The Hokies' top 2017 commit is, perhaps only temporarily, de-committing. This comes relatively recently after a visit to Pitt with his 7-on-7 team. Not the finest news for Fuente and co.
VT is still my leader!! pic.twitter.com/mLHejnxnv2— 4 (@tyjuangarbutt4) July 6, 2016
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Yeah.... this was the kind of bad karma I was talking about trying to avoid in the thread where we were mocking UVa's recruiting....
*pulls out O&M notebook and looks up DE*
"he's too big to play DE in bud's system! who cares?!"
Hope "VT is still my leader!!" remains true and hopefully HCF can add some recruiting clout with some W's this season. It's very easy to forget he hasn't yet coached a VT game.
1) I respect his iPhone game, sending this out with 3% battery life is a strong move.
2) VT is still my leader? Sorry, I'm not going to be left on the hook. Buh bye.
Just another reminder that we hired good coaches, not good recruiters. I'd much rather have that than the reverse, but its damn expensive to get both. For anyone that thinks we'll turn a corner recruiting once we start winning games again needs to remember our recruiting budget and recruiter track record. It just isn't happening.
If that's the case we might as well pack it in now, because we're where we're going to be long-term unless we can start to recruit better. Oh, sure we might have a season where things come together and we get 10 wins, but more than not we'll be a .500 football program from here on out.
Sorry, but I refuse to accept that is the case. And if those in charge are resigned to that fact, those people need to be replaced as well.
Our recruiting budget MUST increase, and its getting to the point where I don't really care how it happens. You can't have success in this age of collegiate sports with one hand tied behind your back, and if that means telling our boosters to put up or shut up, then so be it.
take 120k off of shibest's enormous salary and pay 2 recruiting coordinators 60k would be a good start.
I'm just curious about this increase the recruiting budget idea. Garbutt commits early, is very excited to be a part of the class, suddenly the "head swimming" stage happens after a visit to Pitt, and now he decommits. I'm just wondering what a bigger recruiting budget is realistically going to do to keep guys from looking elsewhere. Were we not calling him enough everyday? Was Bud Foster/Fuente not talking to him as much as they should? Were we not tweeting him enough? Not inviting him down more/giving him more swag? I'm just confused as to exactly how more money = keeping recruits committed without straight up paying kids cash. To me, it sounds like Bud/Fuente weren't able to sell their vision for Garbutt at VT as well as Narduzzi at Pitt. Say what you want, but Bud's system is seriously casting some doubt in the mind of one elite defensive recruit after. I love Bud and am very excited about Fuente - in my mind, two of the best Xs and Os guys out there. But neither of which are very great and/or proven recruiters at this point in time.
We aren't fucked calm down. Even in our terrible last 5 years we still ranked 25th in the country recruiting. That's enough talent to compete more than we have. Like a powerhouse? No, but anyone who expects that needs to check themselves. Coaching has been our problem far more than anything. It was just combined with a slight recruiting decrease as well. With good player development and scheme execution we will easily be more than a .500 team, even with current recruiting
I'm sure this will get the money rolling in
Sigh
I still haven't seen much actual evidence that we have significant deficiencies in recruiting budget and I've taken part in about 5 discussions on MB's about this issue. The numbers are nebulous, the positions are difficult to sort out and at the end of the day, the scale of any deficiency isn't sufficient enough to worry about. Basically, you see people saying we need about $250K more for recruiting. That's nothing for a $70M revenue machine. If we need it, then the coaches should request it and Whit should give it to them. I haven't seen coaches lamenting the budget, nor would I expect them to do so publicly.
Finally, this was again not an issue with budget. We lost this kid because someone at Pitt wooed him. Also, they have momentum....in the ACC....over VT....defensively. They are who we used to be. I sure-as-shit bet that Pitt doesn't have a bigger recruiting budget than we do.
As you noted, we hired player development guys, not recruit-first guys. This is the type of result we should expect until our player development guys start developing players. Or become better recruiters.
We made this decision last December, January and February when we hired coaches. We decided that this type of result is acceptable in the interim. But we better win some games to make up for it.
Bingo. We did not hire a recruit-first staff. Whit and Fuente obviously think they don't need to spend any more on recruiting than they already are. Fuente himself is not the kind of coach who wants to play the recruiting games and wine-and-dine the elite guys. This staff must either truly be top-notch talent evaluators, hope to eventually become better recruiters, or some combination of the two.
this staff has recruiting upside. It's a bunch of young, engaging guys. But very few of them have ever done it before at this level. Burden is on the "experienced" side of the table and he's got one year.
I think our offense will be markedly improved this year. I don't think our recruiting will be. But in recruiting, there is always hope.
I recognize the upside and potential, but I think a lot of the concern stems from the fact that we have nearly an entire staff of coaches, including the head coach, learning on the job with regards to recruiting at a program like VT. We don't really have a proven recruiter on the staff. Bud and Wiles have been here forever, but they are not known for recruiting ability. You think Fu would have thought it prudent to hire a few seasoned recruiting vets at the power 5 level for his first big time job. He must be really confident in his ability to coach kids up, hope that they will become great recruiters after some winning, or they think it's just as easy as it was at Memphis. I'm ecstatic about the coaching aspect of this new staff, but recruiting has some serious doubts.
What gets me the most is that Whit stressed endlessly about how recruiting was so important in today's game and how they needed to be a primary area of focus with how the program moved forward even under Frank and then we proceed to overhaul the staff with a bunch of guys who are unproven at best on the recruiting trail. Don't get me wrong, I have full faith they can coach the hell out of what they get, but to be where we say we want to be, we need to be able to do both. Lack of recruiting is what got us to where we are now, and we aren't exactly hitting the ground running on these first two classes.
Press panic button now!!
Whit went out and beefed up the recruiting staff immediately after Fuente was hired. He created 2 new recruiting staff positions IIRC and promised Fuente that if more was needed he would gladly listen. Fuente himself made comments after the hire of Bartelstein that they were going to see how things went with the current additions and that he would re-evaluate after things went into motion. Nobody discounted the idea of the staff growing in the future, and it seemed just the opposite to me (over time).
I agree with your point, but I also want to point out that Fuente was a pretty darn good net-positive on his first recruiting class that he had only a few weeks to contribute to. He added the #1 JUCO QB in the nation to a class that was basically Beamer's and that cannot be understated. Re-recruiting Patterson, fending off Muschamp for Denmark + Maryland from Beckett... I guess I just see how terribly that class could've gone and how much got done in 2 months. We have work to do nonetheless, but I consider 2016 as a win, especially compared to how the class was expected to finish by everyone a week before Fuente was hired.
Recruiting support staff - check. But what about our coaches? The ones who are actually coaching these guys in the meeting rooms and on the field. We have 0 proven recruiters onboard at this time, coupled with a head coach who has stated he trusts his evaluations and system over all else, and who has openly lamented the current state of recruiting antics nationally. We can add all the support staff in the world, but I'm somewhat concerned about the staff themselves.
As I mentioned earlier, top recruits want to play with other top recruits. It's like the NBA - star players don't want to fly solo on a small team when they can play with the who's who of the NBA and contend for titles. VT is not cool right now with nationally sought after recruits. I'm sure everyone in state has a soft spot for the home team, but their peers are flocking elsewhere right now. This coaching staff doesn't seem to be able to change that perception at the moment. Will winning change the view? Perhaps, but elite recruits weren't beating down the doors even in our ACC heyday.
No one should be learning on the job at this level. Especially when replacing a coach like FB at a program like VT in the ACC. As I have said, im stoked about a sheer caliber of coach like Fuente being the face of our program. But when you whiff on the opportunity to bring more big guns on staff to a power 5 job and hire a bunch of unknowns to help you, I really question the commitment to building our recruiting profile beyond the "diamond in the rough" tier.
What "big guns" we're coming to Tech to work under the Fuente system for the current VT pay?
Instead of simply giving your entire Memphis staff pay raises, we could have gone after some more established assistants. We had the money and name to do that. We paid Shibest big bucks for ??? and very likely lost T Gray because of it. Galen Scott is paid for ??? What does he even coach, at first it was LBs then DEs now safeties?
You're right in that Fuente obviously values his system and loyalty above making hard decisions and going for people outside the circle. Time will tell if that strategy pays off. I don't doubt the coaching ability one bit, but we're not walkin' in Memphis anymore.
That's my point, looking at the money Fuente had to offer to his assistants point to an "established assistant" that you think could have helped in recruiting and fit the system that he could afford to entice to VT. We all love VT but like it or not because of the lack of revenue both in donations and "profit" from ticket sales, merchandise sales, post season appearances, league payout etc etc etc Tech doesn't have the reaources to just go out and buy a hot assistant who fits every check box.
I'm not saying break the bank on an all-star staff. I know VT isn't the wealthiest football program, but you make it sound like we're literally down to our last dollar in every aspect of athletics. We had a budget to hire AT LEAST ONE big name, proven recruiting assistant coach with ties to the area. One or two more proven guys at the power 5 level. I really question the Scott and Shibest hires at their salary level. Fuente went with who he felt comfortable with over proven big time experience.
The names people have tossed about on other boards have for the most part been job-hoppers that last few years and some of them have somewhat shady reputations. So the question remains, what "proven" recruiter would have been a good add for the staff?
Another question is, should anyone in Fu's position be told who they should have as assistants...is poor staff chemistry ever a good idea in any organization? The last few years of Beamer's career were marked by less than 100% staff buy in with each other and occasional communication snafus on the recruiting front. Do we need another in-house cold war?
I think you may be under-estimating the advantage several other teams had over with less turnover. Many of the 4 and 5 * players have been recruited by a position coach at least for at least a few years now, and have a comfortable relationship with each other. I'm not saying this is what happened with Garbutt, but when you are relatively new and unproven, and can see many of the adults in the teenager's life recommending a little of a wait and see approach with the new coaches in a new relationship. Lets not panic, produce on the field, continue to provide one of the top atmospheres in CFB, and continue to build relationships. I feel confident that if Fu cannot get it going in a few years Whit will hit the reset button, but saying this proves Fu can't recruit made bad hires on his staff is very pre-mature.
so what happens when the primary and secondary recruiter have both been at VT since 1996 or later like Bud and Charley have?
then you use the other tired excuses like bagmen, resources, etc.
I am still not about to complain about the current coaching staff not being the right staff before they coach their first game. Was Bud kept because he is a great recruiter? Probably more because is a top DC. Fire Wiles to get a hot recruiter? I would've been against that. So we are judging the new staff on one recruit de-committing, before they coach a single game? Still seems pre-mature to me. I don't see how its fair to expect new coaches to recruit better than the old until they have a chance to show they can put a better product on the field.
Because selling a vision is what good recruiters can do. Look at what the new staffs at MD and Rutgers have done. Our guys will probably have to wait until we have an actual product to point to
I'm not judging anyone on the new staff, I'm judging the 2 15+ year staff members who are Garbutt's Primary and Secondary recruiter... Bud and Wiles have missed sooo many recruits over the last 4 years, at some point they have to be held accountable and let go.
I would however let Wiles go before Bud and bring in a DLine guy who can recruit well.
Interested to hear why you would rather keep Wiles than hire a guy who can recruit the defensive side of the ball?
I can only think of a brief time during one season in the last 15 years when I though the D-line was a weakness on the team, and several times when it was a real strength. He has brought in players who have done well in Bud's system, and understands it.
Has he really brought in players or is he just coaching the players that others pull in for him because he can't finish the deal with the ones he recruits?
Wiles best recruits on the dline would be Luther Maddy + Nicolas back in 2012. Other than that its been miss after miss after miss with a couple unknowns that he was able to pull in the past year.
D Line productivity dropped BIG TIME this past year and with 0 depth that we trusted to step in Dadi and Luther had to play at 70-80%. That falls right back to Wiles and Bud for not being able to recruit the players needed.
We will see if last years drop was just a fluke or is it something that we need to start worrying more about.
Luther definitely did not have to play it has ben proven that both Williams and Baron when given substantial snaps , there was not much if any drop off. Baron was best DT last year.
I disagree, and am starting to think you argumentative because we are bored in the off season. I would rather have coaches that teach the game, develop character, and are good at developing players than coaches whose greatest strength is selling kids on something they cannot deliver. A lot of our recruiting battles are lost to teams that win more. Period. I do not our defense is what has kept us from winning, and believe we we could not hire a better DC than BF for anywhere near the same money. I think having an Offence to go with the defense is the first step in winning more, which is what we need to do if we want to recruit with programs that have won the last four years, or have a championship history. Your talk of recruiting over coaching makes me think of all the coaches I hate without respect, and is not what I want out of VT. Yes, I would like to be good at recruiting, but firing good coaches because you miss on recruits to teams with better programs (based on recent win/loss)? Not very VT IMO.
isn't this essentially the mentality that got us into this mess? Don't get me wrong. I am a huge Beamer supporter but you basically are justifying him holding onto "good coaches that win ten games a season" but couldn't recruit and put us in the hole we are presently trying to climb out of. Not that simple dude and it has nothing with being VT or not. It's simply the job they are hired to do.
All coaches must recruit. Some are clearly better than others, but the job at any school at our level is to coach AND recruit.
I agree we need to win to land better recruits. But I agree with criticism of Wiles. He isn't landing the recruits. He is insincere with the things he says about players. And IMO he relies too much on the system that Bud created to overcome the deficiencies of not recruiting better players.
The DL has held steady but how much of that is only on the ability of Wiles? or could another coach who has at minimum the same coaching ability AND able to recruit better suited, if for no other reason than its a requirement of the job?
Fernley, not disagreeing with your logic and I normally like your comments, but isn't Charlie Wiles currently one of our top three coaches in recruiting in this class according to recent articles ? If he should be fired for bad recruiting, shouldn't all the other coaches below him in the recruiting process also be fired (which is almost everyone) ? Personally, I think we should at least let them play a few games before firing them, huh ? Down the road we may have to switch them all out to get better salesmen, but let's give them their shot.
I'm not calling for him to be fired. Just questioning the logic used above.
He recruits and he does land recruits. But he has missed out on successive big targets. And no thats not all on him. But again just questioning the logic given above that coaches that are performing are beyond reproach.
Exactly. It's not like he doesn't get any recruits at all. The problem is, Wiles is usually down to Plan C, D, and/or E because of missing on our top targets. Then we usually get the spin factor of "Well, so and so is underrated and actually a better fit for the scheme/more twitch, etc."
You do know you can acquire coaches that are both good at coaching and recruiting? I know it's a scary concept, but it happens all sorts of places just not at VT. Also to your point about not knowing the DL was a weakness just look back to last year. DL was super hyped coming into the season and what happened when the games started? They did almost nothing.
I think Wiles is good at coaching and recruiting. I just don't think its realistic to expect anyone to land top 5 talent consistently when you field a barely .500 team. I think the biggest issue we had for years is retaining a good recruiter on offense when he was bad OC. I am not ready to repeat that on Defense. Lets try doing what has worked pretty well on defense, having good coaches and schemes, on offense, and see if that works before we try what did not work on offense with the defense.
There is no greater recruiting tool than lots of W's
Wiles and staff have swung out big time on the top 20 in VA the past 4-5 years so the idea that he can land top 5 talent is a ways off IMO. Heck even when we were in the BCS Bowls we didn't pull elite talent on the DL or anywhere that's saying a lot.
All I'm trying to relay is its obvious Bud and Wiles are not great recruiters so why are we sitting on our thumbs hoping one day they figure it out instead of hiring support staff that can close and make their jobs easier. If that can't happen then letting Wiles go isn't the worst thing as long as we replace him with someone who has shown he can recruit and coach as well.
College Football has gone so far away from relying on the gems to help you win, its a 2 part game now recruiting is #1 and the games are #2. Recruiting seems to control #2 so if a coach can't recruit then maybe its time to look elsewhere.
I agree with almost of this, except for the recruiting being 1 and the game 2. Do you need both, yes, and maybe co 1 is reasonable, but I disagree with the premise that recruiting is the most important part of coaching. I repeat myself a little, but I think bad offensive coaching has hurt us more than bad recruiting, and is major cause of our recruiting getting worse. I also think it unfair to say Fu and his hires are not the right people to help Foster recruit because one guy de-committed. It is reasonable to say you would have liked a proven recruiter on staff, I just think it is too early to call for change.
I agree that they're co #1s, but I disagree that Wiles was an effective or good recruiter. I've also never felt that he was the greatest coach (not saying he wasn't a good coach). Just felt like we(the team) could've done better.
Not sure if I agree - would want to know the answers to these questions:
Is he there because Frank did not like letting people go, or because Foster thinks he the right guy?
Does he recruit specifically to Bud's system?
How much does Bud's system really affect D-line player's choice of schools?
What percentage of the players he really wanted went to schools ranked 20+ spots high than us in the polls at the time, vs how many chose us over them, and how does that percent compare to other programs?
I'm gonna presume the "number of NFL players" or "number of offers from other div 1a programs" question has no bearing either.
What about players like Maddy? Little to no D-1 interest, came because of a relationship Wiles built with a High School Coach, multiple all conference nod, but not in the NFL? If you put "all conference recognition" instead of "NFL players" you would get a statistically larger sample, which could take into account recruiting to a system (if he actually does), and I would say it has bearing.
No, I meant head or position coach offers from div 1 programs. We already know that (by comparison) former Coach Gray blows Wiles off the planet in terms of players in the NFL, as well as All-Americans and All-Conference.
When we are evaluating defensive line recruiting, we need to remember that some very promising dline recruits were moved to offense because of oline recruiting problems.
None of them were kids that would have played defensive end for us. Wyatt had already been moved to DT and there is no way Nijman would have stuck at end. It's not a laundry list of kids either, nor kids that were going to start there that season.
Doin't disagree with your comment. Just pointing out that our dline recruiting may not be as bad as some of the commenters seem to think. There were others moved to offense that may have helped the dline: Alston Smith is one I can think of. Also a strong defensive tackle can make a DE look a lot better by occupying blockers.
Just speaking for myself, but the reason DL recruiting is brought up so much is because Virginia has produced some of the best DL talent (by the recruiting services at least) over the last 3-4 years and we've landed Hill and Settle that's it out of that group.
Mike Locksley is making 45k at Bama... I would have offered him 80k to be at VT. That DUDE can recruit his nuts off and you can quote me on that
Not a coach. So he can't do that much recruiting anymore. Finding guys yea but he can't visit correct?
he can't recruit on the road but once a recruit gets on campus he sure as hell can talk to them and convince them BAMA is the place to be.
I'd put his job as a "closer" once kids get on campus..
He may be able to talk the talk, but in reality, as a very quotable Ol' Ball Coach once said, "ANYONE can win at Alabama". With multiple, RECENT (and historical) National Championships in my hip pocket, even I could recruit up a storm.
I would personally donate $45k a year to keep Mike Locksley out of Blacksburg. There are many coaches who can turn good programs into dumpster fires, but that's where most bottom out. Locksley has the unique ability, metaphorically speaking, to take a dumpster fire and add Cesium 137 and AMFO.
Wait is that the guy from Maryland and then Before that New Mexico?
Yep
I see your points and passion, but our coaches are capable to do their jobs. Experience may be lower now, but the coaches will learn and develop, as anyone in a new job would. Admittedly, the stakes are high here, as is the college football world today. No all-world recruiter started that way early in his career, either.
Fuente put a staff together of guys who he could work with, grow with, and establish something here at Tech. Plus, I personally believe he will run a clean program similar to the way Beamer did. We can't just blow off the whole staff due to one recruit decommitng in July.
The concerns may be real, but let's revisit any shortcomings in year 3+. This is still a rebuilding period. The staff has to have time to develop relationships and groom recruiting areas. We will have to be more patient.
I saw a tidbit that every first year football coach at Tech had a losing season. Think about that for a minute. 6-7 wins is reasonable to expect for this season.
He had over 2 months not a few weeks.
Probably true that an increase in recruiting spending won't matter all that much, but having a recruiting budget ranked 48th of 55 P5 teams (as of 2013) does not help
It's easy to forget that only a few years ago we had basically zero non-coaching football staff (Weaver). Babcock had to get us to where we should've been 5 years ago, first. I don't expect a recruiting staff that is going to grow a whole lot more right away, but the results of having that structure in place now will be felt over several years and not just an immediate bump IMO
Son of a
His HS coach pushing him to Pitt apparently...
...ah pitt, I heard they enjoy a hearty diet rich of fecal matter.
ah, I, used mine eyes to observe what was done hither
Look, look with your special eyes!
If that's true, doesn't seem a very cool thing.
Sure, before the commitment, but after wtf.
I take recruiting decommits much better after I started looking at them as a 17 year old breaking up with his girlfriend. I know committing to a school is a little more serious, but how much commitment can a 16 or 17 year old kid give someone. While it's frustrating, you can't be mad at a kid when they don't marry their high school sweetheart.
yes, and de-committing, but saying "VT is still my leader" is like said 17 year old telling his girlfriend "hey, there's this girl I want to get with, but can't do that while we're dating. So let's break up and get back together after. That way I don't have to feel like I'm cheating."
thanks for dinner,drinks and taking me to this killer party but I'm going home with him.... kiss on cheek and walks out
The cold kiss of recruiting...sigh
I once ended up with two dates to the prom. One was a beautiful girl from another school that I met while broken up with my then girlfriend, from a more local school. With a dad who was a cop. With a big brother that was, well, a bit threatening. Who, at the last moment, decided to unbreak up with me and dared me not to take her to the prom.
For the rest of my life, I will regret the horrible experience of calling the out of town girl and telling her, two weeks before the prom, that I had to break the date. Not because of the embarassment of it all, not for the bullet I had to bite with the old girl friend, but because of letting the out of town girl down and generally showing that I had a lot of growing up to do to earn the balls I was born with. I just wish kids had grown in maturity since I was a ute, but it is obvious that that hasn't happened.
now, there's a humble-brag if ever I've seen one
No brag, just fact. Too bad I didn't use them.
Wouldn't that involve coming to Blacksburg?
The world is on fire, call the priests for a cleansing, SEC rules the continent, etc.
His high school coach tried to talk him out of committing right from the start, if I remember correctly. Not that he was against him going to Tech, just didn't want him to limit himself.
Yep, he never liked it from the beginning it sounded like. Went so far to say he was "shocked" to a local F-burg reporter that tweeted out tidbits from their convo. I really never liked the way his comments came off. It seemed like he was ticked off that he wasn't consulted first perhaps
sounds like his HS Coach wants him to go to Pitt and really is fighting in their corner. If I remember correctly his HS coach wasn't too happy of his commitment when it happened
Really hope we see a steep increase in recruiting next cycle.
I think someone isn't happy about Fuente's policy of not taking official visits after verbally committing. Kinda like Hokie07ME states above....I think he wants to be wined and dined (figuratively) before he really commits.
Is that a stated policy of Fuente's?
Yes according to several recruits.
Well, that's probably not going to work out that well. That's a policy from a different generation, today's kids are too entitled for that tough-love type of approach. It also works better when you have Bama type of leverage over a kid.
But, hey, if it works....then great. It certainly is more representative of the working world. It's capitalistic, we spend resources on you, you commit to us, we adjust resources spent on you, if you look around at other schools, we spend those resources on others. It's just bid'ness.
Dabo has the same policy. Seems to work for him in this modern generation.
He's winning
Chicken vs. egg argument, I believe.
According to this thread, Dabo had the policy in place, in some form or fashion, before one could consider him "winning."
Does Fuente invite kids to visit VT when they are already committed to other schools? I really don't know the answer but I would think we wouldn't given the above. This recruiting deal is so much like showing livestock for a living.
Seems fair to me.
I, for one, think it's a good policy. If you want to take other visits, get wined/dined, etc...don't commit. If you want to commit...commit.
This is surprising?
Im sure his rating increasing after his commitment helped with this. Oh whale. This is why I have a hard time following recruiting, theres a lot more rejection and losing involved than there is winning. I too am hopeful positive results on the field will help us with recruiting. I don't understand the argument that it won't by some of those above. We need to hurry up and start playing.
Don't think his rating had anything to do with it. Was down to pitt and us before and likely still will be. He's always been a low 4* kid not like the rating changed much.
A 17 year old has the right to do what's best for him, Hokie football team will be fine. Fuente hasn't done anything wrong. Winning will cure everything.
Except overpaying his Memphis staff and not going after any coaches who could help us recruit.
if Garbutt decommitting gets us a Jordan Williams commit, i'll take it.
Elite recruits want to play with other elite recruits. Our momentum on the trail has completely stagnated, probably playing some part on Garbutt looking elsewhere. Had we gotten commits from a few more highly-ranked guys, I doubt Garbutt bails. We really need to step it up, or else I fear more decommits will be coming.
Would be nice, but that's not going to happen...
oh well, same shit, different day. Still a ways from signing day, so who knows where he'll end up or who we will get.
Let's worry about the upcoming season, and the signing on the dotted line next Feb will follow. That goes with the guys committed here or elsewhere. Until you have a signature you've got nothing.
Probably getting down voted for this but when is a kid's "commitment" ever going to be taken seriously any more. I am sure it is hard for coaches to account for this because they are probably turning down recruits when they have kids in these slots. I want to be the better person but I could careless for someone who commits then decommits after a new offer or what not... enjoy your new team.
There needs to be an early signing period to help offset this.
Question for the board, though I think I have my answer.
This is the hardest part to swallow, right? Because we've lost commits before, and we'll lose them again. But IMO conciliatory statements like the above seem to hurt more than help.
If Tyjuan decides to stay with the good guys, then wonderful. If not, I look forward to beating him.
I'll check our commitment list in January 2017. Until then I ain't worried about a thing.
I like this philosophy (leave it to a horse).
Besides I recently read a fine article on the critically acclaimed TKP that VA recruits are overrated. I won't panic until after we loose SC commitments /s
Might as well just wait until NSD then.
SPOILER ALERT: Its not gonna be good.
If it shakes out how I imagine it will shake out, the best in-state player that VT will land will be Devante Smith, who is ranked 28th (per 247)
No matter how you look at it...that's not good.
Man, with all this finger pointing I'm surprised nobody's gotten off yet...
Apparently, this is the first time in the history of college athletics that a recruit has changed their mind prior to signing day. The guy has barely even been employed by VT for 8 months, hasn't coached a single game, and is a 1/4 of the way through his first official recruiting cycle.
Lots of recrootin' left kids, lots of recrootin'.
Go pour yourselves a bourbon, spark a cig, and chill the F out.
Counter argument would be teams that see a huge uptick in recruiting when a new coach takes over.
UVA was able to do it with London, Al Groh -- UMD is killing it on the recruiting trail right now etc.
I'm not saying the sky is falling but I was hoping Fuente's hire would do something similar.
I agree with you here. I keep hearing people preaching "chill, relax." If this were an isolated occurrence, then yeah I understand. But this is the same old song and dance over and over. We miss on recruits in July, "ah don't worry, wait till signing day." Signing day misses, "ah it's ok, we'll do better next year." On and on. And I agree, you usually see an uptick with a new coaching staff because of the new car smell and selling the vision and excitement for the future. Spring Game and Summer Camps have passed, and mostly you just hear crickets. We have pretty bad recruiting momentum right now, no denying it.
And as far as the "hasn't coached a game" argument, recruiting is a FAIRLY HUGE job for college coaches. They've been on the trail for 8 months now. I think a lot of people are just sitting on their expectation that Fuente is going to come in and win big immediately, and somehow all the recruiting concerns will magically disappear.
Preach on brother Hokie!
This isn't about just one recruit. It's about the direction of recruiting as a program. Just so happens that one recruit would have been the first top 10 kid in the state of VA we wouldn't landed in the last two years.
You do realize that the program just went through a 75-80% overhaul, right?? Or do you just expect that WE'RE VT and how dare any kid from VA go anywhere else?? You obviously have no clue how recruiting actually works from the inside of a program or from a recruit's perspective. Case in point of the mother that T. Gray didn't say hello to. Kid was practically a VT lock, but a MINOR thing that could have easily been avoided and/or forgotten changed the kids' entire outlook on where he decided to go to school. There are so many cogs running for each and every coach, recruit, and parent . (btw, worked within D1 basketball program for 2+ yrs) Recruiting is a game. You may think you have entire control, then at the last second it gets yanked out from under you. Just because other schools are having better "success" (translated as higher ranked class ) as you point out in other posts, it hasn't translated into wins for them yet either. So unless teams like MD, Memphis, and Iowa St. (as you mention) ever consistently produce teams that finish seasons ranked above VT, IT MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING how their recruiting class ranks in June and July of a given cycle.
I agree with most of what you're saying. Ranked classes are nice, but the fact is we're getting beat by them for kids WE want. Lets throw out the rankings for a sec, they are beating us and they have the same staff overhauls. THATS my issue.
Some people are just going to make excuses no matter what. It's already been said elsewhere that Fuente has realized their approach to recruiting isn't working. At least he recognizes it and hopefully he can get it fixed, but it's most likely not going to make an impact in this class.
I hope thats the case. We the fan bases haven't seen the real "fixes" (maybe we never will), but I guess faith is a lot to go on for a fan base, right?
Check your math. 75-80%? I don't think VT will ever be a dominant force in recruiting. I think our ceiling is in the 20-25 range, so wrong with all your assumptions.
That kid was never a VT lock that T gray didn't say hi to his mother. The only reason he came to VT was because Ford was here. To say recruiting ranks in June and July mean nothing is just showing your ignorance. More and more of the A/B caliber offers that are out have already committed. If you aren't pulling in your targets by this point you are moving on to plan c and d kids, which aren't going to make a great class.
Kevin tolliver was the kid's name btw and he was always considered a heavy LSU lean.
75-80% of the coaching staff was overhauled. 12 of the now 17 member staff are BRAND NEW TO VT. Which OOOOOOOOOOKKKKKKK, is 70.5%....5 % off, MY BAD.
Also, Tolliver's own father was quoted as saying VT was a VERY strong contender for him and TG's actions pulled the rug on any chance.
Yea, rankings in June and July do matter some, because it can set the tone for the cycle. But you're basing the entire success of the 2016 class in JUNE AND JULY. That's just as much your ignorance as mine. Also, not a single national recruit in this cycle has signed any papers yet, so let's see what happens. Like I said before, this isn't the first time a kid has backed off a commitment and it certainly will not be the last.
And so your rational and recruiting philosophy is that if a A/B kid decides to back off his commitment IN JULY, doesn't commit to a different school, annnnnnd tells you that he still has very high interest in your school, that we just say "OH WELL, he ain't comin, let's stop recruiting him and move along to the next kid." ?!? <- that's how you lose, and lose horribly at recruiting.
CJF is going to recruit and recruit hard, he's made his priorities known. He's a HC who has 4 seasons under his belt, 2 of which he spent digging out and reviving Memphis from of its own grave. I don't have any doubt that after 4 seasons in Blacksburg the results can't be just as good if not better.
there aren't 17 coaches on a football staff.
if you believe we were a strong contender for kevin tolliver no wonder you don't understand recruiting.
never said that. VT should stay as hard on garbutt as possible.
easier to succeed with marginal talent at a non-p5 school IMO. Hopeful he can get us back to at least 8-9 wins soon, but this is going to be the most talented team he'll have for a while with how our recruiting is going.
First, check the "staff roster" on good ole HokieSports.com. 12 of the 17 staff members are new. No they're not all "coaches", but not just coaches recruit, which you are apparently entirely unaware of. You obviously have NO CLUE what the entire FB staff does from a recruiting standpoint as 3 non-coaches have direct recruiting responsibilities AND the Director of Ops does as well in regards to setting up meetings, showing guys around facilities and campus, and meeting them when they step on campus. And of those 4, 2 are brand new to VT. Oh, and the video guy is compiling clips on guys as well, so there's 5 non-coaches in on it. So keep on preaching that nonsense.
If you don't think Tolliver considered VT then you read NOTHING about ANY of his recruiting and are oblivious... see this article and quotes from his father.... http://theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/11492523-123/five-star-recruit-kevin-t...
I'm done with you on this. You may think you understand what goes on from an internal standpoint on recruiting, but until you experience it first hand and are at the table with coaches, players and parents, which I did for 2 + yrs, you don't know jack other than what rivals and 247 give you.
I played d1 football, did you?
You want to start talking about the new staff at dining halls to work that into your people on staff too? None of the staff outside of the coaches can have direct contact with recruits off campus. They do grunt work for them and logistics.
Tolliver never considered VT. He got a free trip and hung out with his former teammate. You probably think Andrew brown really considered VT as well, right?
where did you play? just curious
east Carolina.
Sorry, gut reaction to anything ECU. Carry on!
believe me saw it coming. family moved OOS or i'd have tried to walk on at VT.
You're right, (on 1 thing) that non-coaching staff aren't permitted to have off-campus contact, but go ahead and discount all the, as you put it, grunt work they do behind the scenes to make sure the coaches have the ammunition and information they need to do what they need to do on the trail. I never said they had off-campus contact, but it doesn't mean they don't have anything to do with it. And what's dining have to do with anything? I'm talking about direct football staff, per the university's website that is hands on in recruiting.
Maybe the kid never truly considered VT, but for some unknown reason, the kid's dad thought he was pretty darn interested. And that's a direct quote from the father, not the writer jazzing up the piece.
And great, you played. Then you should know pretty well how much work the 'non-coaching' portion of the staff puts in in regards to recruiting.
Let's everyone here at TKP give the Lad an Oreo for being a former player. From the sounds of it, you didn't spend much time at all in the offices around the coaches or other direct staff to see what they actually do when the players aren't around.
keep making excuses rather than trying to address problems for what they are. Got us in the mess the program is in now.
You seem pretty young so maybe you think all these support staff positions were just as prevalent 15 years ago as they are now. Congrats on coaching basketball for 2 years and thinking you know everything about recruiting in football.
I'll see your condescending tone and unrelenting adherence to your opinion on this matter and raise you an Emma gif...
eh everyone is entitled to their opinions that's what these boards are for. would be boring if everyone thought the exact same thing. i just didn't appreciate some ignorant person acting like they know my background and presenting a bunch of bs.
+1
Well, we can both agree with that statement for each other.
Perfect conclusion for this thread. You have presented your share of BS and ignorance as well.
Hope all that tuned in enjoyed the transgressions.
I never brought up your background. I just pointed out you how wrong you were about several things.
Tolliver was never a VT lock and we didn't have 70-75% coaching staff turnover.
Have a great weekend!
Ok, lock was strong phrase for Tolliver. I'll give you that one.
10 total Official Coaches on staff. http://www.hokiesports.com/football/coaches/
3 holdovers: Foster, Burden, Wiles
7 new coaches.
7/10 turned over = 70% staff new.
Grade school Math.
I don't claim to know everything about FB recruiting, but the methods for basketball staffs aren't at all that different other than fewer staff members going after the players.
How about the fact that KIDS can be swayed to other schools not because of our defensive coaches but the fact the majority of our staff is new and nobody knows how we will look next season. Kind of hard to tell these guys what they can expect when Fuente hasn't coached a game at Tech yet.
so explain Maryland, Memphis, Iowa State etc that have even more turnover on their staff and are recruiting better than their predecessors without playing a game. I know they are all very prestigious schools with a rich history of football excellence, but how are they doing it besides having a staff that prioritizes recruiting and selling their vision?
MD is in a different conference with more money flowing in because of TV contracts. Kids want to know their games are getting carried. There is also UA influence. SP wants MD to become Oregon (sorta kinda) if for no other reason than he is competitive.
Look, the fact of the matter is that we will miss out on top D-line and LB talent because Bud's system doesn't transfer to the NFL. Four and five star kids go where they can be prepped for the league. They're not going to learn a two-gap system in Blacksburg. You had better believe that other coaches recruiting against VT point this out to the recruits.
Bud is a defensive genius and would probably showcase top-level talents enhancing their draft stock, but is hard to argue against the notable lack of front seven players from VT getting their names called on draft day. A bit of a chicken and egg scenario, but without proof, how can we expect elite front-seven recruits to automatically trust that Bud will get them drafted.
Add to that the reputation of moving players to fill holes created by recruiting misses and the problem compounds. An NFL sized DE isn't going to come here just to get switched to DT due to needs caused by poor recruiting. Same with an NFL sized LB that would probably get moved to DE to fill holes.
When it comes to elite front-seven players with dreams of the NFL, Bud just doesn't have the appeal that we think he does.
Regarding Bud's system: what have 4-5* DL/LBs done in his system/pros?
Good question. Not a research guy, but would suggest all conference team as a good measurement of his system in college, while pro is good for developing talent. I think I read something on TKP a while ago that said we are above average in putting 3*s I the pros,with several Dline examples, but average with higher stars. Anybody remember what I think I remember enough to find it?
I started a huge spreadsheet on this geographically and eventually it just came to be to much. Basically though it depends on how you define an nfl player succesful. Is it succesful to make a roster? Or be a multi-year starter or what. The disappointing part for us is a lot of the stud defenders weve gotten in the past recruiting wise havent made a huge impact in the pros. Aside from worilds and flowers weve had some 4-5 star guys struggle to do much in the nfl.
Jason worilds is the only 4 star kid I can remember being drafted high in the last 10 or so years on the DL. He had a good pro career, but was moved to OLB (may have stayed at DE in a 4-3). No one else has really done anything lately. Ken Ekanem is another 4 star kid who may get drafted.
I very much agree with this, it's been my belief for a while. I love Bud but until he can start producing NFL contributors on the Front 7 we will continue to struggle getting the top talent we need to compete at the next level.
I'm betting a lot of HS coaches will be watching the development of Tim Settle very closely. He's the first top tier DL that could have gone anywhere to choose VT in a long time.
TL;DR of the comments section:
Mixed in with a little:
Can we please understand recruiting for top talent
In 4 months here's other top schools and players
2017 LB Rahyme Johnson, decommits from UCLA
2017 recruit Exree Loe decommits from Pitt
2018 4-star OT Dare Rosenthal decommits from Alabama
2018 ATH Justin Watkins decommits from LSU
3 Star QB Kenny Pickett decommits from Temple
3-star S Donovan Stiner decommits from Baylor
3* IA DT Juan Harris decommits from Iowa again (his third time)
3* LB Jaylen Griffin (GA) decommits from Cal. Releases top 6
3* RB Michael Warren decommits from Kentucky
4-star LB Ellis Brooks (#230 overall) decommits from Duke
4-star QB Ryan Kelley decommits from Oregon
4* 2017 GA DE Robert Beal decommits from Notre Dame
4* 2017 JUCO WR decommits from South Carolina
4* 2017 MS RB Cam Akers decommits from Alabama
4* 2017 WR KD Nixon decommits from Tennessee
4* DE TyJuan Garbutt decommits from Virginia Tech
4* IMG Academy WR Jhamon Ausbon decommits from Baylor
4* QB Kellen Mond decommits from Baylor
4* TX WR Mannie Netherly decommits from TAMU - cites Moorehead's tweets as reason
4* WR CeeDee Lamb decommits from Oklahoma
4* WR decommits from Baylor
5* NV QB Tate Martell decommits from TAMU
Brandon Martin, #1 JUCO WR, decommits from Auburn
Kedrick James decommits from Baylor.
Top 50 overall player Thomas Graham decommits from USC
It's a long way to Signing day a lot of everything will change
Based on that list, I think there's only one obvious conclusion. Every team in the NCAA needs to fire their current staff and hire better recruiters.
Damn, Bama lost 2 4-stars? I'd say we can all agree Saban is pretty squarely on the hot seat.
Garbutt obviously has not heard about the VT de-commit curse ! Someone should have filled him in on the dire consequences of this....