Frank Beamer is participating in the ESPN carwash—a merry go round of appearances on all of ESPN's media platforms—all day Tuesday. One of the stops included an interview with Brett McMurphy, who shared this loaded tweet.
Frank Beamer said whenever he retires he hopes Virginia Tech's next coach "would come from our staff"— Brett McMurphy (@McMurphyESPN) July 28, 2015
Beamer was pretty well aware of the circumstances around the end of his tenure as Virginia Tech's head coach at ACC Kickoff, but this is the first time I recall him ever publicly discussing a succession plan. Even one as vague as this.
If I ran a sportsbook, Bud Foster would be the favorite to take over for Frank, if Virginia Tech hired in-house. He publicly stated he wants the job, and he agreed to a 5-year contract extension in December. I do think Bud will be among the pool of candidates considered by Whit Babcock, but I believe Babcock will conduct a nationwide search. At the end of the day Whit will receive input from plenty of Virginia Tech stakeholders, but at the end of the day it's Whit's hire.
Frank Beamer notes it's for the VT administration to decide. But he hopes it's a staf promotion.— Joe Schad (@schadjoe) July 28, 2015
And let's not get ahead of ourselves.
Frank Beamer: "I want to do this thing for a while more."— Joe Schad (@schadjoe) July 28, 2015
Comments
I know everyone will jump to this meaning he wants Bud to succeed..... but there's also another possibility...
No there isn't.
doubt it
While Shane did seem to look very comfortable during the Military Bowl, I don't think he is ready yet to be a big-time college football coach.
No. He can't even handle coaching the RB's.
You know what they say...if you can't coach, head coach.
There are eerie Jeff Bowden parallels.
To be fair I don't think Swinney is a good head coach. The dude just surrounds himself with fantastic coordinators and let's them do the hard stuff. I mean kudos to him for getting them all to Clemson...but still
Well, isn't that the definition of a good coach? Getting the job done, isn't he?
tell that to clemson fans before chad morris came to town. I'm wondering what clemson will be like without him
was he not the HC that brought in chad morris? Part of being a HC is surrounding yourself with the right people and allowing them to do their jobs. We've heard for years and years that Frank won't allow OC's to run the offense as they see fit.
Really not a shred of evidence to support that claim, though. Frank has always been a proponent of the "let your coaches coach" philosophy. Rickey Bustle ran the offense exactly the way he wanted to, and there's no reason to believe that Bryan Stinespring didn't do the same. By all indications, Scot Loeffler is 100% in control of the offense. Now, an argument can be made that Frank selects the wrong type of OC, but I don't see any signs of HC interference in how the offense is run.
Stiney wasn't even calling the plays at the end of his OC stint. You think that was his choice?
Which was obviously the beginning of the end of his tenure. I don't really see your point here. Stiney was on the way out at that point, due to an uproar from the fan base that Beamer just couldn't ignore anymore. Frank was looking for a way to maintain staff stability while addressing the issues that had become too big to sweep under the 10-win rug any longer.
If anything, it's the exception that proves the rule.
I've literally never heard this from anyone other than fans.
"Run the ball more" is probably about as involved as Frank Beamer has ever got involved in the offense. If he had his hand in Stinespring's plate during Stinespring's tenure, do you think they would continue to be working together three years after Stinespring got demoted?
Well, simple observation and some comments from Frank like his iconic three things can happen when you pass line, conservative play calling while holding a slim lead, etc. year after year would lead some to think that perhaps he favors/condones/suggests or maybe insists on a decidedly conservative offensive approach. But, then again, I have not heard a single coach say word one about it being an issue, or a problem. As for Stiney, he's Frank's close friend and I think he's just happy to be able to coach with his good friend. Short of firing him, I can't see Stinespring leaving for any reason whatsoever. He's happily ensconced in his "family".
Frank's the head coach. He may not be involved with the play calling, or the day to day nuts and bolts of the offense, and I'm sure he's not, but he is responsible for the program's philosophies and directions, so he likely does influence things in that way. Just a fan's humble opinion, of course, and I am a Frank supporter regardless, but I would like a more dynamic offense when we have the hosses to win with it.
The "three things" quote is Woody Hayes, not Beamer.
Fine and dandy, then, but Frank has repeated it, and I didn't hear an attribution. Glad to give credit where it's due, so props to Woody and a leg for you.
We are passing more now than the program ever has under Beamer.
That's what I was saying when I said you could argue he hires the wrong type of OC. Frank wants a multiple offensive scheme that values the run. Every OC he's ever had has put that type of offense on the field. So yes, he certainly does affect the offense in the fact that he has a say in the type of OC we go after, but there's no evidence he does anything at all to control the offense that the OC is running. I have never heard of him overruling a called play in-game, nor giving any offensive directive other than the generic "run the ball more" sort of thing that every coach is going to do.
I don't really disagree with anything you said. Hopefully Loeffler will be able to field a more productive offense. I am happy with the more passing thing, but fear that a lot of that has to do with the lack of a productive running game than a change in philosophy. While I watch games hoping to be entertained, winning is the ultimate feel good thing, so I guess if we can win ten games a year again, I'll be a happy camper regardless of how we go about it. It is a perennial gripe, though, whether justified or not, and Frank is where the buck stops, but like I said, and you said, never heard of him meddling in-game, but as just a fan, I probably wouldn't if he did unless a disgruntled coach called him out, which is just not gonna happen. I'm not one who thinks we should be in the NC game every year, nor was I unhappy with our 10 win seasons. I'm not in the push Beamer out crowd, I love the guy.
if we had an OL that we could run behind we wouldn't pass as much IMO. Passing more is a result of the repeated 2nd and 3rd and longs.
Add on to that the fact that the short passing game has become our de facto run game. I agree, as the run game improves, pass totals will diminish. I would say, however, I expect our YPA to go up at that point, as our passing game would become more vertical.
Yes, and I'd like to add FUCK CLEMSON.
Thanks,
atlHOkie
And putting him on O was the worst coaching mistake Frank has made in 10 years. His entire previous history was in his Dad's path on the back end of defense. I would personall much rather see what Shane has on that side then keep Cornell coaching 2 kids.
Umm, no.
ABSOUTLY noooooooooo
NO! Nepotism has always sucked! Pay your dues.
Are you referring to Shane getting any coaching job at VT or just HC?
Just HC for now.
Oh yeah that's what he's thinking
I have no idea why people are saying there's no chance he might be it. There definitely is. There's a reason he's assistant head coach right now. It would be prudent to say they wouldn't consider him.
The reasons are: he is not a coordinator, he has numerous prior coaching jobs and he enjoys it.
and read into this what you will:
I laughed.
If any other school hired Bud Foster, it would be considered a home run hire so why would it not be the same here at Virginia Tech? Widely considered one of if not THE best defensive coordinator in the country and we're just lucky enough to have him on staff already. I think this hiring decision whenever it has to be made really isn't all that hard.
Devils advocate, he has applied for HC jobs and never gotten one.
He's "expressed interest in" a few vacancies (WVU and Clemson), and interviewed for others (Pitt and almost Vandy), but let's not forget that once upon a time, Beamer "expressed interest in" going to UNC. How do we know he really gave his all to try and get hired, rather than merely using these situations to bolster his position at Tech?
Context also matters. Clemson already had Swinney as an interim head coach. Same thing with Stewart at WVU. Pitt took Todd Graham when Foster didn't show for the interview in 2010, which likely influenced them not hiring him in 2011 after Graham left and he DID interview.
Carolina had offered Beamer. He was all but gone
I disagree. He made a big show of it so Tech would pony up. Once they did, he dropped all consideration.
HT you are right...It was a pure power play. How does that sit with the alumni
They can't be too mad about it. They're still paying him. The fact that a guy like Frank Beamer felt he had to do that should tell you something about the situation though.
No, it wasn't a power play at all, read his book. Contract was all but signed with UNC.
I would not be surprised if that was a bit of a fib.
It's not a big a deal. How many times have one of us done that at our job? Plus, IIRC, Beamer's raise was small, but the assistants got a sizable raise, no?
Not according to Frank.
Pffff #sources
(Credit: idea stolen from Joe Lanza, editor of thekeyplay.com and the guy who can revoke my Moderator badge if I don't cite him properly; all rights reserved by Joe, I assume)
They're marinades, Marie.
"How did we ever win eight?" "It's a marinade!"
We can rebuild it, we can make it stronger.
You win.
Actually in his book, Frank admits that he had all but signed the papers while in Carolina, but decided to come back home and sleep on it. The next day he decided that he couldn't leave Tech and called them to let them know. That is the main reason that he was so understanding when Tech sent a plane to Georgia to pick up a OC a few years ago and that OC decided that he couldn't leave Georgia.
Bud Foster's coaching search is like when you go to the car lot looking, even though you have a nice care with low miles and is in good shape. If the dealer wants to give one away, you talk, but you don;t have to have a car. I suspect Bud's price tag has been pretty high for an unproven head coach.
One of my clients at the time of the Clemson coach change happened to be a pretty heavy hitter booster guy for the Tigers. He told me first hand that they were seriously passing the hat around for Bud. He said that Foster reminded the old timers a lot of Danny Ford, and they were smitten. At the end of the day, economics played out, and they knew that they could get Swinney to move up for the bargain basement contract.
I don't have info on any of the other incidents, but I believe we came closer to losing Bud to Clemson than to anyone else.
He'd be considered a home run as defensive coordinator.
Being a great DC doesn't mean you're gonna be a good HC.
See:will muschamp
Or Bo Pelini (Nebraska) and probably will be the case for Narduzzi (Pitt) and I'm sure there's more.
However, the main difference is that each of those coaches went somewhere new to become a HC. For Bud, he doesn't have to reinvent the wheel. He already has the players he wants/wanted (for the most part). And he's already familiar with the Administrative Staff, Boosters, fans, etc. He literally just has to keep the wheels in motion and follow the groundwork laid out by Frank. He's had a front row seat, for almost 30 years, to see what it takes to be a successful head coach at Virginia Tech.
Now, if he takes a complete 180 and makes a bunch of changes for the sake of "taking his own path". Then it's completely up in the air at how successful he'll be.
I don't think it is surprising that he thinks that. He hired, and has kept, this staff for a reason.
I would love for Bud Foster to get a shot at HC, but I also believe that Whit will hire the best guy for the job. I would hope that Bud would stay as DC if he doesn't become the next HC...I just have a feeling he will also part ways.
I think the only way Bud sticks around as DC is if we hire a Chad Morris-type guy - known for offense with a wide-open attack, good recruiter, etc. If we hire someone with a philosophy closer to Beamer's, my gut feeling is Bud takes off for a HC gig somewhere else.
How about Chad Morris?
I still don't discount that possibility.
Pure speculation, but I think Morris wants to stay in the state of Texas. That's where he coached HS ball, and it's also very easy to move vertical within the state.
Where would he go? The premier jobs are locked up, likely for a long time UT, TAMU, TCU, and Baylor, none of which are stepping stones, especially for those coaches. Texas Tech isn't much of a vertical move. There may be opportunities in the surrounding states that keep him close to Texas, but would he really decline if Whit came calling? He has experience on the east coast and with the ACC. The Texas pipeline gives him a recruiting advantage. And he knows we're serious about our football.
My guess is hop over to TTU, and then a big time B12 school. If TAMU goes another season or two without 8-10 wins, he might get his shot quicker than you think.
I think for us to get Chad Morris Beamer needs to retire in the next 3 years. If Morris does well he's not going to stick at Sam Houston or Houston or wherever he is long.
Well look at that, you read my mind.
If Morris has 2 solid years at SMU and Beamer decides the 2016 season is good enough, it could end up being a more legit possibility than some may think.
Yeah, in all seriousness, I agree. If he's successful he's my number 1 candidate over Bud. I think a coach like that would be able to keep Bud in the fold, as long as he has complete control over the defense.
Morris won't win 4 games at SMU this year though
I'm more surprised Beamer saying he wants to do it "a while more". I know we don't know what "a while" means but you get the feeling around here that he'd retire after 2016 season.
I consider this to still be a strong amount of coach-speak. Beamer isn't going to say "I don't know how much longer I'm going to do this" or even put a timeline on it because he knows that his impending retirement in the coming years is already being used against him on the recruiting trail. By putting some uncertainty there, it takes away the strength of those pitches against him even just a little bit.
Some possible explanations:
1. "A while" could be 100% coach speak and he could plan on retiring tomorrow for all we know.
2. He could "want" to do it forever, but know he should hang up the whistle after another year or two.
3. I don't think I've seen a single person who has put the "2016 or 2017" timeline out there with a single bit of input from Beamer himself. Everything has been, "well, it looks this way" or "Based on the last couple years" and stuff like that.
If things get turned around this season, all bets may be off and we might be looking at another 4+ years of Beamer. And of course, people will be calling for him to retire while others tell them to shut it every step of the way.
Couldn't agree more on this. My guess is (and has been) that Beamer himself doesn't even know when he's going to hang it up. It could be after this season or he could very well end up outlasting a few of the coaches who supposedly use the "Beamer is gonna retire soon" to negative recruit against VT.
Recruiting. He isn't going to say, hey, i'm hanging it up soon, that would kill us in recruiting.
He doesn't have to say it because recruits already know it and it is impacting our recruiting.
Soooo what, he should just retire now because some people use it against him that he's retiring soon?
Shit, why didn't we think of that? We should be out telling all recruits that Saban will be retiring soon, so there's no reason for them to commit to Bama. Once Bammers finds out coaches are saying it, they'll have no choice but to force his retirement!
Do you have quantifiable data to back this up? Our recruiting, if you want to dive into data from the highly acclaimed and accredited recruiting sites, has been exactly the same for the past ten years. We rank in the mid 20s pretty much every year. I think our worse rank is low 30s in 2011.
The main reason it "looks" like our recruiting is getting worse is actually because we're getting more attention from highly rank recruits than we ever had before. So when they ultimately pick someone else, it looks like we "loss them" when in actuality, we used to never be in any of their Top 10, 5, 3 etc.
Everyone gets so bent out of shape when we miss on a guy who had us in his top 3, when we should all be more upset when VT can't even crack a guy's Top 15.
What do you want me to survey every recruit we offered this year and ask them the question? Our recruiting the last 3 years was pretty good, but i'm talking about this year. We will be closer to the 2010/2011 classes when this class is done and we know how those classed turned out for us.
Your 2nd paragraph is completely wrong. So wrong i'm not even going to address it any further.
When was the last year that VT went 0 for top 10 in state? I'll wait for your answer on that.
I didn't realize the 2016 signing day has already come and gone.
Ok, which of the top 10 are we going to land then?
Signing day is what, 7 months away?
LOTS of time between now and then. Way, way too early to already call this class a failure. The fact you're even trying to do so shows your intentions in this discussion might not necessarily be pure.
I hear the 2025 class is crap right now, no F'ING commits AT ALL!
Who called it a failure? I said it won't be what we have been accustomed to the last 3 years and will be more in line with the 2010/2011 classes from a national ranking perspective. You caught me man I hope we have a terrible class because that is going to help VT football get back to winning...
Also unless we land Dickerson and some DEs or we find some late bloomers with a lot of potential we missed out on early contributors at our two biggest positions of need.
From another thread:
I think Bud's tweet of his DC position is more about recruiting than anything. Also, Frank's statement in the same interview is that he'd like to keep doing HC "for a while longer". These statements are about optics. VT is a state university so they have to do a public search for an HC when the time comes. But as stated, it's Whit's decision.
I'll take VT Head Coach Scenario 1 for $1000 Alex.
what is the crucible?
EDIT: so that gif was taking a while to load and I thought you were making a reference to the crucible. As in, you were about to get piled on worse than a goth in 15th century Salem. #readingwaytoomuchintothingstofindajokethatsjustnotthere
I think Shane was up for the JMU HC position a few years ago, I may be wrong, but I wanted him to take that so if he became VT HC he had experience
Yeah, I wouldn't mind Shane as HC but he needs to be a HC elsewhere first and I would prefer he doesn't directly succeed his father.
He also applied for ArkSt and Troy in the past 2 years.
Babcock , cannot afford & will not gamble the CASH COW on a coach without head coaching experience , especially a person with one game experience as a head coach.
So no Foster either uh.
I'll play a little.
Whit may want to keep the cash cow running, but since TV contracts pay a lot of the bills, that'll probably be safe no matter who is coach.
However, once we need a new head coach, I'd be willing to pony up a few bucks if it's Foster (or some splashy hire). So maybe Foster is still included, if Whit thinks he'll bring in the donation cash.
TV contracts pay a lot of the bills that will probably be safe no matter who is coach. Sounds like I have heard & seen that philosophy before with the basketball programs in the past. So , let's save a lot of cash and hire one of the local high school assistant football coaches , double his salary and we have saved over 2 mil.
I guess the question is really over Scott Loeffler, as Beamer also said that he was one of the top of his field. If this turns out to be true, and Loeffler pans out as something special, then there would be the possibility of Bud as head coach and keeping Loeffler to run the offense.
I think the real question is "Is the existing staff capable of taking VT to the next level?"
The good thing is that that [current] staff will have to prove themselves BEFORE Beamer retires. The possibilities should be pretty obvious at that time.
It should come as no revelation that Beamer supports the current staff, and would suggest that the next head coach would come from within. It's consistent with his entire career.
I have faith in Whit to make the right choice, whether it be to hire from within, or to select another highly-qualified coach after a diligent search and evaluation.
^^^This. Well said.
EDIT: Ummm.... written.
Sweet, we're hiring RichRod for OC!!!! My dreams come true!!!!
As Tech fans, we have been spoiled with stability, almost to a fault. While I have been an advocate of Bud Foster taking the reigns as Head Coach once Beamer retires (I hope that's how he goes out), I do think it is important to see who else might be interested in the spot. If we can get an offensive-minded head Head Coach and can keep Bud Foster at Defense Coordinator, that could be very dangerous. But, I would like to take comfort in the fact that this coach will stick around at Tech for awhile. That means that Rich Rodriguez is probably a no-go. I am interested to see what happens when this time comes, though.
There is nothing wrong with continued stability based to some degree on the stability of the past....
What I meant by stability to a fault is that Brian Stinespring was OC for entirely too long, O'cain happened to luck out when Tyrod Taylor committed, and Newsome was a joke. I do condone Beamer staying in office as long as we are making bowl games. He made all the correct changes after the 2012 season, 2013 was a good year until Duke derailed us, and 2014 could have been a good year had half the team not gotten hurt. I expect the team to go 9-3 this year and win a decent bowl game, and I think that would be really the most realistic high note for CFB to go out on.
Ahem.....10-2 ACCCG.....you left these over there.....
Seriously though, I do think a realistic high note for CFB to go out on would be ACCCG and either a playoff game (or two) or a strong bowl victory.
I don't know how anyone thinks this is a valid scenario. If I were someone's apprentice for 20+ years, then that person left, and I was not given the job, no way in hell I'd stick around and do the same job for a different person.
EDIT: Foster almost took a lateral career move to TA&M this season. I don't think he's sticking around if he didn't love the staff here.
"Don't know how anyone thinks this is a valid scenario". I can think of over 1 Million reasons why this could happen.
I think that price tag is significantly higher if Frank Beamer is not the head coach.
I would have to think that Whit is already in talks with Bud Foster as to that exact scenario. "If you do not get the HC job once Frank retires, what do we need to do to keep you and your staff intact here at VT?"
I don't know a HC that would come in and say....."Well Bud may be one of if not the best DC in the country but I'm going another direction." You can literally not higher a better DC than VT already has. Plus if Frank retires on a high....i.e. ACCCG win, playoff game, or at-large bid to previous bcs bowl then I don't necessarily see a new coach coming in and changing everything. Its not like we're cellar dwellers and your job is to rebuild the program to prominence. I dont' think Frank leaves till we're at least a competitive top 15 program again.
I don't think a new coach would come in and try to replace Bud, I think a new coach would come in, and Bud may not want to coach for him.
unfortunately, I can definitely see a new HC coming in and wanting to replace Bud. He would have no sense of ownership of half the game. I mean, who is going to tell Bud how the defense needs to change? No one. A smart HC would keep him on and let him be completely autonomous, but if there's any sort of personality clash the HC wouldn't want to go toe to toe with someone who's been at the school for so long and has the reputation Bud does.
It would be like having to give a talk on offensive line play and French is sitting there in the front row scribbling notes for questions to ask when you're done. Sure, he knows his stuff and could probably enhance the conversation, but you would really rather have an audience of noobs.
Gotta ask I've seen this on numerous threads here and people on Twitter. Why the love affair with Rich Rod? He has a cloud around him regarding potential NCAA violations and player unhappy with his style, including one player specifically calling out the atmosphere as not being a "family" while at Mich. I want a coach who will keep the VTFamily tradition alive, where players feel like family.
The answer is that Arizona got a little lucky, had a monster in Scooby Wright, beat Oregon, and had a good year. That's pretty much it.
OT - Just started rewatching the 2004 season. I hate to open old wounds, but damn... Hokies got jobbed on a LOT of calls in that SoCal game, the phantom interference call not withstanding.
Conspiracy?
Was at that game big one that stood out was "roughing the passer".
I honestly think Tech would have won that game, had Hyman not been called for that pass interference.
Yep, I knew that game was over as soon as that penalty was called. Which was a shame as we were about to go up two scores. That '04 team we had was very good, probably second or third best team VT has had. The schedule that year was brutal if you factor in Auburn we had our chances to beat the top two teams in the country. But who needs to open up those old wounds, even though 2004 was still the most satisfying season to me, including '99.
We should have beat Auburn too. As I recall we dropped a pass in the endzone on a 4th down, lost by 3.
Yep and missed a 20 something yard field goal in the 4th quarter
I was at that game as well and trust me that call did not go unnoticed. Also a interception was wiped by a call right? maybe the roughing call HokieFireman is referencing. That was the first game I attended as Hokie, what a way to start.
What is he supposed to say?
What if Beamer had said, "You know, we've had a pretty good staff the past couple of years and I'm happy with our continuity and those guys recruiting efforts, but I don't think our future coach is in Blacksburg right now." ---- Do you realize the sh*tstorm that would cause?
We already have enough issues recruiting with his impending departure so there is no way he's going to undermine the current staff. This is a lot about nothing. Beamer will be gone by the end of next year at the latest, Shane moves on, Bud will remain DC and we'll get an HC with a more wide-open game-plan (e.g.-RichRod type not saying RR).
I've been adamant with the belief that Foster is not HC material because of his past, but do not believe that is the case any longer. I feel football has become too big of a business with too much money at stake, to not hire the best candidate. Transgressions are easily forgotten these days with a winning season (see Dana Holgorsen, Bobby Petrino, etc.). That being said, I don't see Foster as the figurehead/fundraiser/glad-handing personality that is required of the position. I see him as much more of a football junkie, in his own world, Jim Harbaugh type. Oh wait....
Foster's past?
Yeah, I thought he's had a pretty good past.
I think he might be referring to his past HC job interviews that didn't go in his favor.
That's not what he is talking about but nobody wants to get into it. It's all hearsay and a longtime ago.
There is likely more to it than that, but since I have only second and third hand accounts, and even then, it's really old news, I'll choose to keep quiet on the issue. I agree that we need to keep Bud, but I think his value to VT is as our DC. Like it has been mentioned, Bud doesn't really seem like the gladhanding, fundraising type, and probably isn't exactly the type to do some of the ass kissing that a modern HC has to do as the public face of the program trying to fill the coffers from the deeper pocketed fans. Personally, I hope Bud will stay with the program, we hire an offensive minded head coach, and maybe then we'll see what VT's ceiling can be. If he does, indeed, become the head coach, I'll be all for him, but I'll also be surprised if that happens.
Edit: Took too long to get this post out. cds7c said it first, and more succinctly. I concur.
Lots of rumors of adult beverage indiscretions, even when I was a student back in the late '90's, but nothing that ever made the news though which is why it remains in the rumor mill...
You just described 90% of the student population :)
Suffice it to say there was more to it than that.
For us younger people who weren't around back in the day, could we please get an actual explanation of what is alleged to have occurred? I'm really curious.
I wouldn't call anything an allegation, mostly just rumors. Been so long that no one knows what might or might not be true. I really hope no one starts posting stuff they've heard from their uncle's cousin's fishing buddy, because we will go downhill really fast. I've heard some stuff and it seems ridiculous. Next time you're in a grocery store checkout line, look to the nearest tabloid, and whatever you see on the cover is something that someone has said Bud Foster did at one time. And to me, those statements have the same credibility.
The one thing that I know for a fact (and this comes from players) is that the guys will basically jump onto a burning, sinking ship if Bud needed them to. They love the man and are loyal to him. That, to me, is all that matters.
Understandable. Didn't want to cause any sort of uproar, mostly just curious, since there are some that seem to think it would affect his HC chances. Though I gotta say, just because Bud is leaving Scientology doesn't make him unfit for the head gig.
Yeah, the alien baby surprised me a bit, too. But part of me always knew that Bud was a cybernetically enhanced extraterrestrial being, anyway.
Which is why I decline to expand on the subject regardless of the veracity of my sources or their information.
I would add, days later, that I have never heard anything anywhere from anyone to indicate to me that Bud wouldn't be qualified, as far as I'm concerned, to serve as the head coach at Va. Tech.
That's kind why I wouldn't mind having Shane has our HC. Shane would KILL the fundraising/dealing with the media/being the "face of the franchise"/recruiting aspects of being a HC. As long as he has his father's "hands off approach" with the coordinatiors, he's would do a great job...the issue is that he's woefully underqualified and he had to deal with nepotism issues for the rest of his career, it'd hurt us from a recruiting standpoint.
Make Shane the HC at a lower rate than his peers, make Foster the highest paid DC in the country.
That's possible, if you have a DC and and OC that will go along with it, they're good enough to take VT to another level, and the entire group is able to kick recruiting up to a more elite level, and nothing falls apart in the mean time.
It's a VERY tall order. We'll know if it's even within the realm of possibility in a year or two, but a lot of things would have to go stellar (like next-level stellar), and everyone would have to be willing to go along with it.
It's difficult to believe Bud would go along with that, but you never know.
Somebody very recently commented that how at a meet and greet with recruits Shane was the least interactive of the coaching staff. I also just do not know if Foster deserves to be passed over by Shane.
Don't see it happening. It would be wrong on so many levels. Bud or not, Shane don't jump Bud. Laws of nature preclude the possibility in a natural world/
...Bud jumps you!
He can also blow bubbles with Beef Jerky
I love Foster but I honestly believe he is comfortable staying the DC as long as Whit makes the right hire which isn't Shane.
Exactly my thoughts. Foster wants to be a HC, but doesn't want to politic. So he needs a OC or HC that likes that stuff, attacks to maintain possession and give the defense a rest, but isn't the sort to carry the banner all by himself. I really think we can keep Foster as DC, provided 3 requirements are met: 1) The HC is the right one, with an attacking-possession O. 2) Whit pays the man, cause he should be the highest paid DC in the country, since he's also the best. 3) WE as fans an alumni, CARRY HIS F***ING FLAG! Foster wants the recognition, and I don't blame him; greatness, deserves recognition.
My preference would be to do whatever possible to keep Foster. Foster is GREAT at what he does. I hate to mess with that part of the equation.
VT needs an uptick in recruiting and offense to get to the next level, so whatever HC can make that happen in combination with the other personnel would be optimal. Loeffler is so far unproven, one way or the other.
Maybe the politicking can be covered by, say... an assistant to the athletic director who specializes in football? Do we have someone who fits that description on the staff? Hmm...
This guy seems to know how to work the public. Is he around?
Foster is one of the top D coordinators in the country, not denying it. But some coaches that were amazing coordinators have failed greatly when they jumped to head coach. Not saying that is the case here but it is possible so I would be more than happy for him to stay as a coordinator till the end of time ah la Lebouf (sp)
I hear this brought up a lot and it is true. But, it's also true that most of the top D1 coaches were also great coordinators, so the fact that he does his current job well should only be perceived as a positive as it relates to his chances of being a good HC.
There's also a lot of DC's who made fantastic HC's. Saban, Jimbo, Chip Kelley all come to mind.
Jimbo was an OC and/or QB coach at ever stop in his career, including under Saban at LSU. Kelly was only a DC one season at Johns Hopkins in 1994, every coaching position he had after that prior to becoming a head coach was on the offensive side of the ball.
Frank, we love ya, but I have to say no to Shane
I don't approve of the job Shane has done as a RB coach.
His recruiting has seemingly gone downhill.
The players may love him, but that's not enough.
What part of the RB coaching isn't at least ok? Do you blame him for injuries?
His insistence on rotating RBs unnecessarily and not playing to their strengths.
No team in the country plays one back exclusively anymore rotating is common, we as fans don't know when a back is tired or other factors. Has he been perfect no but to lay all the issues with RB's at his feet is tiresome and played out.
I didn't "lay all the issues with RB's at his feet", I said I don't approve of the job he's done.
And honestly, even if he'd done an excellent job I don't want him going from RB coach to Head Coach. If he makes his way up the ranks and gets more experience I can listen to the argument to have him take over but not yet.
I agree he isn't seasoned enough to take over HC yet.
Hokie fireman, the best position coaches in the business are masters of their craft who have usually played the position and coached the position for several years. Look at the bios of RB coaches at most of the big time schools. A long snapper with a hodge pudge of coaching experiences is an outlier.
I know one of our backs came in a little over weight last year, but overcoming Hodge pudge can be a tall order.
the only reason Shane gets this job is because you never want to be the coach after "the coach". Whit could fully separate from the Beamer legacy at that point.
He can also simply select someone else.
I hope this does happen, because if we hire from within that would probably mean Beamer ended on a high note.
I'm thinking even an exceptional one.
Bud as the new HC and let him pick the OC that he thinks would compliment his defense the best
I've read all the arguments as to why people aren't sure or don't want Bud as a HC.
And I don't care. Bud is my pick until I hear direct quotes from him that he doesn't want it.
I think we're a big enough program that there's no need to gamble on a coach with no HC experience
in other words, Bud will never be our HC. If I'm Bud, which I'm not, I'd have a hard time coming back to Tech if they told me I had to go elsewhere, get some HC experience, and then apply the next time we have a HC opening.
I wouldn't expect him to either. He had a chance to do it in the past but chose not to. Being a DC at one school for 20 years puts him in a strange situation
Do you think another P5 program will offer him a position as head coach?
See, this is something that often gets overlooked when talking about Bud. Yes, he has interviewed for HC positions before. But when it comes down to hiring their next coach, don't people think that ADs at other schools interviewing Bud have it in the back of their mind that as soon as Beamer retires, Bud would leave them in a heartbeat to be the next HC at VT. If I were an AD with no ties to VT and I were choosing between Bud and some other well-qualified coach, I would probably go with the other guy, since I would have a better chance of him sticking around for more than a year or two. Most Power 5 teams do not see themselves as stepping stones and hire accordingly. So, in my opinion, for the last few years and until Beamer actually retires, Bud has interviewed or willl interview with one hand tied behind his back.
I think they pick the best head coach for their institution.
They might ask him if he'd entertain an offer at a previous institution if offered, but that's when he say's "If I accept your offer, I'm fully committed to your position." Everybody who interviews has ties to one or more communities.
Everyone has ties, but not almost 30 years at one place.
No AD is going to think that the best head coach for their institution is one that they suspect would bolt for VT as soon as it opened, regardless of how he answers the question. And there are only two previous institutions on Bud's resume so being vague is useless in this case.
Of course, maybe that is why he has been passed over when he has interviewed? If they asked, and he honestly said VT was his dream job, then it would explain why they went in different directions.
Does any P5 school hire a HC assuming he will be around after year 3?
Or that they will want him around after year 3?