"Oh you guys think, huh," Bud Foster said rhetorically when he was asked if he was interested in Virginia Tech's soon-to-be vacant head coaching position.
Foster previously told The Key Play succeeding Frank Beamer would be his dream job.
"I don't think this program needs a culture change," Foster added Monday evening. "We can do some things a little bit better. We got to win the state in recruiting. We got to get that back. We got good kids, we got a good program. We're close to getting it back where we want to be.
"Recruiting's the key. We got to get back to winning our state. When we did that, we were a top ten football team. We haven't the last few years, we got the top kids have left the state. Then all of a sudden, we've become just a little bit above average. Where you get a couple of guys who are difference makers and the next thing you know you're winning 9, 10, 11 football games. That's where we got to get back to doing that."
Foster also discussed the Hokies' Thursday night road matchup with Georgia Tech:
- Tech needs to be sound in its "option principles"; which defender needs to account for the dive, quarterback, and pitch. The Hokies also need to be physical upfront, and the back end must prevent the big play over the top of the defense.
- Georgia Tech's offense is at its best when they establish the fullback. Virginia Tech can use its defensive speed to its advantage if they can force the Yellow Jackets to the perimeter.
- The Hokies go live in practice, chop blocks and all, to best prepare to stop Georgia Tech's triple option attack.
Comments
Interesting he kept referencing what "we" need to do better as it relates to the future of the program. Does this mean he's staying?
He is referring to Virginia Tech Football. I wouldn't read in to it whether he will be here next season or not.
The Hokies already have a culture , a lunch pail foundation. What it needs now is a good coach who can convince top talent to come to Blacksburg to continue what Beamer & Foster started . A great offensive mind with Foster's great defensive mind is the winning formula to future success.
I don't want him thinking of anything but GT in Atlanta on prime time TV.
Well I mean he got asked the question about whether or not he wants to be the next coach, so you can't blame him for talking about it.
Interesting to hear him out so much emphasis on recruiting. I think Foster is aware that that is his perceived weakness as being named successor.
As exciting as it is to hypothesize about an outsider coming in, a part of me would be really happy if Bud was named.
He's our guy.
#BudforHC
Honestly, Foster gets flack for 'not recruiting' but he takes care of business. He was the primary recruiter for Teller, Ekanem and McMillian, all of whom are starters and productive players. He made an in home visit to Tim Settle the day before signing day (I think). He clearly gets it. I'm not ruling Bud out for HC job quite yet, and I hope Whit does the same (or at least has given Foster significant consideration).
Not to mention an in home with Josh Sweat before Jimbo came the next day. He had the whole defensive staff visit. Even though we didn't get that one, he really puts forth the effort.
I don't think there's anything we know about Bud Foster that he doesn't know. Your comment that Bud Foster knows his weaknesses is spot on, and doesn't surprise me a bit. I think highly competitive professionals like Bud know exactly what their strengths and weaknesses are, and have strategies for how to optimize the former and mitigate the latter.
Literally nothing would make me happier than to see Foster get the job and be successful.
Plus infinity
100!! - My biggest concern with promoting Bud to HC is tis his plan the offensive staff. Second concern is his plan to get VT back into the top 15 regularly in recruiting. If he has a solid plan for those two concerns, hire him today.
VT has always had a chip on their shoulder. If given the opportunity, I hope Bud can prove the haters wrong.
So people are "haters" if they don't agree with you over the choice of VT's next coach?
what?
I hope Bud can prove the haters wrong.
Maybe I misunderstood what you meant by this.
Dictionary.com
Thus, the people who say Bud is not HC material. He would never succeed. The ADs that never gave him a chance. Etc.
Yes, I know what the word "hater" means.
What I'm saying is that people could feel that Bud isn't the right fit for a particular HC job without being a hater. They might just think someone else is a better fit for the job.
I'm not 100% sold either way. I think Bud has been a great DC, and I think he should interview for the HC job. I also think Whit should choose the person who has the best chance of improving VT's football program, be it Bud or someone else.
It will really be the overal combination of HC, DC, and OC that makes one HC candidate better than another.
Yes. This is fact.
Soooo, why do you hate Bud?
Except what does that then say about Beamer as Head Coach. 4 years of mediocre results, then bud comes in and is successful.
Absolutely nothing.
Foster has a lot to accomplish as a HC before he is even in the discussion as being on Beamer's level.
You mean unless he exceeds Beamer such as: Winning 12+ games in a single season, wins a playoff game, wins a MNC, achieves an outright #1 ranking, defeats #1 ranked team?
those are lofty expectations. I'd wager that you'll have much more appreciation for what Beamer did in about 10 years when nobody behind him has exceeded the standard he set in Blacksburg. It's not only a distinct possibility that will happen, it's extremely likely.
You misinterpret my comment. I appreciate all Beamer did. But it sounds like you've completely written off even the remote possibility of a new HC like Foster or someone else achieving what I just listed. And please don't be misled. I didn't mean accomplish all or most of those in one single season. If Foster or [insert HC] won at least 12+ games in one season, they would've accomplished something Beamer did not (unless you asterisk the '11 season where Danny caught the ball).
It's not comparable unless Foster does the same thing Beamer but accomplishes even more. Foster would have to take over a small program, build it into a regional power and a national brand, and then bypass Beamer by accomplishing everything you listed.
If Foster did it with a program that he built up from nothing like Frank Beamer did, sure.
Beamer built up the program from little and a shitload of NCAA fracs vios to be sure. But he didn't build it up from nothing. He also never accomplished any of said items I listed during one of his time at Tech. You're correct in a cumulative sense though. I believe be it Foster or other (exception being RR) the coach needs to be supported.
So you're saying Jimbo only won at FSU because of Bowden?
The past helps but you still have to sell/recruit the future.
I know Beamer made the program, but its no longer 2000. its been 15 years, and since about 2008ish all programs ranked 10-40 are on the same level in that any top coach can go to that school and have them BCS level Bowl eligible within a 3 year turnaround
I don't agree with that, I think there are plenty of teams in the 10-40 range that are punching above their weight simpy because of great coaching getting more out of less than average teams. But that's another discussion
Whoa whoa, pump the brakes now. That is my whole point. You asked what would it say about Beamer if Foster came in and improved the winning percentage right away, and I said it wouldn't say much because you can't compare the two accomplishments. Beamer took a small football program and turned it into a regional power. Foster would be attempting to take a regional power and turn it into a national powerhouse. Two totally different legacies.
Let's not forget that Beamer was one quarter away from winning a national championship too. He hasn't been able to sustain his success as he has aged, but there was a time when he was considered one of those "top coaches". Whoever takes over has a hell of a lot to prove before they can say they rank up there with prime Beamer.
One thing it says is that Frank Beamer built a great program that could be passed on as his legacy. Another is that over the years he taught Bud Foster a thing or two.
I would absolutely love it if Bud got the job. He could elevate Torrian to DC and pick up a stud recruiter to take over Torrian as CB coach. Bud has said in the past that he would want to have a spread attack on the offensive side of the ball, if he can find someone that can really put together an up tempo offense to pair with a good defense, I think he could really turn us around.
With the amount of loyalty and, with this year being an exception, the defenses he's fielded, he's shown he deserves a shot at it. We don't have the LBers to be good right now and we have freshman all over the secondary. Landing a big name LBer and a year of experience for our secondary could mean a world of difference next year.
I may be in the minority but I don't think changing offensive philosophy from a pro-style to a fast tempo offense is the difference maker. Like Bud said its recruiting. Look at Alabama running their offense... It's efficient because they have the horses to do it. Clemson... The same! I think it's about keeping defenses honest by having a balance attack (whether it's a pro-style or a spread) and it when it comes down to getting those 3rd and short, imposing our will on the defenses. But as a mentor always told me: "you can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit, no matter how much mayonaise you add!" Recruiting is the key. Whoever the next coach is going to be he better be great at it.
Travon showed us this against BC a week ago. Was nice to see again.
There is a huge advantage to having a HC that wants this particular job over all others and Bud is the only one under consideration that fits that. But why should we think that he would recruit better talent as a HC than he has a a DC. We haven't had real LBers since Adibi and Hall. When your best players continue to be walkons there's a big problem and I don't see how he could suddenly change
Your logic is valid imo
Well, if we got better offensive recruiting maybe Bud wouldn't have to keep sending defenders over to offense to retrain in those positions, eh?
We make jokes about QB/ TE, what about LB/RB, DL/OL?
Didn't Chad Morris go on record a few years ago saying that this (VT HC) was his dream job?
As far as I can tell, that's a message board narrative with no real source. I found (what I think was) the first instance of that statement on a public 24/7 Sports board, someone saying exactly "we all know that Morris is on the record as calling VT his dream job," then a lot of other people saying it made sense. At this point, it seems to have been taken as fact, but "on the record" is a bit of a stretch here, as I can't find any actual record of that statement aside from chatter.
This. I've seen a lot more quotes from Chad Morris suggesting that he wants to be in the state of Texas than that VT is his dream job....I doubt if Chad Morris is VT's next HC. I wouldn't be upset if he was...I just doubt that he will be
Dude it's in the Internet. Just like we all know Jefferson said " UVA was the worst thing I ever created"
Sounds legit to me
In 2013 Morris said he was interested in the VT job when it opened.
until I see a source I will not believe it. You're just somebody saying that on a message board as far as I'm concerned. No offense, but you don't have any credibility. #sources needed
247Sports insider J.C. Shurburtt in 2013 (via 247Sports staffer Cory Fravel), "Chad Morris wants the Virginia Tech job if and when it opens
interesting. I wonder if that's still true now, 2 years later. It's good for VT if true.
He was reportedly interested in the South Carolina job when it opened up, so that basically killed the "Morris won't leave Texas" crowed. I don't know why he wouldn't be interested, Virginia Tech is obviously a huge step up over SMU (where he will still need at least another year to rebuild)
TSL sources / staff members (reputable from that sense and to whom they are connected to) have heard that Morris indeed has been interested for several years in the Tech job. Open secret that Beamer wasn't going to last forever, so Morris made it known he'd like to be in contention.
this is pretty shaky at best. I don't know how reputable TSL is. And who have they "heard" from who say that Morris is interested in the VT job?
I want to hear or read a direct quote from Morris saying that he's interested. Otherwise I'm not sold that he's that interested. As far as I can tell based on reading his own quotes the man wants to be in Texas.
The staff is pretty reputable. They've got credentials as well and a reputation at stake by stating publicly as such. Not saying they're suggesting it's going to be Morris, but I'd take it to the bank that he's interested and inquired about our HC vacancy.
Well that's not a bad thing. I think Bud still being in the mix is the huge wild card here. It's strange not having any idea who the face of our football team is going to be in 6 weeks. Exciting and nerve wracking all at the same time.
I know the TSL guys are well connected, so if they're saying that's the chatter, I believe it as chatter. That falls well short of "on the record." A lot of people are claiming to have "knowledge" of the situation, but until a known media entity puts his/her actual name on an article that says, "I have a quote from Chad Morris and it says [whatever]," this is all rumor mill stuff from anonymous people on the Internet.
Certainly not on the record, but I'd argue that people who are that tied in to the scene over there (not just anonymous posers such as myself, but credentialed reporters) who publicly state that Morris is interested are correct.
http://www.thekeyplay.com/virginia-tech-football/2015/11/10825/virginia-...
Sorry to resurrect this thread, I've been trying to get caught up to current threads for a couple days (mostly just skimming looking for green comments and occasionally getting sucked into a thread) and have tried to avoid commenting on stuff, but I wanted to comment on this:
I've seen this sentiment before and one of the previous times I went back through our linebacker recruiting, I didn't quite make it back to Adibi and Hall, but I did cover 10 recruiting classes including the current one. These are all of the Linebacker recruits (or other recruits that I, from memory, knew eventually played/practiced extensively at one of our linebacker spots) from the 2007 class to the 2016 class as listed by 247 (which is why Huelskamp is on the list despite being a walk-on) along with their 247 composite rating. I bolded players that I knew started at one of the linebacker spots and struck-through players that either left the program or moved to offense. A lot of this is from memory, so feel free to correct any mistakes you see:
2007
Hunter Owens-OLB-0.8759
Quillie Odom-ILB-0.8475 went to Hargrave, re-signs next year
Barquell Rivers-OLB-0.8475
Alonzo Tweedy-OLB-0.8019
2008
Quillie Odom-OLB-0.8926
Bruce Taylor-ILB-0.8729
Allen Stephens-OLB-0.8567
Jake Johnson-OLB-0.8444Lost starting job to Gibson, was moved to DE over Spring, and transferred after.Lyndell Gibson-ILB-0.8444
Jeron Gouveia Winslow-OLB-0.8229
2009
Tariq Edwards-OLB-0.8567
Telvion Clark-ILB-0.8558
2010
Brian Laiti-OLB-0.86210Chase Williams-ILB-0.8600
Current roster comes from these years
2011
Ronny VanDyke-S-0.8755
2012
Trey Edmunds-OLB-0.8898Has spent entire career at RBDeon Clarke-OLB-0.8849
Devin VanDyke-OLB-0.8817Gave up football after multiple injuries (shoulder?) French was very high on him during Spring practices, if healthy likely to have challenged Williams for Starting Mike spot and to have started over Motuapuaka this year.Dahman McKinnon-OLB-0.8655
Quinton Taylor-ATH-not rated
2013
Holland Fisher-S-0.9722Went to Fork Union, re-signs next yearAndrew Motuapuaka-OLB-0.8532
Anthony Shegog-S-0.8344
Jamieon Moss-OLB-0.8247
Sean Huelskamp-OLB-not rated Started in relief of injured Motuapuaka
2014
Holland Fisher-S-0.9461Raymon Minor-ATH-0.9041
2015
Tremaine Edmunds-OLB-0.8760 Started over Clarke, likely for disciplinary reasons
Carson Lydon-OLB-0.8454 Started in relief of injured Motuapuaka and Huelskamp (targeting)
Others LBs on current roster:
Drew Burns-rJR LB
Johnathan Galante-rSO OLB
Josh Eberly-rJR LB
Trent young-rFR LB
Zach Tresser-FR LB
Joe Koshuta-FR LB
Matt Reinhart-FR LB
Future Linebackers
2016
Emmanuel Belmar-OLB-0.8467
Tavante Beckett-OLB-0.8430
Victor Greene-OLB-0.8151
I post all of this because it shows that the vast majority of our linebackers have been recruited, not walk ons (and most of our walk-on starters I believe have been invited walk-ons, which is a world of difference from a student that tries out for the team). The only walk-ons to start at a Linebacker position (unless I'm forgetting someone) over this period are Jack Tyler (I don't think anyone has any complaints about him beating out Williams for the starting spot) and Sean Huelscamp (Due to Motuapuaka being injured) at the MIKE spot and Derek Di Nardo at Whip (was able to take the spot because RVD was often injured). So that's three starters over 9 years and two of them started in large part due to injury. Over those 9 years, 15 of 27 commits have started at least one game at a Linebacker spot and I believe that Raymon Minor is likely to start in the future (In line to be #2 Whip next year which puts him an injury away from starting and he was the highest rated LB recruit on roster so he is likely a better fit than some of the current starters if we have a different DC in the post Beamer era.)
Edit: Also since you specifically mentioned Adibi and Hall, here are their 247 composite ratings:
Xavier Adibi-OLB-0.8667
Vince Hall-ILB-0.9000
Adibi was basically rated about where most of our LBs have been rated, mid-high 3 star. Hall was rated higher than all of our starters have been, but he was still a very low rated 4 star recruit and not as highly rated as Raymon Minor was coming out of high school.
Team Bud. 100%.
It is VERY difficult to think that Bud does not deserve a run at head coach of the Hokies - so I won't think it. Bud deserves a shot.
Give him a head coach salary and a 2 or 3 year contract to see what he can do.
i agree but give him 4 years with a VT option for 5th year so a freshman class can work its way through.
Have Bud as HC and then he can get his guys into place on offense that can hopefully recruit and keep talent in state, the defensive coaches can all recruit plus who would take Torrians spot. We could have an offensive and defensive staff that can recruit and all Bud has to do is coach. He has a lot of fire in him and could get a team pumped up. He has said he is not Beamer and I believe it, he could bring that tough guy approach that fires players up and all of the coaches would respect him. Definitely all in for Bud right here!
I guess my concern is - doesn't this ring a little hollow since he is on-staff and, frankly, doesn't have the reputation of being a cracker jack recruiter? When you look at the string of just defensive misses over the last five years, and the fact that Bud's system isn't exactly NFL-friendly in the front seven, it just sounds a little strange to me if he's pushing "let's take the state back" when he's on a staff that has had such an issue with that as of late.
It's not like it would be mutiny to approach Frank and say "let's get this recruiting thing turned around". Just my two cents.
Bud spent the day talking with Joe in the summer of 2014, and he discussed how VT had an inferior recruiting infrastructure over the last few years of the Jim Weaver era. He was a strong advocate for change, and talked about the drain of trying to coach, spend time with recruits, go watch HS games on Friday's etc was in season. At most good football schools, the football staff coaches and then supplements the work done by the recruiting coordinators.
http://www.thekeyplay.com/content/2014/august/19/beyond-pail-day-virgini...
Whit provided those resources and recruiting improved initially. I think Beamer's eventual exit was a real damper for this season's class. Bud's track record at inside linebacker is a bit worrisome, but keep in mind, he sunk so much into getting Stephone Anthony and Travis Hughes and got beat. I doubt it was because of lack of effort on his part.
To me, Bud has earned an opportunity as the head coach. However, so much depends on a closer internal review by Babcock. If he identifies that Bud isn't the guy to take the program to that next level, or that there does need to be a culture change, then Bud can't be the guy. That perspective is something none of us have the benefit of.
I will say this. I have not had many encounters with Foster. I always assumed that talk about him "never" being the head coach stemmed from his personality not being a good mesh with boosters, or his recruiting track record. Then, I got to hear him speak in person and talk with him for a few minutes. To me, he is the kind of coach I would want to play for. He was engaging and friendly, organized, mission-focused, and polished. At the same time, he can inspire and intimidate. I saw absolutely no indication that he didn't have the personality to run the show or that he would be a liability in fundraising.
I don't think a Bud Foster era would necessarily be a mirror of the Beamer era. Bud is his own man. He is loyal to Beamer, but based on hearing him talk and his interview with Joe, I think he is very much his own man on how he would want to run a football team. I don't think he was entirely happy with the state of the program and the offensive staff and wanted changes as much as the rest of us.
I would like to ask a question. If you are second mate on a ship, say 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, or a little after and you notice that the ship has holes in it and is slowly sinking, and as well, you notice your captain does not think those holes pose a threat, what do you do? But what if, you yourself did not notice those holes? I can't know, but I'd like to know what type of conversations Bud was having with the head guy in those days. How far does loyalty go? Many here have seen it in the business world, sports world and other instances. Does Bud bear any responsibility for the state of affairs?
Last night I followed a link and went through the game against WVU in 1994. There was a young, energetic Bud huddled up with his troops on the sidelines. That's where a coach coaches, in my opinion, and the defense that night was getting it done. You could just feel this guy had a destiny. I'll come out in support and say, I believe Bud could be a very good choice. I just disagree, a little cultural change is needed. People need their heads busted at times and that includes the head coach. Beamer had his butt kissed for too long and here we are.
Edit: I hadn't yet read the posts below before posting this. But the basic premise of my question stands.
I agree, I think Bud would bring his own perspective to the job. I have no idea how good or bad a HC he would be, but I know the devotion his players feel for him and that they would run through a wall for him. I think that if he can inspire an entire team like that, it's a positive. And if he goes elsewhere, I think Virginia Tech will rue the day that they play a Bud Foster coached team, cause it won't be pretty.
I disagree with Bud. A lot of our culture is outdated in this day and age and is one of the reasons we have been a mediocre program for the past 4 years. I'm not talking about the 'family atmosphere', but the recruiting culture. Offensive philosophy. A lot of small things here and there that have accumulated to why our record is where it is.
We need a culture change, and the next coach I hope knows that and doesn't continue what has obviously not been working. Whether it is Bud or not is not my concern as harsh as it may sound. I just want what's best for the school to be successful again.
If you read the interview with Joe above, and other quotes from Bud over the last few years and he has been an advocate for changing the recruiting culture and the offensive philosophy. He openly stated that VT was way behind other top ACC schools in terms of the recruiting resources and infrastructure.
I admit to not reading the whole interview, will take a look at it later tonight.
I've seen you mention recruiting "infrastructure" a few times and I'm just wondering what you mean by that. Does that have to do with adding staff like Guerry or facilities or something else? Just Curious.
That's absolutely what it means. If you haven't noticed, Guerry has been a tremendous help, with both changing and modernizing some of our recruiting, and making VT more visible. Not only is this helping, but it takes some responsibility off of the coaches.
Look at Alabama for example. They have 8 "Football Analysts" on the football staff. 3 Directors of Player Personnel, 3 Directors of player development, a director of football ops, a recruiting ops coordinator, a football ops coordinator, and an athletics relations coordinator. All of these people, PLUS the coaching staff itself to assist in recruiting, evaluating players, and doing the little things behind the scenes. This kind of stuff adds up. Compare that to VT's staff here.
We obviously don't have all of the resources that Alabama has, but Weaver also restricted us in some ways. By adding positions like Guerry for high school relations, it really helps out recruiting, which everyone knows, is the key to success.
My interpretation is that Bud agrees with you. When he says the culture doesn't need to change, I believe he is referring to the family-atmosphere, built on being blue-collar and busting your ass day in and day out. That part of the culture, Bud loves. Him saying that they need to get better at recruiting is him saying that the recruiting culture needs to be updated. I think Bud's philosophy is very much is line with what you think as well.
I'm not sure I really get how Bud as head coach is would be different from the situation three years ago.
Has someone been holding back on the recruiting? Does Bud have a line on a better offense than Beamer was able to attract? Wasn't the whole point of the shake down on the offensive side three years ago to set up the current staff for Beamer's departure?
I would love nothing more than to see Bud Foster lead that team out of tunnel in Lane and in Bristol next year. I think Bud knows there needs to be change, and I think he's right, the program doesn't need a culture change. That definitely does not mean that he's got the right to take over, but I do think he should at least have a chance. Can he take over and maybe hire a new offense coordinator and get some great recruiting going? Team Bud over here.
Buds the man...but I don't see how we could see big positive changes with him as head coach. But again I am just so glad its not my job to figure it out. Its nice to simply trust that someone else will make the right choice.....hopefully.
I think you give Bud the opportunity for 3-4 years and if he can't turn it around then you can go another direction with the program. Hopefully we would be around the same place or a little better and wouldn't be deeper in the hole than we already are. And if he does succeed then Whit looks like a genius for hiring in-house and everyone in Hokie Nation gets to be happy.
My position is you give the job to Richt if he wants it. He is by far the most qualified on our board. But he very well might not be in the right place for the job right now.
I would then want to interview Herman, Fuente, Smart, Morris and Bud. Any of these five may have the right ideas for the future of the program. No preference for offensive guys, for new blood or for Bud. All five are qualified and deserve a chance to win the job.....if they want it.
I do not think Bud deserves a shot at head coach. He has been on the staff already and it is partially his fault as to why we haven't been able to keep talent in state. He is a terrible recruiter and if he would be head coach the program would be an 8 win team at best. Chad Morris needs to be the head coach with Foster being able to be a DC for a few more years. If he doesn't perform the next couple years then find a new DC
What makes you think he's a terrible recruiter?
And who will we get better than Bud? NOBODY!
Nearly every great defensive player we have had has said that playing for coach foster was a main factor in their decision in picking VT. The misses Bud has had have been to other great programs and haven't been for a lack of effort. We can't blame him for every miss and not give credit for the great players he has hit on.
What makes you think Bud is entirely responsible for some of the recruiting misses? I honestly put most of that on Beamer and his pending retirement.
TEAM BUD all the way!
The success or failure of hiring Bud would completely hinge on who he could bring in as offensive coordinator.
I'm assuming he'd tell Loeffler to take a hike.
What about Shane? Would definitely be awkward for Bud to let him go.
Well, wisdom says he'd put Torrian as his DC, which would open up the CB spot. All of Shane's previous jobs have been on defense/special teams before coming here, so why not try him out on defense?
A while back I had read an article about Foster, and how organized he is and how would run his team as a Head coach. It'll be interesting to see if anyone picks him up as a head coach somewhere. All those guys who are vying for HC positions at the AAC and conference USA will be leaving open spots. Bud might take that in. I also noticed how he mentioned that he would like to recruit better in VA. If he really has that plan, we better hire him or he is going to UVA.
I hire Bud Foster in a heartbeat if you tell me that we could get an impressive Offensive Coordinator. Just not sure where that comes from. The idea of elevating Bud and changing nothing else scares me a little bit.
Would he get rid of Loeffler and then get someone else? Who could they get realistically that would be better than Loeffler as an OC?
Furthermore I can't fathom a world where we have to consider firing Bud Foster if things didn't work out.
With all that said though I'm down. He deserves it and I would be willing to go down that road.
Bud is insanely confident in his abilities as HC at VT.
I have never known Bud to not be prepared and to have a plan.
He knows and is respected by lots of coaches out there. You think even a little that Bud would not know how to leverage his relationships into being coached as an HC?
No way Bud does not have as much assistance and resources at his disposal to go do this.
I'm all in.
#Bud4HC
Do not think Bud is HC material. As far as culture goes, let's keep the honesty, caring about people/players and winning. I think we were too loyal to staff for too long. You have to produce or you are gone. If you have not read about or seen the clip on the Toledo coach, look him up. He would do VT proud. His winning approach and philosophy would work at any level. Bottom line, I trust Whit and am ready to support whoever he brings in...
Hmmmm
I'm hung up on the emphasis on winning the state in recruiting. Is that even possible anymore with all the hands in the cookie jar? I mean you have programs like Penn St who have deals with ODU to have in state camps siphoning off talent left and right. I dunno I just don't think that is a realistic goal anymore, and we have to be focused more on regional and national recruiting to have success instead of becoming more insular. I think that is the absolute wrong mindset and a major symptom of why or current recruiting fell off so badly.
Unfortunately I believe promoting Bud would be an act using the heart and not necessarily one using the brain. He has earned the right to be a top candidate but I think there are better candidates out there who will get us to where we need to be sooner with a higher ceiling.
My brain thinks it would be good for Bud to get some HC experience at a lower level
My heart will feel awful if Bud doesn't get a shot
Keep in mind that Bud has had that shot in the past. Over the last fifteen years, there were multiple times where Bud said that he would stay at VT until he could get a P5 (then BCS) job offer. Specifically, Memphis was interested twice I believe.
So if Bud doesn't have the prerequisite experience for the job right now, it's hard to say, but that's on Bud.
you're not wrong. I just know that Bud REALLY wants this job and I'm going to feel bad for him if he doesn't get it. If I'm Whit, I probably don't hire Bud. But I'm not Whit, so we'll see what happens, I guess.
Not sure if anyone has read 'Good to Great' by Jim Collins, but it's a well known book that analyzes 'great' businesses (business that have outperforming the general stock market by over fifteen times since the 1920's). General Electric, Boeing, Wal-Mart, Walt Disney, and Philip Morris are the ones I remember, but there were around 20 different businesses. One misconception that he briefly touched on was the myth companies should seek to hire CEOs from the outside in order to stimulate fundamental change. In seventeen hundred years of combined lifespans, he found that his 'great' companies found a CEO from outside their company a total of four times - all four instances coming from only two of his 20+ companies.
Now, I realize that there is hardly a one-to-one ratio when comparing a 100 year old corporation to a college football team that has been relevant for 20 years, but this is a comparison that I've thought about much during our coaching search. The only coaches I'd really want regardless of if Bud stays are Herman or Fuente. I'd take Morris and (reluctantly) Richt ONLY IF Bud stayed. Otherwise, Bud is in my top 3 ideal head coaching candidates.
Good to Great is more or less what Beamer just did.
So what do you do when what you were doing stops working? This is what Jim Collins says:
"If I were running a company today, I would have one priority above all others: to acquire as many of the best people as I could. I'd put off everything else to fill my bus. Because things are going to come back. My flywheel is going to start to turn. And the single biggest constraint on the success of my organization is the ability to get and to hang on to enough of the right people."
Bud isn't Frank. I think it's a misconception that Bud is going to run the ship the same way. I follow the rules and standards my boss sets, but if I were given his job you can bet I'd make changes and do things my own way.
I think Beamer took us to good. Now we need to get to great. I would argue that we have the right AD, and the right people on defense. Offense is up for debate. We really need coaches who will focus on recruiting above all else. Bud has consistently voiced this opinion. I'm curious how he would change the recruiting structure (specifics that is).
Beamer actually took VT to "great", and was consistent for some time, but was unable to keep the program there. Something else was needed at a certain point, and it just wasn't there.
I'm troubled by the problems on defense this year and last year.
If you have a program that depends on a certain talent level, and you don't have the talent, then it's a pretty big problem.
Meh, we'll just have to disagree.
I think the solution to that problem to get hire personnel who can go out there and get that talent.
Message boards don't like to hear this because it indirectly points the finger at them, but if VT football is going to go from solid to great, fans, alumni and regional business will have to step up big time with money.
There is a very strong correlation between financial resources and recruiting success -- much, much, much bigger than any individual coach can affect. VT currently ranks 42nd of the 54 public power 5 schools in total athletic revenue. That's right, VT is in the lowest quartile of it's most direct competition and trails almost all of the schools it needs to match or surpass in order to substantively improve recruiting by 30%-50+% in revenues.
Folks like to assume that VT hasn't lived up to expectations in recruiting because it helps them rationalize imperfection. But the fact of the matter is that VT was likely exceeding what could reasonably be expected given the financial resources (or lack thereof) and inherent challenges of an institution that, even for all of its recent football success, is still an interloper in the world of college football.
All VT has done with making it's recent recruiting infrastructure changes is keep pace with the Jones'. All of the increased "focus" in the world on recruiting and the tweaking of the recruiting infrastructure isn't likely to make any more than marginal gains in recruiting unless and until wallets open up equally to the expectations for recruiting improvement.
I think the head coach is a lot more important than the dollar figure.
The point of the finances is to pay coaches and provide facilities.
I don't think you can adequately separate winning, money, coaching, and recruiting, as they all correlated.
I think you're right, VT needs to increase the contributions, but I think Whit is the guy to do that more than Weaver was. The right head coach will also influence that. I think the facilities are pretty good. The ACC also needs to increase conference revenues, but I'd argue they've taken strides in that direction as well.
The Weaver-Beamer connection was nothing if not efficient. They really did do more with less.
You keep saying that it's all about the money, but you haven't stated where VT is deficient, other than fund-raising.
I'd be very interested to see our recruiting budget/breakdown vs. that of another school that often lands top 10 classes, but is not located in FL/TX/CA. Clemson, Nebraska, Oregon, Tennessee would all be interesting comparisons. Do we want to recruit players of a further distance but can't afford to fly coaches out there? Do we not have the same number of dedicated recruiting staff? Is our recruiting staff not of the same quality?
We have less staff in the recruiting department and less travel money.
So that's what in monetary terms? $1 million? $2 million?
Do you really think that's more important than a top-tier coach? Do you think that amount of money is what's holding VT back?
I think it's worthy of review, but I think the head coach is a more important factor than this, and I think VT can find that kind of money if it's important.
It's got to be more expensive for some of these other programs to recruit in Virginia, yet VT has been losing those recruiting battles.
I'm curious if they're finding it in your checkbook? I can't comprehend how anyone would believe we can casually come up with a spare $2 million.
I think head coach is very important and have no idea the relative importance between that and additional recruiting resources. I suspect the recruiting resources not only play a big role in landing recruits, but also in allowing the coaches to focus more on coaching during the season.
Also, isn't the level of coach we get and the money we have intertwined? If we had deeper pockets, we could not only hire tons of recruiting focuses people but also lure bigger name coaches.
I think VT is going to shell out for a head coach, and I think it's money well-spent.
If you go back to the argument being presented here, it's that VT can't win recruiting battles because they don't have money. I'm just trying to figure out what people mean by that, and what impact that money would have on the program.
VT just invested in both basketball and football facilities. They're willing to pay for coaches. If those coaches are successful, I have no doubt that you'll see a bump in revenues AND contributions.
I think your off by a factor of 10.
In 2009/2010, our opperating cost was $55.7 Million. That same year Florida State was operating at $70.5 Million. SOURCE
In 2008, Alabama donors gave about $12.5 million more than VT Donors
No doubt about it - those schools that land top 10 recruiting classes year in and year out are playing on a different field.
I believe VT is able to afford a top end coaching staff (~$6 mil/year total). But that staff has at least $10 million less in 'tools' than Bama does.
Does this matter? Does a craftsman care about the quality of his tools? Yes.
IMO the tough question Whit must answer is not "I have X dollars, how do I allocate it?" - the question is "I have X dollars, how do get Y more dollars?"
Yes, but FSU - who stole two huge recruits from us last year (Nnandi and Sweat) - managed to get up to Virginia quite a bit last year. It was more expensive, but as we stated, they're operating with $12.5 million more than us (I expect that number has increased significantly since winning the National Champion). I think they can afford to fly someone from Tallahassee to Norfolk once a week to sweet talk a few five stars.
100% agree.
To my knowledge, money is used in two main places when recruiting - Staffing and Travel.
Staff: By hiring additional staff, we can have people in charge of planning recruiting visits, planning visits to recruits, planning social media strategies, reviewing high school tape, etc. Literally everything accept sweet talk the recruit (that a coach must do).
Travel: Face time with these kids is huge. If there's a particular player you want in Texas, you need to be able to fly coaches there enough to get him.
I think we have everything in place to win/compete the ACC Coastal every year. I expect us to win an ACC championship too. But we keep talking about the new coach getting us to the next the level. To get on par with FSU/Bama/etc on an annual basis (like Clemson has started to do) we need more than just a phenomenal coach - we need phenomenal players too.
I don't doubt that more money is better.
What I'm saying is that you have to start with the coach and recruiting. You have to improve the wins, you have to win bowls, you have to get to the ACC championship game.
VT was there, but has recently slid backwards.
We can now say "Welp, it was really too much to dream for," or we can try to hire a coach to get back to ACC championships, good bowl games, and better recruits. VT really has built a good program with good facilities. Now it's time to get the team back back to a high-level of play.
All of those things are interrelated, but it starts with leadership.
I've written this elsewhere. I don't have the data in front of me so I'll go from memory.
There are 12 schools (10 public, 2 private) that have totally dominated Rivals avg star ratings since 2002 - collectively being in the top 15 87% of the time. There are another 7 schools (6 public, 1 private) which have been in the top 15 collectively 50%.
These 19 schools have filled 90% of the top 15 slots over the last 14 years.
Of the 16 public schools for which athletic revenue data is available, 14 are in the top 19 revenue generating athletic programs (all with 2014 revenues exceeding $100 million). Only UCLA (#29) & Clemson (#39) are not in the top 19 (and neither is in the elite group of 12).
Clemson is the only school comparable to VT (#42) in terms of revenue (even UCLA is 20% larger). However Clemson has a much longer major football program history than VT and (better recruiting location notwithstanding) its success in recruiting is long-standing and pre-dates its recent run of success and it's new coach.
The group of 12 (in no order):
Tennessee
Michigan
Ohio State
Florida State
Texas
Alabama
LSU
Oklahoma
Georgia
Florida
Notre Dame *
USC *
The next 7 (in no order):
Clemson
UCLA
Penn State
Oregon
Texas A&M
Auburn
Miami *
I have no conclusion whether there is a correlation between recruiting budget and recruiting success. My guess would be that it has some modest impact, but IMO recruiting budgets are just a subset of financial resources. A recruiting infrastructure is just a standard operating necessity these days; it doesn't really help much if you have it, but it hurts if you don't.
IMO, the most important factor in being part of the top tier of recruiting is program perception - which is a combination of program tradition, financial resources, national media penetration, and the depth AND breadth of fan, alumni and regional business & media support.
Access to recruiting hotbeds also appears important but not necessarily critical (Notre Dame, ~Michigan, Tennessee, Oregon). Recent win-loss records have only modest impact -- it impacts more where they place in top 15 vs whether they place in the top 15.
Coaching changes don't appear to have much impact - similar to the impact of win-loss records, but maybe even less so.
IMO, the most important factor in being part of the top tier of recruiting is program perception
Coaching changes don't appear to have much impact - similar to the impact of win-loss records, but maybe even less so.
You seem to be singling out financial resources as a more important factor than coaching or recruiting, and saying that's what the data is telling you. I don't believe you can separate out a single factor.
My premise is that a coach can change the perception of a program, as can a win loss record, which I think a coach also has a lot of influence over.
Beamer has changed the perception of Virginia Tech football over the past two decades. For me, it's not that big a stretch to say that the next coach of Virginia Tech is also in a position to change the perception of the program, and I think that's a key quality we should be looking for in a coach.
The head coach is the single most important person in the program. I've got to believe that athletic directors believe this as well, as they spend a lot of money trying to find the right one.
You can believe it all you want, but the evidence is that when it comes to recruiting -- particularly at the level VT must aspire to in order to achieve significant improvement -- there is essentially no precedent for it.
I'm not singling out financial resources, however they appear to have the strongest correlation to recruiting success -- particularly at the level VT must aspire to in order to achieve significant improvement.
there might be a little bit of chicken-and-egg here too. Winning certainly helps the bottom line...There are HUGE programs that have TONS of history (OSU, Michigan) and they can rebuild in a hurry because they have deep deep pockets. But how much money was Alabama's program bringing in before Saban got there? I honestly don't know, maybe it was a ton but I wonder if the success they've had on the field has contributed to an increase in funds.
Would VT benefit from spending a lot on a splash hire if that coach is able to elevate this program to CFP berths? Some say you have to spend money to make money. If there are donors who are sitting around holding on to their money because they don't like the product on the field, then we have to improve the product on the field in order to get the cash flowing again, right?
Then there's the argument that we have to get the cash flowing in order to afford a coach who can get us to the CFP on a semi-regular basis. Something's gotta give. What happens first? Do we spend a bunch of money to get a guy we think can win big or do we spend within our budget and force the hand of the donors by saying "look, we can only afford B level coaching...if you want an A level coach we'll get one but you need to pony up first"
Great point.
I think you have to try and find the right coach. I think VT really has done a great job choosing a university president and athletic director. Next up is the football coach.
Part of me would love nothing more than to see Bud get his shot at his dream job. The other part of me wants to see this entire thing blown up and flipped on its head. I'm torn between both options
I can agree with his initial assessment.. We don't need a culture change overall, the foundation has been built by Beamer and staff so we can follow that.
However we need more of a killer instinct on offense and overall attitude on offense. I just don't think loeffler and current staff want to put up 30 points and 400 total yards of offense. Its all about slow methodical drives and if we happen to find a chunk yardage play great the next play will be a jet sweep for a loss of 4 yards. If we stall at the 5 yard line then we will take the 3 points and be happy.
So yeah complete cultural change no but a more offensive minded gung-ho attitude would be much appreciated.
This year the defense isn't all that great.
Seems to me we need a head coach who can revamp the offense, and one who can bring some new ideas to recruiting.
The defense isn't great, but it's not as bad as people are making it out to be. Factor in the injuries it's been dealt, and I think it's not surprising at all.
Yeah, better recruiting is key to depth. But I'm also not convinced that Bud is as poor at that as people are making it sound.
can this not be used for the offense as well?
Sure. I think we have at least one more win with Brewer in all season.
I still have questions about play calling though.
But my point was focused on Bud's prospects for a promotion.
nailed it.. bring in a HC who can hire an OC that can bring a legit offense into Blacksburg. Let the HC do a heavy haul in recruiting and then profit.
Recruiting has changed, we know that, the coaches know that and recruits knows that.... time to get a HC that is willing to do the dirty work and lock up some top recruits.
I have no problem if Bud was named HC, just like I wouldn't have a problem if Herman, Morris, Fuente or Rhule were named HC. I would have a problem with Rich Rod or Richt being named HC for many of the same reasons already stated on this site.
My question is this, if Whit was going to hire/promote Bud why not announce it already? Does he entertain other interviews for the sake of calling it a national search while risking other verbals to reopen their recruitment? These are interesting, yet somewhat frightful times to be a Hokie...
A few reasons to delay announcing a head coach until the end of the regular season (in no order):
I doubt very much anyone has been selected. Unless it's a dreamy match made in heaven, why would any coach or AD worth his salt commit now when there are so many chips yet to fall in the next month?
If Whit has talked to Herman, and believes Herman is the perfect candidate and Herman wants the job, Whit may want to promise him the job so Herman says no when SC comes calling.
Also, if Bud was announced as the next HC mid season, but he refused to tell the assistants who was staying and who was going, that'd be really awkward. This way, despite the uncertainty, the coaching staff can still function as a team because the decision is in Whit's hands, not Bud's.
I flip-flop back and forth. Articles like this makes me want Bud as HC.
Then I think back to a Chad Morris offense and feel that I want him as my HC.
I've said this in another thread, but I'll say it again. Bud is my choice as the next HC and he always has been. Maybe it's just my heart talking and Bud wouldn't be the right guy for the job. But at this point, there isn't an argument out there that has swayed my thinking about Bud. He's tough, passionate, prepared, and loves VT. For me, that sounds like what we want in a HC. #BudForHC
And what's to say Bud can't fire Loefler et. al. and hire a hot young OC who can revitalize our offense? Clemson has two OCs. Surely they don't need both of them...
#Bud4HC
I think a lot of Bud's success as a DC is from understanding what the offense is trying to do.
I think he has long wished VT had an offense he would have a problem stopping, and recently we have not. I am confident he knows what to look for in an OC, and knows what OC's he would not like to face, as a few of his previous comments on the offense would suggest. His track record of not playing athletes who do not perform at the highest level (unlike our previous RB rotation) indicates he would not have a problem replacing coaches who do not meet his standards. I do not think he is the only good answer for coach, but out of all those named so far he would be my choice.
Part of the problem regarding our lack luster recruiting, particularly on defense for the last couple years is because of exactly what is going down with the program right now. Many recruits were afraid of being caught in limbo during the transition between Beamer and who ever becomes the next coach. This has had to play into the minds of many.
The reason for the offense not being able to get quality recruits is because of a)O'Cain b)Newsome and c)because Stinespring's offense never had an identity.
Where assigning guilt to Bud due to association, and because we've had a down defense this year. I think that's unfair.
Other coaches on the staff face the same challenges recruiting, and have done a better job than Bud
I don't know who I want to be the next HC, but I will say that the Hokies would be smart to go grab TimeCop whenever he gets canned, strictly for recruiting purposes. I would even be in favor of making him the TE coach or something like that where he can't screw anything major up. For all the crap we give him from a coaching standpoint, he is an excellent recruiter.
I don't know that London is an excellent recruiter or if he just had the timely benefit of players being pushed his way by the Thoroughbreds and their disdain for VT.
Whatever it was, it sure hurt VT for a while. Those candidates may have made the difference.
VT certainly had good overall recruiting, but a handful of difference makers would have been nice.
Sure enough. Clearly TimeCop has a message he can deliver, but I think it's important to differentiate how much he did vs. how much he was given (and then largely squandered).
Good point.
YOU!
Well that and I really don't like his old pitch of "come play for a black coach instead of an old white coach in Southwest Virginia."
Woah!! pump the brakes!! I seriously doubt this was ever actually said. We don't need to be going around slandering people, even if it's the laughable coach of our hated rival. That's just unnecessary. It's especially insensitive given the racial undertones....it's unfair to assume that Mike London is racist and it makes you (us) look racist when you proclaim something such as this.
Agreed. I don't believe London would say this. However, it was said by many associated with the Thoroughbred programs, and many such comments were posted to Twitter. Some were later deleted, but there was a LOT of public vitriol and some racially motivated statements.
I don't really doubt that it has been said. I seriously doubt Mike London ever said it. We shouldn't be putting words in quotes suggesting that Mike London said it if it just isn't true. If it was said by a fan behind the veil of twitter there's not much we can do or say about it. There are stupid people everywhere and they're going to say stupid things. I just don't agree with projecting fans' stupid comments on to a public figure. That's not fair to Mike London.
I have nothing to directly confirm that was what he said. But as with any pitch, it's not just about what you say, but more about what is heard. If recruits and their parents take to the Internet to express how they are going to one school over another and it contains racially charged reasoning, one is left to assume that it is part of the pitch given, especially when they are the only two schools mentioned. Mike London isn't dumb. He wouldn't directly say those words, but I wouldn't put it past anyone in the game of college football to use cleverly disguised words to reach a player and recruit them to their team.
Oh, it's an obvious narrative, but it's not fair to attribute it to Mike London.
It's made message board rounds before in the past. I'm not saying it without it making rounds before.
It may have been more the thoroughbreds talking than Mike London, though.
If we're stealing anyone from UVA for recruiting it HAS to be Chip West.. that guy has pulled in multiple 5* and high 4* kids to UVA.
since 2013
5* -> Taquan Mizell, Quinn Blanding, Andrew Brown
4* -> Tim Harris, Jamil Kamara, Jahvoni Simmons
Of the ones from Hampton Roads (Harris is from Richmond IIRC), how many of those players either went to Bayside or played with 757 Sports Academy or the Thoroughbreds? (answer: at least 4)
Chip West may not have had to do much at all with those influences around the kids.
Can someone help me out with who the "Thoroughbreds" are?
http://www.thekeyplay.com/content/2013/february/27/va-thoroughbreds
much appreciated
I don't envy Whit in having to make this choice. Then again, what an opportunity he has for the betterment of the VT football program.
The fact is that he has to pick the best combination of skills required to take the program to the next level. Not the next level from where it is now, but the next level from where it was 10 years ago.
I think he should consider Bud, but I also don't think that VT owes Bud the job. VT's football program is a great opportunity for someone. Here and now. I don't think it's trending in the right direction, though.
People are saying that the offense needs a change, but that the defense is good. I'm not seeing that. The defense depends on the heroics of a few key positions, but for some reason we can't get the right personnel for those positions, and don't have the depth. Is that Beamer's fault? Was he really holding back the recruiting on defense?
I suppose it's natural for our community to be emotional about the coaching search, and to resist change. I think it's also clear that we need some change.
There are some fine HC candidates out there, and I find the possibilities exciting.
I don't think the way forward is all that clear. I can't jump on the "we owe the guy a shot" train. I'm more on the "let's see your proposal for a new direction" train. The candidate who can attract the best coaching staff and recruits wins.
Right on, Bro!
We're 31st in defensive s&p+ rankings right now. Without our best player (and multiple others hurt or playing hurt). We were 10th last season, 3rd the year before.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadef
But 64th in the FEI rankings, which is completely middle of the pack
3rd in that last year, 4th the year before.
My point is that this year is a statistical outlier when it comes to the product that Bud has put on the field, and when you lose your best player for the season and more of your best players are playing hurt... how is that a knock against him?
If three people out knock you from 10th to 31st, you don't have adequate depth to run your defense.
Last year, Ohio State lost their starting quarterback and won the national championship. This year, they lost their number one defensive guy and several wide receivers for the VT game.
Yes, injuries hurt. Most teams have some players out. So that's a factor of the game.
I hear what you're saying, but year 3 of a rebuild was an unfortunate time for a significant lapse. It certainly doesn't rule him out, but he needs to be able to explain what changes he thinks are needed to address it.
Yes, VT can't recruit talent like Ohio State, I agree?
The point was actually that if you're going to use a defense that depends on heroics, you have to be more than one deep in heroes.
Otherwise, in spite of your rankings, you're going to lose games, even to average teams.
And my point is that if you expect us to be able to reload like Ohio State does, you're going to be unhappy with any coach we hire.
I'm unhappy with losing back to back games to ECU, Pitt, and Miami. I'm also unhappy with the fact that the most recent team to win back to back games at Lane stadium isn't VT.
I'm sure Bud is thrilled about it. And your argument keeps changing.
No, my argument is that VT doesn't owe Bud the HC job. That hasn't changed.
I'd consider him for the position, but it's not a clear choice from my perspective.
31st is still very good. Losing your best players will almost always result in a drop-off, it's absurd to say otherwise.
31st isn't good enough when your offense is consistently ranked in the bottom third.
I'm just asking if people really think that Bud can improve recruiting into the top 20.
So now it's the defense's fault that the offense isn't up to snuff?
He did, increase focus on recruiting and expansion of recruiting infrastructure. He addressed your main concern head-on.
If Bud saying that he's going to recruit better convinces you, then great. I just think that's easier said than done.
Seems to me that if he had some ideas in this area, they should have been brought to Beamer's attention.
Agreed. I know Bud has the upmost respect for CFB (as he should) but I would have guessed he would have mentioned any big new ideas he has had to CFB a long time ago. Not to mention that I wouldn't think that Frank exercises full dictator style control over all recruiting methods and as a result I'm guessing that Bud has had enough autonomy over the past several years to try out any new methods he might have sitting in the back of his head. Long story short I just don't see him holding on to any revolutionary new recruiting tactics that he hasn't already attempted.
THIS!!!!!!!!!
Maybe the issues of not being able to close when it comes to HC vs HC and lately just not being an attractive place to play by top recruits really was the issue. The position coaches can only do so much and promise so much but if a kid doesn't want to play for the HC you can't really do much to win him.
When you look at the past recruiting classes it seems like every year we seem to take more and more kids that don't really have many p5 offers so we will be their 1 offer and that's enough to sway them. That's how you get into depth issues all over the field.
Some of those changes have been made, we've increased the staff and made recruiting more of a priority. It sounds like Foster would push to have the staff and budget increased even further. We've seen some benefit from those changes, but it takes a while for those results to be seen on the field. The guys who should be depth players are currently starters. It'll take a few more recruiting classes before the whole roster is filled with those guys, but you can clearly see the what's being built and see that Foster has a plan to do even more. That's what convinces me.
I think that's a fair point.
I think when evaluating candidates you have to look at what they bring to the table in a comprehensive way.
Why does everybody assume that if Bud is named HC that Torrain Gray will be named DC? We have a limited number of coaching spots. Don't forget that Beamer is also the special teams coach. Why change things up on defense. Let Foster continue to be DC, make Shane Special Teams Coach (if he is retained). Then you free up both RB coach spot and potentially OC if you want to retain Lefty as QB coach.
Plot Twist. Bud Foster hired as HC. He hires Kirby Smart as DC and Chad Morris as OC CIW
If he can bring THAT, he's HIRED.
I am really torn on whether Bud is right for the job or not. After reading some of the interviews I do think Bud knows where the problems lie and how to go about fixing them. But in my mind it really comes down to who he would bring in as OC.
Pure speculation here, but I think Bud's salary requirements would be lower than most of the other names being tossed around at this point. This may let us throw more money at an offensive staff and possibly towards recruiting. I don't keep up with the hot names at that level of coaching, but I got think there are some good OCs out there looking for more money and/or a change of scenery.
The more and more I think about it, in my heart, I am going to be really disappointed if Foster doesn't get the gig. Part of me wouldn't mind seeing the splashy offensive mind guy come in, but then I think about the years of blood sweat and tears that Foster has poured into Virginia Tech football, knowing that the HC job is his dream job, I would just hate to see him not get that shot. Yeah he hasn't had any HC experience, but surely he has picked up a thing or two in his 32 years under Coach Beamer.
I don't doubt that Whit will choose the best guy for the job.
Does anyone know of a 20+ year assistant/coordinator at one school being given the reigns to the program when the 20+ year HC retired?
The only long-term assistants/coordinators at a single school that stayed at that school (that I can think of) were:
Bradley (PSU 32 yrs - did not get the job but was interim after Paterno)
Shannon (Miami 16yrs - got the HC job)
Mickey Andrews (FSU 26yrs - did not get the job)
Shannon is the only one who might be a fair comparison to Bud. I don't like the conclusion I would have to draw from that comparison, so I'm going to ignore it and claim that Bud wouldn't have Nevin Shapiro getting in the way, and therefore much success would be guaranteed.
Great question. There can't be too many, because not too many HCs stay that long.
I think coaching is probably a little like post-graduate work. It behooves coaches to get some time working under different coaches to learn different styles. I'm really thankful that Bud stayed at VT as long as he did, but for his sake, he should have left for something else a long time ago. The more he had branched out, the better I think he would have become and the more marketable he'd make himself. He could be a stellar HC or he could be awful. We don't really know because we only have his time under Frank to reference. Other candidates at least have a more diverse resume, even if they're younger and less experienced.
I also wonder if HCs who have more varied experience also have more contacts, which come in handy when you need personnel changes.
This is a good point...best case scenario, IMO, is we have to find a new coordinator or something every 5 years or so. If we're churning them out that means we're doing well.
This isn't a 20+ year example, but Tom Osborne was an assistant for 8 before getting the head coaching job at Nebraska.
I feel like Bud getting HC is the smart thing to do. Uncertain that bringing in a big name coach would only be a stepping stone of an even bigger program to open a job in the coming years and we have to start all over. I just hope that when Bud (if and when) gets promoted that there is a structural change, especially on the opposite side of the ball. Getting into a consistent offense and actually producing there is step 1 to much bigger things.
I just hope the team is mentally strong enough to take all of this in stride and win some ball games. You've got players probably reeling, coaches on their phones looking for that next job, and the pomp and circumstance of Frank's Good bye Tour. I would imagine that much focus will be needed these next few weeks.
Yeah. The #gameday4frank thing is special. I just hope there is much more focus on the actual games remaining. These are 3 rivals of sort with the UVA game being his last. I hope we can win out somehow, and finish on a high note. Recruiting would surely get some relief with a big finish, upset over UNC and a bowl win. Instead of being torched and not even making a bowl. Then there is coach uncertainty, and no streak to brag about.
These young men need to stay loose also. The #gameday4frank thing helps them stay loose for a short time, which will help them mentally prepare for the next game - which the coaches do by keeping them on their routine. I have faith that the preparations routine that our coaches bring and have brought is being continued and that this team will respond.
Full disclosure: #Bud4HC
I, for one, don't think we need a change in culture, except the cultural component that allows assistant coaches to flail miserably at their jobs for far too long.
However, I do think there are some changes needed, and some that have already taken place. A bigger emphasis on recruiting matters, and I think Bud understands this. We have already added recruiting-oriented staff, so that's a start.
I'd also like to see us emphasize any analytic approach we can bring to the table. FSU does this extensively and has seen success with it, professional teams of all sports use data for optimization, but I've never heard of us using extensive schedule, process, or biometric data. This approach matters, and great teams do it well, but we'd likely have to hire for this position - or scour the stat/math/IE departments for creative interns.
I think that Bud would make changes while maintaining the character of the program, but I'd think there would be few major cultural shifts, mostly 'technical' shifts, which I think sounds perfect. #InBudWeTrust
I'm big on loyalty and part of me wants Bud to be the next HC, but the main draw back to him is that he is not on the same level of a recruiter as the other HC's he will be going up against. Just look at the top talent VT has lost in the last few years Jones, Anthony, Hand, Sweat, Nnadi, etc. These are all defensive guys and Bud couldn't close the deal. It's not all his fault, sometimes the traditional football powers and better weather locations just win out, but if Bud had an elite recruiting HC that could come in after his own sales pitch and close the deal we would be back in the discussion for ACC championships and beyond.
I shake my head every time I see FSU play this year, half their starting DL is from VA and Jumbo came in and snatched the state's 5 star defensive kids. I think Whit can get Bud to stay if he convinces him that he is bringing in a HC that will help land the big recruits and help add the quality depth that VT needs to get back in the NC discussion.
Just look at the top talent VT has lost in the last few years Jones, Anthony, Hand, Sweat, Nnadi, etc. These are all defensive guys and Bud couldn't close the deal. It's not all his fault, sometimes the traditional football powers and better weather locations just win out,..
It might be true what you say, but I believe more it is the state of the program that is most responsible for these guys going elsewhere. Top recruits in Virginia know what's going on, Virginia Tech simply is not fielding a top product right now. This will continue until the ship gets righted. BTW, top recruits have been leaving the state for places such as Alabama, Auburn, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska and so on since way back when. I remember marveling at teams in the 60's with Virginia players, thinking that guy went way out there. Beamer was able to bring some in and as things improved he brought more in. But when things go south, well, the players head that way too.
Just because Bud is green as a Head Coach from an experience standpoint doesn't mean he couldn't raise money from boosters, or lead the organization like he has led the defense over the years. Beamerball started the ascent but the LPD has been equal in the success of the program.
Who in hokie nation wouldn't want to hear Bud talk about the state of the program more so than Frank's coach speak? I mean that with all due respect to CFB.
Here's my crystal ball prediction:
We hire someone like Morris/Fuente/Rhule and Bud stays on as DC. After 3 years and much success they jump to another program and Bud gets the nod. In Bud's first year we win the Natty and Bud Foster does this at the 50 yard line:
all while yelling: "WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"
He's completely right about recruiting the state of VA being our key to success. 2005, the last time we made it to the top 3, 20 out of our 22 starters were from the state of VA.
I thought we finished #3 behind LSU and OSU in 2007
We did... We reached 3rd in the country at least every year from 1999-2005 except for 2004, but we won the ACC outright that year anyway, then we reached #3 again in 2007, we won the ACC Championship and Orange Bowl in 2008, we reached #4 in 2009, and then #5 in 2011. Then not recruiting the state starting in 2008 caught up to us in 2012.
Me, every time I see "Foster is a terrible recruiter"