty of things Fuente hasn't done well at that don't seem to involve recruiting.
"Virginia high school players just aren't as likely as players from other states to stay home."
I don't buy this statement. When Tech was coming off the MV7 success we had no problem keeping our share of the top Va players in state. The problems was we could never really get over the hump from really good team to great team by winning marquee games against elite schools (Fl. St, USC, Auburn, Boise St). So kids stopped seeing us as a bigtime school and we started losing the high 4* kids. I believe if we can get the right coach and he can build a winner then the kids will start choosing Tech again. Kids want a legit chance at winning and a legit chance at the league. We haven't been doing much of either over the last 10 years.
That's not marquee wins you're talking about; that's "playing for the National Championship" kinda success.
In 2001 we did land the #1 overall recruit (from Pennsylvania), but we only pulled in 1/5 top in-state. In 2002 we pulled in 1/10.
The 2003 season was the only year we managed to pull in half of the top ten in state.
Meanwhile in the 2010s, one of those elite teams you listed that wins nearly all of their marquee matchups and couldn't break the top 50 in recruiting once (Boise). Texas has a dud of a decade, going 73-53 (winning ten games once in 2018), and drops below the top 20 in recruiting once (They took only 17 recruits in the 2017 class).
If success on the field was a major indicator of recruiting success (National or in-state), Boise classes should have at least been somewhat comparable to Texas in recruiting in the 2010s.
There's something a lot bigger going on in recruiting than winning marquee games.
If we need to be "playing for the National Championship" good in order to have a chance to pull in half of our state's top ten once in a blue moon, we're definitely struggling to land in-state recruits.
Don't get me wrong, we've been awful against the top ten since the year 2000. But winning marquee matchups doesn't move the needle as much as you'd think when it comes to landing top in-state recruits.
Boise St is not Virginia Tech. Boise is some feel good story that USAToday writes about is forgotten about after a year or two. Virginia Tech is somewhere between the bluebloods and the Boises of the world. We are more akin to Oregon, Ole Miss or Baylor. We had a legit chance to separate ourselves from the lower P5s and own VA recruiting. The down Beamer years allowed UVA to waste our top recruits and for us to become stagnant.
Here's where you're starting to make sense. Recruiting numbers are nothing more than indicators of program attractiveness. The reason we don't ever pull in our fair share of in-state recruits is because those recruits always have other options, and those options are typically places they'd rather be. It's not like UVA is kicking our butt in this department- Virginia kids tend to go out of state. Because whether we like to believe it or not, Virginia kids don't have a big, shiny in-state option.
Virginia has had one program that made it to a National Championship, and then proceeded to win 10 games eight seasons in a row. But something still drives them elsewhere.
Recruiting has very little to do with on-field success.
I'll try and keep this short. There's a reason I key in on Boise State when you specified "Winning marquee matchups". In the "Wins and Losses" and the "Round Robin" charts, Boise is in the middle of the pack (of the top 18 or so football programs over the last 20 years in the rankings) when they play ranked teams.
However, they have the #1 winning percentage against both the Top Ten ranked teams, #1 against Top Five teams, and they're #1 against all of the other teams who stay ranked more often than not.
Again, all of these breakdowns cover ONLY the top programs over the previous 20 years. There is literally nobody who can touch Boise's winning percentage when it comes to winning big, clutch games.
The asterisk to this accomplishment, of course, is that even though they win these games whenever they have the opportunity, those opportunities are few and far between. Because they're a "smaller" program.
I could use Ohio State, Alabama, or Clemson as examples of clutch teams who win their marquee matchups, too, both we both know there's a hell of a lot of difference between them and Boise State than anything that happens on a football field. Their programs are filthy rich.
That's why I used Texas. They comparably suck at football compared to any of these teams, and they amazingly recruit right up there with the rest of the schools that happen to already be big and rich. (They're 2-3 against the #1 team in the country, which is actually fantastic. But they're not regularly blowing the doors off of top ten teams like OSU, Clemson and Alabama are).
The size of any program has an absolute hell of a lot more to do recruiting than anything they can put together on a football field.
Brockman, Texas is the big dog school in a state that has probably at least 10 times the number of 4*+ athletes that VA has. Texas has a marquee game each year that they actually win from time to time. Texas has played in two C'ship games winning one since VT last made it to one. So even if they suck at football they will have plenty of 4* recruits whose parents had them dressed up in burnt orange since they were babies.
That just proves the point though. If winning matters more than anything else to recruits, the burnt orange onesies the kids grew up in would have no impact on their recruitment. Rather, Texas has something that Boise doesn't that impacts their recruiting much more heavily than wins. This trend is consistent across the sport. Money, history, and location all have more impact on recruiting success than wins.
In the Mike Vick days when top players like Curry went to UNC?
I still remember watching him play every position and dismantle my HS team in the playoffs.
Mike Vick and Ronald Curry are the same class. So how could MV success affect Curry?
Exactly, plus Curry was also a guaranteed 2 sport athlete... VT basketball then wasn't exactly moving the needle...
It was exactly the opposite, we only got Vick because Curry committed to UVA. So Vick committed to VT, then Curry flipped to UNC.
But the point is even in the late 90s top VA recruits were leaving the state.
And in the last 10 years, the world has gotten smaller, social media has made recruiting a lot different, and VA is now full of transplants from Ohio, PA, NY, etc who were looking for jobs from 2006 to now. These kids didn't grow up on VT football success from the 2000s cause they ain't seen it, and aren't linked to it.
I was hoping someone would bring this up. Seems like we consider DC area to be Virginia when it's likely people who have moved to the area and do not see VA as "Home".
Winning would fix that.
As a DC native and NOVA resident, my guess is there's no other school better represented (in terms of sheer numbers) in the DMV than VT.
If we started winning, people would take notice and (while it may not be "home" because of the 4+ hour drive), you'd get more people who wanted to make that trek.
Our largest alumni base is in Metro DC. There are quite a few transient groups there as well that move in and out every few years or so.
The transplants are everywhere. In Richmond alone, we have quite a few former New Yorkers and Ohio folks that Browns and Giants fans pack just about every bar on Sundays.
Could you clarify what years this happened? I've only found a single year where Tech landed a majority of the states top 10?
Maybe I'm mis-remembering but the Adibi years the entire lb core was Hampton Roads. TT5 was Hampton Roads. DHall, JWill were HR. These are all 4* kids that chose VTech. We can't even get 3* kids.... Also I said "our share". If we capitalize on some of those games maybe 2 top kids per year look at Tech a little harder.
What is VTs share of the top 10? TT5 and Blake Dechristoper were 2 of the 10 ten that year. Getting 2 out of 10 seems bad.
This is a bit of a misconception (depending on what preconceived notions you have, I suppose). Andy Bitter did a piece on this for The Athletic. From what I recall:
VT has never landed more than 5 recruits from the VA Top 10 in a single class (and we've only done this twice in VT history)We've once landed four top 10 VA recruits (2008), have twice landed five top 10 VA recruits (2003, 2012), and once landed 6 (2005). Every other year we landed 3 or lessYes, Fuente is doing bad an recruiting the state, but I don't think VT has ever 'owned' the state like Clemson owns South Carolina or LSU owns Louisiana, etc.
EDIT: Phrasing and Formatting.
EDIT #2: Found a previous post I made about this last year. See post for specifics. In summary:
Nah he's a legit guy who runs a VT fan site, not saying he necessarily has inside info but he's no troll.
There are actually several facts that lend at least some credibility to this. Fuente did have some very highly rated offenses as an OC (check bar1990's posts for a table). And he made massive improvements in a Memphis team that was like a dumpster fire covered in shit. As I said before, you don't luck into turning a perennial 1-2 win team at Memphis and winning 9 and 10 games there his last 2 seasons. And he did have some initial success here even. Given all that though, it has become clear that he can't maintain/duplicate that success here. It seems more likely that he will be a good G5 coach, and that might be his ceiling. That doesn't mean that teams won't assume (and possibly correctly) that he'll do better at a G5 school, especially in the Texas/Oklahoma area where he's from and recruited earlier in his career.
If being in Texas was a better fit, Justin Fuente should not have allegedly turned down the Baylor job.
I bet he is kicking himself for doing that -- and so are we!
He never got offered the job
Based on what source/facts?
The same sources you have that he was offered
My sources were deductive reasoning. People seem to think he sucked and so nobody would want him. His wins and recruiting classes were public knowledge. So if they thought he sucked so bad, why would they even talk to him. They're not going to come to Blacksburg and say "we think you're not capable of success, convince us otherwise." But somehow people on here are convinced that they wouldn't have even offered.
My deductive reasoning is that he takes it if it's offered.
The idea that he flirted with them then turned down what was likely more money in a location his wife and kids would actually be happy and reset his hot seat timer in order to show to the VT administration that he needs more resources to finally be able to recruit for this school is absolutely bonkers.
People get interviews but not an offer all the time. And I would assume in an industry like this courtesy interviews happen all the time
You don't fly a thousand miles for a courtesy interview, you pick up the phone and do a FaceTime or something. Plus, your deductive reasoning is based on the assumption that he sucks and he knew he sucked, so he should have taken something to make him safe. If you assume he has confidence in himself, then he thinks he can do better here and isn't worried about a hot seat. In 2019, Tech went 8-5. Two of the losses came early in the season before he made HH the starter. We beat a ranked WF team and lost by one to a ranked ND team, we shut out two teams in a row, pummeling GT 45-0 and Pitt 28-0. Khalil Herbert committed to Tech Dec. 9 and he had HH coming back and a first team all ACC corner in Farley. And looks like Fuente interviewed in January of 2020. He had to have felt like he had a lot of pieces in place for a good year the following year, so would he have really felt so concerned about a hot seat at that point? He probably would have felt like he'd have a better season in 2020.
I don't think I've seen anything about Fuente's wife and kids not being happy in Blacksburg - and even if that is true, you're making the assumption that they'd be happier in Waco than they would in Blacksburg. Was there some sort of interview I missed where Mrs. Fuente said she preferred Waco to Blacksburg?
I really don't see the value in yall arguing about the Baylor job. It has nothing to do with where we are today. Just drop it. Plz
If you listen to SZD, Steven Godfrey has said multiple times that Fuente interviewed with Baylor and 'thought' he got the job and was prepar
inged to leave, but then didn't get it. It's unclear if he received an offer that was later rescinded, or if he just very confident leaving an interview, or what. But it's pretty clear that, had Baylor offered him, he'd be coaching there in 2020.Edit: half of a word
I'm confused. Not sure how much "preparing to leave" could have been done considering he announced the next morning he wasn't taking the job. We spun ourselves up quick, so it seems like it was longer, but us finding out about Baylor coming and Fuente announcing he wasn't leaving all happened within 24 hours.
IIRC, it was about 48 hours without comment from Fuente.
By 'prepared to leave', I meant to say that he was ready and planning to accept the new offer (that never came).
I'm going to file that under hearsay.
Doesn't mean it's not true, but it's just some people talking.
Steven Godfrey is one of the three most connected media members in college football (along with Brett McMurphy and Bruce Feldman). If you think a report from one of the most credible members of the media is 'hearsay' then I don't know what to tell you...
don't forget paul finebaum lol /s
anyhow pretty much all reporting is technically hearsay unless the reporter shares some primary source evidence along with the report
It doesn't matter how credible someone is. Hearsay is still hearsay. Just means it was heard from an indirect source.
Just sayin that the burden of "reasonable doubt" is different for a journalist than for a lawyer
If the journalist can't say who told them something, my feeling is that you have to treat it as rumor.
You can't then change the status of it and repeat it as fact.
this is fair - but journalists usually get benefit of the doubt for a couple reasons - one, their journalistic integrity relies on their credibility so journalists aren't just going to guess or start rumors just because. If they're wrong all the time, they're not good at their job and they will struggle to find employment.
I'm much more willing to listen to a rumor from, say Andy Bitter, than any number of folks on TKP
Sure. But rumor is still rumor.
Bitter is credible because generally, HE is the source. He works hard to get it right. And he doesn't have hours and hours of on-air time to fill with innuendo.
what beat writer is their own source
How far are beat writers from the story?
If they're not getting from the horse's mouth, I don't know who is.
Thanks for this context! I don't remember having seen a report like this before that led to any credibility behind reports that he hadn't actually gotten an offer. Most of my recollection was just theory one way or another based on his performance and whether Baylor would have even offered (and many seemed to think they weren't even that interested, even though they interviewed him).
He may very well be kicking himself, but he probably honestly thought he could improve here. Everything he's said certainly seems like he thinks he could improve. Unless you think both he and Whit are liars, Baylor is not the only school that came knocking on Fuente's door. Baylor is just the only one Fuente even really entertained. Baylor saw his performance and recruiting classes and still came to talk to him. If they thought he was such a disaster they wouldn't have even bothered. Just because we don't want him and he's not being successful now doesn't mean he wasn't successful early here and at his previous coaching jobs.
A less than ideal unfolding of events for Texas Tech recruiting director Beau Davidson...
Very ideal. Quick Photoshop and he can recruit Fuente to Lubbock with a VT2TX
Fu learned from Buzz, sending his assistants there first to get the place ready.
Remember, All our ex's leave for Texas.
Standing by to offer Coach Fu a most exceptional employment reference.
Anyone know if the buy out clause is straight payment or is it offset by any new job he receives after his release?
No offset clause. If we fire him, we owe him the full buy out. If he leaves us, he owes us the full buyout.
Edited (again) for (further) clarity:
Let's start by discussing college football head coaching contracts in general - College football (head) coaching contracts typically have language to handle two types of exits: The coach leaving on his own will (typically for another job), and the coach being fired. The buy out is relevant in both situations:
However, not all universities like the idea of paying a coach to not coach, so there's an additional option that can be negotiated into the contract: The offset. The offset says 'if we (university) fire you (coach), then we will only pay you the difference between your buyout, and your current salary.'
Now, this is a great deal for the university, but the coach is (potentially) losing a lot of money. So, in return for the nice gesture to the university, the coach (or, rather, his agent) will ask the university to offer an additional bargaining chip. It could be a higher salary/compensation, but more often than not, the university agrees to free the coach of the buyout he would have to pay if he were to leave. Basically, both parties are agreeing forfeit potential upside in order to limit potential risk for the other party.
At this point, let's talk specifically about Fuente's contract. Fuente's contract does NOT contain an offset. I imagine that this was intentional... Remember where we were at the end of the 2017 season (specifically in early 2018 - the time of Fuente's most recent contract extension/update):
At this time, two things appeared to be true:
Now, Whit could negotiate for one of two options:
Given the outlook at the time, option 1 was the obvious choice. At the time, it seemed very unlikely that VT would have to fire Fuente without cause. However, Fuente being hired away seemed significantly more likely - The higher buyout would (a) make it less likely that Fuente would leave, and (b) get VT paid if he did leave. Based on the information available at the time, this was clearly the right choice. Who would've guessed in January 2018 that the next 3 years would be filled mediocrity and turmoil? Not I. Clearly, not Whit either.
Note to self.
Next time, have an offset clause. If someone else is willing to pay him, we shouldn't have to.
Typically in coaching contracts, there is either an offset clause, OR the coach doesn't have to pay a buy out when he leaves. In 2019, when Fuente was a hot commodity, it made sense to take option #2, and get paid if Fuente got hired away (rather than hedge against firing him).
It was the right move based on the information available at the time.
I'm saying that if a coach we fire then later gets hired by someone else, our buy out should be lowered by any compensation he gets.
Seems to me that protects us both.
Edit: So I'm unclear on your updated post. Are you saying that if VT were to fire Fuente, and he gets hired somewhere else, we could deduct his new salary from the amount we owe him? If so, I feel a lot better about this.
Damn...so even if one of these openings calls him and makes him an offer...he's still got 7.5 - 10million reasons to say turn it down. We may have a losing season, but Fu is gonna be laughing all the way to the bank
The new school would pay the buyout, not Fuente
He owes us, or both parties walk away? Or is it a situation where his next stop picks up the tab
Question: from your description, it sounds like #s 1-3 are all in his contract but at the end you say no agent will give you #2 and #3. Did we get both in? Just wanting to understand. Thanks!
I guess my original comment did a poor job of distinguishing things that can be included in a college football coaching contract from the things that ACTUALLY were included in Fuente's contract. I updated it to clarify this. Hopefully this makes more sense now?
TL;DR - Whit negotiated a contract that would be super beneficial for VT if Fuente left for another job, but not the best if Fuente flopped at VT. As we all know, the latter happened. This seemed very unlikely at the time, but here we are.
I appreciate the clarification! Makes a lot more sense now.
Is his contract published somewhere?
I'm hoping beyond all hope that Fuente sees that it is the end, finds a new job, and both parties agree to waive all buyout money and have a mutual parting of ways.
I don't actually think that would happen but it would be nice.
Texas Tech do we have a coach for you...
This is whatcha call a win-win scenario.
Don't you get everyone's hopes up like that, shame on you
Fuente needed the very best facilities, a perfect roster balance handed to him, more staff, more budget and 6 years to have VT hovering around 4th in the coastal. I'm sure he will kill it at a school in the middle of the Texas plains with not near the facilities, tradition or fans support. Yes.
Are you against them trying?
LOL. Absolutely not. I think he personally would be happier in Texas. I think the VT job/expectations are getting the better of him at this point. Texas Tech is the 4th best program in that state - at best. That isn't the expectation or case at VT.
Don't give it away man!
Come on Beau, your job depends on it!
Given this thread is all about VT2TX, I thought it funny to share this recently unearthed AB tweet from 2016
I think Whit should let him use the plane. It would be the classy thing to do (read: quickest way out of town).
It's not for Fuente. Whit will make Cornelson drive a fully packed Prius to Texas. Or should, at least.
But why the check out date? I do not want him to have a checkout date.
You can check out anytime you'd like, but you can never leave.
Roaches check in, but they don't check out.
Twitter (Mandel, Feldman, Godfrey, etc, etc) claims the Tx Tech brass want Art Briles. The AD wants Traylor from UTSA, and several writers are calling for Sonny Dykes. I could see Fuente at SMU or UTSA if either open up. But Tx Tech looks not so Fu-endly.
Art knows the area...
I think SMU would be a great fit should Sonny Dykes go elsewhere. Back in the AAC and right in Dallas, super close to family in Oklahoma. Would be a big pay cut but that's what happens when you don't succeed at big time jobs. Still make 7 figures and way less expectations in an area of the country where he has more connections. Plus would be a great hire for the SMU program IMO.
Dinkin Flicka