OK, so right now HokieNation is in the dumps. Personally I think we're too obsessed with the lows (Hand, Brown), more than we're celebrating the highs (Reavis, Ford, Vinny M, etc...) I will preface this with the following, there are a handful of months before signing day. However, as of right now, we aren't landing the majority of the state's best, even though we've owned the state. I think many of us have hypothesized why that is, so I ask you, what's one thing you'd change on the recruiting front to change that, or what do you think is going wrong?
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Getting that indoor practice facility this past year would have made a huge impact I believe.
Obviously it would be great to have Hand, Brown, and Nnadi all in the same class. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen. Instead of focusing on the decisions of 16 and 17 year old kids, Hokie fans need to realize that even though Andrew Brown might have more potential than other recruits, there still remains a very real chance that a 2 or 3 star recruit could go on to have a much better career than him. Injuries, academic issues, family issues, and problems with the "fit" of a school happen every year to players of every "star rating" around the country. While having a Brown commitment would have been exciting, it wouldn't change the outlook of our program. We're still going to be a top 20 program nationally, still going to play Alabama in August, still going to pack Lane Stadium six times a year, and god-willing still going to beat UVA on the Saturday after Thanksgiving. Recruiting is flashy and sexy, but one or two decisions by a high school kid in June doesn't win or lose football games.
Exactly. See Luther Maddy vs Kris Harley. Still have hopes for Harley to step up next year, but Maddy thus far has really performed at a top level since joining tech
And Dadi...after the spring he had I feel he's ready to explode1
While this has been disappointing, I'm not sure I would change anything. This is the first recruiting cycle under the new coaches so I want to give them the time they deserve. We've gotten rid of the "old/outdated" coaches and replaced them with younger ones who are on twitter and can better identify with these recruits. While LOLUVA is getting these recruits now, I think the recruiting future is bright with our new coaches.
But please, just give them time to prove it.
For what it's worth though, the coaches that we have replaced are not the primary recruiters for these big-time 2014 players - Hand, Brown, Holmes. We are missing out on defensive players that our coaching staff has been in contact with for multiple years, and I think that's what most frustrating. There's no excuse at all for the UVA to be running recruiting circles around VT.
That being said, I wouldn't trade a 5-star recruit for nine straight wins over UVA. Hell, I wouldn't trade nine 5-star recruits for it.
Having Frank Beamer more personally involved on the recruiting trail. If Mike London is pushing a more "young" (dude is 52) attitude along with Coach Slanted Visor, it doesn't do VT any favors if their future hall-of-fame head coach isn't making personal house calls and frequently putting himself out there early and often in the recruiting process. Sitting on top of a mountain in Blacksburg doesn't get these guys' attention.
Also, it's an issue when Bud Foster is rumored to be leaving or is openly interviewing for other jobs. I think that cost us several big-time LB recruits (Hughes, Anthony) in the recent past.
It's incredible to see how an average season of 7-6 and a complete lack of offensive play-makers has had such significant recruiting effects on VT. One "down" year and everyone is looking elsewhere. The irony of UVA fans is that they point to last year as a reason VT is down while sitting on top of Fail Mountain.
Just think about if David Wilson had stayed, or Tech had competed for the ACC and play in another BCS game. I think it'd be a different story. I'm just not going to get my hopes up for five-star players, or even high four-stars, because VT has proven time and time again that they cannot close.
"sitting on top of Fail Mountain."
I'll be using this with my Wahoo brother from now on.
It's incredible to see how an average season of 7-6 and a complete lack of offensive play-makers has had such significant recruiting effects on VT. One "down" year and everyone is looking elsewhere.
I don't know if this is a fair statement. We don't have a history of pulling in top recruits to start with. That being said, the down season cannot be blamed for it. I think your other points coupled with "VT losses on the big stage" are much more damaging.
^^^ THIS .. Frank Beamer should be the leader in selling this program.
I don't think it really matters. I mean, all the guys committed to LOLUVA are gonna reopen their recruiting in 6 months after Mike London gets fired.
This isn't really something we can change, but I think another big thing is the perception of academics (at least in the UVA situations). VT really has excelled in the last few years of being a very good academic school (nowadays, the average high school GPA is like a 3.9 and a roundabout 1250 SAT score for the incoming freshmen classes). I still believe people think that VT isn't a good academic school (except for engineering, of course). I think UVA tries to preach that a degree from their school will hold a lot more weight and if a player doesn't go to the NFL, that he will still have a good chance to be successful.
Ehhh I dunno about that. That sounds like something a recruit would tell his mom to keep her happy about his school decision. I seriously doubt Brown picked UVa because he thinks he'll have a more successful post-grad business life if there is no post-grad football life, or many other recruits for that matter.
Define success and prestige however you like, but the numbers don't lie: http://www.richmondbizsense.com/2009/07/23/hokies-edge-wahoos-in-graduates%E2%80%99-starting-salaries/
1. Recruiters need to overlap. I've worked in outside sales for 5+ years, and I can attest to the power of many. The more faces, names, and personalities that customers (players in this case) get to know, the stronger the relationship. If a recruit only knows VT as Bud or Cornell, and there is any wavering in their perception of said recruiters longevity, it will dramatically impact the relationship and decision--for the worse.
2. Develop stronger ties with highschool coaches. In many scenarios, the highschool coach is a second father (or first) to these kids, and if the coach is impressed, the kids will get a sense of confidence from a trusted advisor. The Ford kid is a classic example.
3. Start early. If we're the team that brings them to the dance, there's a stronger possibility they'll go home with us. Recognize talent early, make offers once you identify the talent, and stay in their ear.
4. Be confident. People buy from those that they feel sure about. No need to be "braggadocio", just exhibit confidence. Men, mothers, HS kids, all feed off that mentality. We need to walk into these living rooms across the state and act like we are the champions that we are. No need to display disrespect, just an assuredness of who we are and where we are going...to the top.
All great points. I can add one more angle - relationships. We need to develop good, stable relationships with HS in key areas. In other words, develop strong pipelines, and maintain these even during cycles when that HS does not have a nationally hyped player. I don't know for sure, but it looks like that is how Mike London is getting these players. We have to give him credit for that, even if his on the field success rate is lacking. I think the players that London has recruited in past cycles have also contributed to developing those
A point of contention on #3. While agree starting early is extremely important, I don't think VT has failed on that. They do a good job of getting sophomores and juniors in the state of VA to their camps and football games. The problem seems to be fighting off the other elite programs and closing in on the deal.
The best examples are Jaylyn Holmes and D'shawn Hand, both of whom considered VT their favorite during their JR years. Then this past winter and spring, the top programs in the nation lured them away, leaving VT sitting on their hands.
I think the program in general needs to get better at recognizing problems quicker. How many times after a certain coach is replaced, or a change is made, we read a quote from a current or former player that reveals how bad the problem really was?
I think the program has taken a turn towards complacency and I am NOT saying I don't understand why. I love our 10 win seasons and ACC titles. I think the feeling is that VT is a better program than UVA, therefore the program speaks for itself and the recruits will come.
What I am getting at is WHAT IF there is a big issue with recruiting at VT. WHAT IF some of the coaches are doing a lackluster job of creating good relationships. I just don't want multiple years of bad recruiting until a change is made, and then we find out how really bad it was.
One thing I've read in the past is that once a recruit verbals elsewhere it's Tech's policy to stop recruiting them unless they reach out and show interest. That's a classy policy that no doubt comes from the top down. However, I feel like at other programs, when a target of their's commits elsewhere, that's when the real recruiting, or flipping process, begins.
If things go tits up at UVa this year, and the program decides to move in a different direction at coach, kids like Brown and Blanding might be tempted to go elsewhere because of how close they are with London.
The case of Holland Fisher illustrates your point so eloquently. After Tech offered Fisher and he committed, it did not stop high powered suitor, Alabama, from pursuing him. Shane Beamer, on the record made a quote and it is in my signature, "We are not going to back down from anybody," after Alabama made siren songs for Fisher. I think it is vital for the staff to remain in touch with the commits so they know Virginia Tech is still interested in them. I hope that Shane's recruiting in the SEC is helping to change the mindset within the program.
High School this, High School that...one thing that we keep leaving out on here (though it's been mentioned in other threads) is the relationships with 7 on 7 coaches. I don't claim to be in the know but scuttlebutt is that the UVA staff started fostering those relationships before we realized how influential they were becoming. Especially in the bread-and-butter 757 area.
Good point. However, wasn't there question about whether these coaches are quite professional to deal with or not?
Was reading an article on Andrew Ford and his HS coach said this:
"We love Frank Beamer," Cantafio said. "He's a great guy, great (head) coach and everything else. But bottom line is, when you go to college, you'd better love your position coach, because that's the guy you're going to live with for four years."
Anyway, such truth, something to think about. I think this is why VJ is so balls out. He loves Gray.
I think we Hokie fans are viewing these recruiting misses through some maroon tinted glasses. I don't think we should be surprised at all that these elite recruits don't want to end up at our school.
OK, I'm not trying to trash Virginia Tech. I love this school and football program an unhealthy amount, but let's try and look at this rationally.
1. Tech doesn't have a history of prestigious post-season victories.
Tech doesn't have a national championship and has only played for one, and that was almost a decade and a half ago. Since then, Tech has played in some BCS bowl games but has only won one (against Kansas. Not exactly a stop-the-presses accomplishment). Most of the bowl games (and many of the nationally televised games Tech's played in) ended in a loss. Some of those losses were beatdowns. Tech has been better then UVA, for sure. But Tech hasn't been an elite program over the course of the last five years, and certainly not when you factor in the last unwatchable season.
2 Tech has lost it's identity
Beamerball used to be a great marketing tool for recruits. Having a "brand" is a great way to separate yourself from the crowd, and Beamer had a good way to stick in the mind of his targets. Play for him, and you'll be a part of an exciting brand of football. Great special teams and exciting defenses. The past couple seasons has seen Beamerball fall apart though. The Special Teams play hasn't been awe inspiring, and the defensive play (while effective) hasn't been exciting.
3 It took far to long to hire new coaches
If Stinespring hadn't decided to incorporate the pistol into Tech's playbook, I think he'd still be the OC. That move probably cost Tech 2-3 games last year, and if Tech wins 9 games I think Stinespring keeps his job. Let's face it, Beamer had a blind spot when it came to the lack of production from his offensive unit. It took a massive systems failure, which lead to a season so bad it threatened what he had built in the program over 2+ decades for him to make a change. Even then, he didn't fire the architect of the worst-managed offense in the ACC over the past decade. Loeffler and co. will have a positive effect on the offense. I'm confident of that. Loeffler's scheme's are too fundamentally sound and coherent to not be an upgrade over whatever Stinespring was tryin to piece together over the years.
However, let's not pretend that Loeffler and co. don't have a huge branding issue to fix with the offense either. And combined with the step back the defense and special teams experienced the past couple years, Tech isn't a real exciting program right now. Virginia Tech is the best football school in Virginia, no doubt. But simply being the most consistent program isn't enough to get elite recruits in your state. You need to have some sizzle. You need to have an angle, something which your recruits can get excited about... and "They've been quite above-average every year for a decade" isn't good enough.
Tech can't compete with the elite schools for elite recruits because, well, Tech isn't an elite program. UVA has a distinct advantage in the 757 area right now because a very friendly coach or two is pushing kids away from Tech. I don't think that'll last forever, but for now it's a fact of life. In a year or two we won't be seeing these top recruits flocking to UVA, it's just a fad.
Until Tech starts getting some high quality on-the-field results, Beamer isn't going to be able to out recruit the OSU's and Alabama's of the world. He's going to have to get some big time wins, on the big time stages of college football. Long-term recruiting success depends on it.
Cincinnati. But otherwise yea, I agree with your post
and Michigan...it was a catch.
You are goddamn right it was a catch.
Bruh, ... What are you doing here? Lmao
He's just a Hokie calling into the void.
Let's let him be. He'll be alright.
Agreed, it will take time. Programs with history and prestige aren't built in a year, much less one or two decades. Michigan has been doing it for over a hundred years.
I think many hate losing recruits to UVA, because we are above average and they are a team content with mediocre. Friends of mine that are wahoos even know that's what the aim is whether they like it or not. So that confuses many Hokies.
This year needs some results. If Scot starts to show some offensive power, and the defense ends up as expected, that will help. Then we would need to carry that.
I think the ACC isNt helping as well. They may be pulling some top recruits and sending a lot of kids to the NFL, but the nations view is ACC is #5 in a five super conference league. That doesn't help in the end.
Anyway, just can't give up on these guys, plenty more football to play, and a lot of questions to be answered. On the field will help though, so need to get back to 10+ and Big game wins.
Well said. I'm as die-hard of a fan as the next guy, but I can see the reality. I think the thing that happens to Hokie fans every year is this: we all believe that we deserve to catch a break, to put it all together and make another run at the top. We've worked hard and been consistently good for a long time, but we've not cracked that upper echelon in a long time. Put that together and the mentality is, "we've got to be getting close to getting back." Then the media likes to hype up the conference races, get us all excited, and that attitude of "we're due for a break" becomes "this is the year!" It's sort of a vicious cycle.
I believe the new coaches are going to give us a shot in the arm, both in terms of on-field performance and energetic recruiting, but I don't think that is necessarily going to cause a 180 in a single year. Am I hoping for (and expecting) improvement relative to last year? Yep. Do I think that it will be a couple of years before we're consistent conference (and maybe national) contenders? Certainly. For that, I'm willing to wait. Level-headed fans and prospective students/recruits see that, and I hope that's what's going to drive this program forward.
Don't discount the damage that losing national TV non-conference "big games" did, coupled with the loss to JMU. UVA has been inferior for a long time, but they have not been part of the national discussion. That is an advantage, because London can sell "be part of creating a legacy" rather than joining a legacy of failing under the brightest lights.
Also, I have heard for 2 decades that Beamer's staff does not "sell" kids on VT. They (the staff veterans) look for kids who fit their system, and who want to be at VT without being sold. There are very few guys who they have "turned" or who have been suprises over the years. Kevin Jones comes to mind. I know Frank Beamer worked hard to help close Ryan Williams. But, in most cases, they get guys who pretty much VT locks from day 1. And, that isn't what top notch recruits are looking for these days. They want to be wined and dined. They want to feel wanted. They want promises to be made. I understand that elite programs like Alabama, Notre Dame, and Florida State can recruit nationally because they have resources most programs don't. But, if schools like Maryland and UVA can land elite talents like Stefon Diggs and Andrew Brown, then there is no reason VT can't unless our recruiting strategies are sub par.
I will differ to others who are more recruiting savy to point to the "why" and how it needs to improve, but the results since Kevin Jones was landed have not been congruent with a perennial Top 10/15 program.
Look no further than Mike Locksley and Chip Wests' recruiting practices as to why the two kids you mentioned went where they did. Some of the problem comes with doing everything by the book for the last 20 some odd years, and not "playing the game" when it comes to some recruits. I believe we can still recruit well and play by the rules. As mentioned a million times on this board and in this thread; it starts with winning games, kicking the piss out of your rival (this year more than ever is time to lay 50 in Cville) and playing an exciting brand of football with guys flying around on the field having fun doing so to start generating some buzz again.
It really is funny how a guy with a track record of repeated failure and sketchy behavior like Locksley is so successful. I don't want the Hokies to go down THAT rabbit hole, but there is defintely something missing when they miss on kids who are going to schools with no track record of success. Another example of a kid who is in a dire need position for VT is Damien Prince, who seems to be locked in to the Terrapins. DC area. Hokies have recruited well in DC/Maryland. Would have a chance to contribute almost immediately. Instead, he will go to Maryland and lose frequently.
Maybe the new O will help run the score up a bit. I know CFB isn't into it, but it helps show dominance. Kids like that type of stuff.
Well put, losing big games is much more then a lost opportunity. It's actually worse to keep losing big games then it is to not show up. At least if your loses aren't nationally televised you have the chance to create your own story. If you get beat down on nationally television, the story is going to be dictated for you.
The goal however, is to not get beat down on national television. If they are so great, they should feel they can help change that perception.
I'm sorry the "be part of creating a legacy" argument is complete bullshit. If that were the case, James Johnson would be able to pull high quality recruits to "create a legacy" with Hokie Basketball.
Even though we have a reputation for losing big games, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PLAY IN BIG GAMES. We can practically guarantee recruits that in their five years of playing for Virginia Tech, they'll have the opportunity to play for multiple ACC championship games, at least 1 BCS bowl game and high profile OOC games such as Ohio State, Wisconsin and Notre Dame. #LOLUVA can't even guarantee their players will play in multiple bowl games in any given five year span.
Just curious, I thought there was only 4 years of eligibility...
I think by "playing" he meant "on the team"...ie a redshirt year.
I was wondering that. With kids leaving early and what not, probably still averages 4 years on the team.
The MoJo, the Moxy, the bravado, the cajones, whatever you want to call it. VT needs to get this "it'll hurt if we lose" mentality in their recruiting. They have it on D, with the lunch pail theme, but it's severely lacking on the recruiting front.
The greatest recruiters have this (Saban, Meyer, Hoke, Spurier). It all starts with the head coach, standing up and saying we need the best players in the country to win. They CONVINCE the recruits that their school is the best for them, and that their going to be apart of something special. VT's recruiting motto is this: "We want guys that want to be here. So, 2-star, 3-star, doesn't matter, as long as we coach them up." (paraphrase, can't remember when Frank said this)
Shane, Grimes, Gray and Loeffler have all proved they recruit well. They just need to get that killer instinct from top-to-bottom.
If VT is fighting recruit's perceptions there is not much you can do but to disprove the perceptions. That means results on the field or off the field. Need success in both education and athletics. Keep showing our leadership in all areas.
Off topic: Now that I'm in a relationship, when I hear this question my instinct goes here:
On an unrelated note: A while back the "Ackbar for Rebel Leader" movement at Old Miss inspired me to make this
I think I would like for Virginia Tech to return to the blueprint of success that launched Virginia Tech's success during Beamer's tenure.
While landing four- and five-stars recruits help, I believe part of Tech's success for years has been the identifying recruits who have hidden qualities, and bringing out the best in them. Once in a while, landing players such as Tyrod, Macho Harris, Brandon Flowers, David Wilson, and other lauded players, it is the under-the-radar, blue-collar type of players that made Virginia Tech feared.
It is why I am truly excited about the class of 2014. I think Tech has landed some solid players who will fit the offensive philosophies of Loeffler. It will take some time, but I think it will pay dividends.
Brandon Flowers is actually one of those under the radar players you are referring to.
But yes, I agree with your point. While UVA has grabbed the headlines, I think there is a lot to like about the players we have picked up for 2014.
David Clowney -> Brandon Flowers -> Jayron Hosely -> Dadi Nicolas/Luther Maddy
I think the counter-argument here is that we have gotten just about as successful as we can using this blueprint. It gives us consistent 10 win seasons, but we just don't reach the next level. We have proven we can develop these "under-the-radar" guys. If we can just land some top 10 recruiting classes, we have the coaching to make us an elite team.
To me, the majority of the blame for not winning those high-profile games on the coaches. LSU in 2007 is the only one that comes to mind where we didn't belong on the same field. Look at how many of them required our O to step-up (get a first down, etc) and poor decisions (fake punt). I truly hope our new offensive brain trust can help us move the needle in the other direction for the big games.
Or do the coaches deserve the credit for coaching-up a bunch of 2 and 3-stars to compete on a field with 4 and 5-stars?
Or walk-ons that went to the NFL?
Nailed it. Upvote.
I used a complimentary argument for why VT should have pushed for the SEC. Yes, 10-win seasons streak wouldn't happen in God's Conference. However, the highs are higher, and the lows are lower. It's essentially a rotation at the top for who has a chance to play in the national championship. Alabama, Florida, and LSU are the elite in the SEC right now, but Tech would fall in the bottom part of next group of aTm, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina. Money aside, being able to pitch Tech as the northern most school in the SEC, the best conference would be powerful not only for VA kids, but NJ, Maryland, and Pennsylvania too.
Better road games
As I have not followed Tech for a long time (first started following them since Randall-Vick-Glennon era), how has recruiting changed from the Big East to the ACC? Did it improve with conference affiliation or remained the same?
I think this is a worthwhile investigation.
Thats a tough one to me, as the conferences themselves have changed since the move. The big east at one time had a lot more respect. WVU was the perennial favorite for a while, and then Miami started dominating. I feel like it was a lot more competitive back then, and you couldn't really pick who was going to win it. The irony is, that most of those top teams are in the ACC now. Since the move, it's obvious that the BE dropped down.
The ACC used to be dominated by FSU with Clemson and UNC popping in every now and again. So I think the move helped shake the ACC up, however many now consider ACC a weaker conference. Don't really think they thought it was great before, but FSU was winning the big games and that matters.
So I like to think we moved up to the top of the BE and then left and became the top of the ACC. The biggest negative is that we are the top of what everyone considers a weak league. I mean, it isn't as bad as say being the top of the MWC or something, but not too far off in many of the nations eyes...
I wouldn't say that there has been a significant difference in football recruiting - success rate or areas recruited - with the transition from the big east to the acc. I know it gets talked about often, that Mike Vick propelled VTs recruiting - but I would say it started right after the 95 sugar bowl. VT didn't get to the national championship game with just Vick and the lunch pail. There were some ballers in those late 90s recruiting classes.
With that said, we have had good and average recruiting classes since about 96 - ACC or Big East. Mostly VA guys - some others within the 500 mile radius and a few areas in south Florida.
The 2010 and 2011 classes are hurting VT right now. They were average at the time, with few potential offensive playmakers. Now in 2013, they are looking below average for VT standards. There may be only 2-3 guys in those two classes that will play on Sundays. That's not going to get it done against the Florida States, Clemsons and Miamis
i think what needs to change is very simple. Beat the top teams when you play them. #BeatBama
How about we stop recruiting tight ends for every position on the field? LT, much of the OL, Chris Drager to DE. Then, oh, let's not forget that we end up with DE recruits (Zach McCray, the other guy who moved) moving to TE. I understand that guys develop better in some ways than others when they hit campus. Some guys grow quite a bit. But how about we recruit guys and let them play their positions? Had we gotten a real QB for our post-Tyrod years, how effective would LT3 have been at TE (you know, the position we recruited him for and the one he wanted to play)?
Cam Chancellor was a QB recruit. Turned into a beast at safety. Change happens and is usually for the better. It is a mutual thing between the coaches and players. Players will change to move up the charts or help the team cover a weakness. That is all about winning and putting the best players on the field. A 5* recruit won't have to worry where they are playing. A 2-3* wants to get on the field and will need to work to get there.
Kam was mostly a QB recruit but he played corner/safety at Maury so they knew if he wasn't going to pan out at QB then he would be ok in the secondary. He also played basketball for so they knew they were getting an athlete.
I'm kind of OK with getting a lot of high school QBs. They tend to be pretty versatile, and in high school the talent pool is limited. Lots of schools take their best player and make them the QB simply to get the ball in their hands. Whether they end up as QB, DB, WR, or even TE (Booooone), I like fitting the best player on a high school team into our schemes. I'm less enthralled with bringing in TEs.
Most of the TEs we bring in that you mentioned didnt play TE in high school, its just where they're projected to play. Case and point, LT played QB for his HS team
I thought LT was a tight end until his junior year. I though he was moved to QB because he was the most talented person on the team and they wanted the ball in his hands every play.
Don't know the specifics on LT, but I think he was a receiver his sophomore year and back-up QB. I could be wrong about that. In high school, it's pretty common for the back-up QB to play another position because he's that good of athlete.
Correct. He played WR and QB. Never played TE as regular position in HS.
Not really a thing I'd change about current recruiting, but if I could change one single thing about VT Football, it would be Anthony Midget and Larry Austin being able to take on Peter Warrick instead of Ronyell Whitaker in the 4th Qtr of the Sugar Bowl. Those scorch marks Warrick left on Whitaker's forehead are still smoking.
I have a feeling we'd all feel so different about VT Football if we'd pulled a win out of that game.
I believe a few others have said this, but we need to get back to having a winner culture, not just 10 win seasons, but ACC Championships, BCS Bowl wins, and OOC wins.
We haven't won a nationally televised post season game since... 2010 ACCCG? (Russel Athletic bowl doesn't count, hopefully none of our recruits saw that game... woof!) I'm curious of what our record in national televised games (the ones that recruits would most likely see) is over the past 3 years (I assume a recruits memory probably goes back 3 years). Even including Thursday night games, I'd bet it's sub-.500.
Of course recruits don't want to come here, they haven't seen us preform well in two years? After beating FSU we schlacked by Stanford. Recruits (note: RECRUITS, not fans who watch every game) haven't seen us play well in two years. Would you want to play for a team that puts forth a lackluster performance every time you've seen them play?
a quick check of the schedule shows the following records (Im including bowl games, even Rutgers....). In parenthesis are games on basic TV (ie ABC/NBC, so would be national TV record minus games on ESPN/ESPN2)
2010: 5-2 (2-0)
2011: 4-3 (2-0)
2012: 2-3 (0-1)
So while not a good record, it is above 0.500 (mostly)
I would put competent refs who know what a catch/interception is in the 2011 Sugar Bowl. As much as Danny Coale's "It was a Catch" is remembered, I think that Jayron Hosley's 2 overturned interceptions (one on a PI call, the other on replay) were bigger plays.
May get downvoted for this, oh well. I can objectively see why both were called back. The replay one, the ball clearly touched the ground and it's too difficult of an angle to see if he had control during. From the angle the camera had, I don't fault the refs too much. Furthermore, he had to regain control and that will typically end up in an incompletion. As for the PI, Jayron definitely grabbed jersey and pushed off. Granted, it wasn't much but at that size and speed, the smallest touch can make the difference.
I think the worst fake punt I've ever seen in my life was more to blame for that loss. We had the momentum. Defense was dominating. Michigan hadn't passed the 50 in the second half (may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure they had trouble getting one first down the whole third quarter). And then we go ahead and let them right back in the game. Also, a huge false start in the red zone on our final regulation drive was very damaging.
We threw that game away. I don't want to hear about it anymore.
Upvote - I thought the same thing once I started typing the second paragraph but was too into it at that point to quit.
LALALALALALALALALA
Won't dispute that the fake punt wasn't the most egregious of the many, many (MANY) things that went horribly wrong for us in that game. And I won't argue about the first interception being overruled. If I'm a Michigan fan I agree with that call 100% - an awful lot of the ball was hitting the turf).
However, that second interception should NEVER have been called a PI. Denard throws up one of his special arm punts, the WR and DB both lay hands on each other as they wait for it to come down, and neither gets enough jersey or pushes hard enough for a PI call there. The WR falls down, but that's not because Hosley (all 155 pounds of him) pushed him harder than he pushed Hosley - he jsut didn't have the footing and his momentum took him in the wrong direction. Terrible, terrible call. And then, God... Danny Coale. Why Universe, why?!
Ultimately, recruiting is won on the field by winning big games and championships (pretty much what bar1990 was getting to). I along with everyone on the message boards have speculated on the other reasons for not being considered by the elite recruits consistently. While we are talking about things we wish could've gone differently or changed though, the pass interference call against USC in '04 is a big one for me. I know it is a lot of speculation, but that knocked the wind out of the players and I honestly think we may have won if not for that call. That would have been huge for us as a program. The other is Boise. If we don't lose that we don't lose to JMU, perhaps still go undefeated and maybe wind up in NC game. I know Stanford blew us out, but they exploited a weakness (the TE blown coverage/mismatch they identified after the 1st half) that another team may not have been able to. A lot of speculation and pointless talk anyway since what's done is done, but just two games that I think could've changed Tech's perception.
Yet, in 2014 Rivals ranks these teams:
2. UK
3. UTenn
13. Ole Miss
14. Rutgers
15. NCST
While the year is still young and will change dramatically by signing day, these teams are currently on top and none of them have won a big game lately. Historically, Ole Miss and UTenn have some big wins, but that's it.
Winning big games and championships may help, but they're not the ultimate factor in recruiting.
Can't compare us to those schools though. Like I've said before, our coaching staff has a long resume for these recruits to see and analyze. While there has been a lot of success, the accompanying lack of major success (championships, big wins, ooc wins, bcs bowls, etc) are serious red flags that hurt us. In our case, winning is key because we've already shown we can do everything they need, besides win the big game(s).
UK, Tenn, and NCSt all have brand new head coaches. Rutgers and Ole Miss coaches have only coached one year. They can preach new beginnings and start something special and all that good stuff. Whereas, like I've said on the site before, with us what you see is what you get. Until we win big games and show recruits that what you see at VT is national spotlight (winning, not losing) then we'll continue to get overlooked. Therefore, I think in our case, winning big games and winning bcs bowls is huge for us.
Our situation may be unique to us. I don't think there's another program out there with the storied success we've had while lacking a national championship and/or those signature recent wins.
I think you're right. But again, it's all the ability to sell your school. I think you can compare VT to KSU, Wisconsin (before Bielema left), and Arkansas (before the motorcycle accident). But, that may make your point stronger, none of those schools recruit consistently well. Nevertheless, I still firmly believe the best recruiters find a way to sell your school's strengths. Selling VT shouldn't be more difficult than a new coach at UK. VT football isn't stale. But, I do think their recruiting technique may be (sans Loeffler and Grimes).
Until RichRod, WVU was in much the same boat as us - which is part of what made the rivalry so great. I think they have one of the best records for teams in terms of total wins that hasn't won a national championship. And until Rodriguez showed up the book on WVU was that you couldn't give them cereal in a bowl because they'd choke to death on it. Nehlen had a bowl game losing streak that was pushing a decade plus at one point. Their recent performance in BCS bowls (string of wins in the Sugar, Fiesta and Orange) has erased that commonality so at present VT is in its own category of "Good but not Great" misery on the national stage.
It's still remarkable that of all the teams that have played in a BCS title game, VT is one of the very few to have not been there before. Until Oregon-Auburn we were the lone "outsider" program to crack that ceiling if memory serves. The big mystery to me is still this: how did our OL recruiting get *worse* after a national championship appearance?
Re: poor coaching hire.
Yes, out of all FBS teams WVU has the 14th most wins with 708, and we have the 16th most with 697, and we are the top two schools in that category without a national championship.
2014 targets Blanding and Brown are shown on Rivals as being recruited by Stiney. Same goes for Jalyn Holmes (OSU commit). But Stiney had some good 2013 recruits and others in past years (like LT and DW). 2012 he missed some big names but there are a couple that may step up this year. Is he losing the 757 battles or is he still effective? Nnadi is on his list.
I could be wrong, but Brown and Blanding were both heavy UVA leans and had been for awhile. I think the only "miss" on that list was Holmes, but he "fell in love with OSU" and I don't know if you can pin that on Stiney. Some kids feel at home as soon as they walk on the campus and no "recruiting" will change that.