Down seven with 4:03 left in the ACC Championship Game, Virginia Tech had the ball on its 41-yard-line. Its sights were set on a touchdown and would-be game winning two-point conversion attempt. The Hokies drove 36 yards, into striking distance, and ultimately sputtered on four straight downs to all but end the game.
Virginia Tech had a chance to beat Clemson. The same Clemson that closed as an 11-point favorite. The Clemson that's headed to the college football playoff, again. The defending ACC champions. Virginia Tech hung with the Tigers. In the game's waning moments, the Hokies closed on a 14-point gap that separated them from the Tigers most of the evening, and had an opportunity to win the game.
That loss is not a moral victory. Rather, it's an excellent progress report.
The last time the Hokies played a ranked opponent on the national stage — the Battle at Bristol against Tennessee in September — Tech sprung out of the gate only to fall flat on its face, hard. The Volunteers took advantage of a plethora of Tech mistakes and swept aside a mistake prone, hapless Hokies squad.
A few months later, the Hokies returned to primetime more polished and ready for the task at hand. Even in a 35-42 loss, Tech proved they belonged on the same field as an elite team and even earned a little of the media's respect along the way. Note Tech's one-spot, post-ACCCG loss jump to No. 18 in the AP poll (filed under rare occurrences), and these national pundits' insta-reactions to the contest.
Virginia Tech couldn't quite get it done tonight, but boy, that program is about to take flight.— Kyle Tucker (@KyleTucker_AJC) December 4, 2016
Hokies played their asses off and then went and bought backup asses and played those off too.— BUFFALO TURKEY WRAP (@edsbs) December 4, 2016
@KirkHerbstreit during the 4th quarter of the ACC Championship#HardSmartTough pic.twitter.com/RQaToyFlSy— HokiesFB (@HokiesFB) December 6, 2016
2 big takeaways:* Fuente is a terrific coach & VT gonna be good for a while.* Clemson is gonna be tough out in playoff whoever it gets.— David Hale (@DavidHaleESPN) December 4, 2016
VT ended up waaaay ahead of schedule. 2017 and on look great for Fuente https://t.co/KTqrVFNUs4— Steven Godfrey (@38Godfrey) December 4, 2016
Virginia Tech didn't receive a single vote in the preseason AP poll. The media picked the Hokies to finish fourth in the Coastal, and just three of 191 ballots pegged Virginia Tech to win its division. And one prominent scribe even predicted the Hokies' bowl streak would end. Points being, Tech's rebuilding effort is ahead of any reasonable pace.
The Hokies will need to continue to recruit better to close an evident talent gap. What a difference Richmond product Clelin Ferrell would've made rounding out Tech's two-deep at DE instead of holding down the trenches for Clemson. If they do, the sky's the limit. Rest assured the coach who was on the road recruiting less than 24 hours after a heartbreaking loss knows this already.
For as crestfallen as you are/were over that loss, feel equally encouraged to know Virginia Tech football is in Justin Fuente's capable hands.
Comments
Well said
Sorry. This is completely irrelevant. But I cant see Sam Watterson without thinking of this old SNL skit.
Does anyone remember on the Colbert Report, Sam Watterson came on and did a short called "Jack McCoy Says Things You Shouldn't Believe in a Convincing Manner"?
"Trust me, I've had a vasectomy"
Hahah yes I have seen that. Probably one of my favorite Colbert moments next to him having Jeff Goldblum comment on the death of Jeff Goldblum.
I have never been so excited and full of optimism for the direction of this program. hats off to the coaching staff and players for showing the drive and heart that show what being a hokie is all about. 1 more game: I'm ready for some bacon!
not even back in 99? We've had some moments where it seemed like we were pushing the elite level.
Hokie2013 was 8 in the '99 season. I think it's fair to say that most people's knowledge and appreciation of their college football team isn't quite fully developed in 3rd grade.
not to be that guy but I was also 8 in 1999 and that was the year that made me a fan for life. I had the appreciation part covered at least
Same year that sealed my fate as a NCAAF fan. Was such a great season in sports iirc.
unfortunately my parents were pretty strict on limiting watching TV back then and I didn't know anything about football. Things have changed since then and I have watched that game 10+ times on YouTube, but it's different when you know the outcome.
If there's a game worth rewatching from that Championship run, it's the "Miracle in Morgantown" game. Couches were spared from burned that day.
Hey, that's normal. Your parents were just trying to protect you... VTFB has a crippling affect on one's life..
Since your foray into Hokie fandom you, or those close to you, may have noticed:
May include and not limited to: heavy drinking, time away from home, delusions of grandeur, inferiority complex, or keen sense of optimism. Turkey dependancy, or an enabling significant other are also symptoms
Fortanutely there is help... See thekeyplay.com for suggestions
My appreciation was fully developed in first grade...
I wish I would have started that early, but I'm doing my best to catch up!
Also a lot of people don't know where they want to go to school until the middle of HS. I am a third generation Hokie so it was written in stone for me.
But I was at the Nat'l title game and I still don't remember much. I was 9.
I was 8 in 98 when my dad took me to my first game and I was hooked for life.
This team did it this year without a wunderkind uber talent at QB. Not to take anything away from the 99 season, but there was definitely a feeling that it could be a fleeting thing because of how it happened.
This year feels different. This was a legitimate team effort and it feels sustainable because of the scheme being used. These same kids, outside of Evans, were ones who struggled to reach bowl eligibility the last few years and were 20 yards from potentially knocking off the #3 team in the country in a championship event. It feels different... It feels like we're on the cusp of something big.
Seems like a bit of a diss to describe Evans that way. He's not an elite QB probably, but he's a huge step up from what we've had. He didn't break the school record for passing yards in a season JUST because of the system IMO.
Evans is a great mix of LT and TT. Bigger than Tyrod, better runner than Logan. I'm unsure if the passing numbers are a tell sign of talent, or lack of RB talent. Im sure it was very easy to hand the ball off to Evans, Williams, and DW3.
The QB numbers are a reflection of QB talent. He has better touch on his passes, dropping mortar round dimes into the hands of his WRs, never really sailing anything, in total command of where his WRs will be.
Tyrod is awesome. But I think Evans might be a better pure QB. Those fades though..awsome.
One of these guys consistently had to make multiple reads and tougher throws, and it wasn't Evans.
edit: I love Evans and I think he is a great fit for our offense, but numbers don't always tell the whole story.
That was not intended to be a slight towards Evans, and my apologies if it came off that way.
Basically, in '99, we were THAT good because Michael Vick was one of those once in a lifetime talents who overcame the talent deficiencies we had across the board and carried the team on his back to the title game. Yes, we had other players who were good, but on a position by position basis, we really had no business being in the game against FSU, and there we were. And even then, our offense was really Vick doing things only Vick could do. Even after Vick, our team always played like that, even up to Tyrod. Our scheme put the pressure completely on the QB to make plays.
Its different now. We don't ask Evans to be that kind of player, nor do we really want him to be. Our offense is schemed that we should be able to move the ball down the field by just lining up and going. That's not to say Evans can't take a game over, I think we've seen a couple instances this year where he did just that, and we were a much better team for it, but we don't need it to happen to have success. If this was Year 2 in the Fuente era with all the same pieces in place instead of just Year 1, there's a real possibility we could have ended up in the playoff this year, based on how we lost the games that we lost.
You ask me, Evans is already one of the best QBs to ever take the field for VT. Only guys I'd unquestionably put above him right now are Mike Vick, Tyrod, and Druck, and I'd put him on even footing with Randall and Thomas. I have the utmost respect for everything he was able to accomplish this year in his first 5-6 months on campus.
No way we'd make the playoff this year under any circumstance. We're gonna have a tough time making the playoffs in general just because the coastal is so weak and we only get BC +1 from the Atlantic. Real shit draw.
Now if you mean that under year 2 we wouldn't have fumbled the ball like it was a greased up baby, then I could see that. Beat UT, Beat Syracuse, probably still lose to GT, and beat Clemson. Still our schedule just wasn't stacked enough to make up for a bad loss. People still claim Washington shouldn't be in the playoff.
Next year is a good year (WVU, Clemson) and 2020 is a great year (Michigan, Penn State, Louisville). But WV could actually be bad next year with the players they're losing and who knows what happens to any of those programs in 3 years. We really really need Miami to get good again. That would make up for a lot.
It's not relevant because we obviously didn't only lose one game, but under the exact circumstance you just described:
In all likelihood, we would've been in the playoffs.
Shoot, had lost the first two and beaten UVA, I think we are in the Orange Bowl. People forget that we were 14 in the CFP Rankings going into that game.
um...... 52-10, bro
Man, sometimes words get lost whilst mobile TKPing. Clarification - had we lost to UT and 'Cuse but beaten GT and still closed out against UVA in dominating fashion, we would be in the Orange Bowl.
I was literally depressed for this team after that final 4th down play on Saturday. I didn't sleep well, and I had that horrible feeling in my stomach because we worked so hard to get to that point, and it will take another year to get back there. I love Buzzketball to death, but literally the thought of no college football makes me sick.
But, this season was a lesson in how to be emotionally, physically, mentally, and spiritually prepared to win. We dropped games we shouldn't have, but we are a better team than that when playing at our absolute best. As sad as the football offseason will be, I think we made a statement on Saturday, and we are in excellent hands with Fuente.
The season isn't over.
Curiously, although Blacksburg and Charlottesville are in the same time zone, their seasons change as much as a month apart. It's been basketball season in Charlottesville for a week and a half, but it will be football season in Blacksburg for another three weeks.
Tell that to the team that is playing tonight.
Just because our football team still has a game to play doesn't mean that our season hasn't started. No, the difference between UVa and VT is that at VT, football and basketball season overlaps.
football season exists and basketball season isn't a year long with baseball, lacrosse and tiddlywinks seasons smattered around in the middle
FTFY
I imagine in that scenario, Penn State sneaks in because of our strength of schedule.
I wouldn't overlook Babers and Nardouche. Both have large talent pools, and Babers appears to be a really good coach. Plus, UM will start improving under Richt.
Cool thanks! I misinterpreted what you said to imply that Evans was successful mostly because of the system. I agree with your assessment 100%, he's a good quarterback in his own right working within an offensive system that finally has some identity.
I'm personally silently hoping that all of our juniors stay home to take us to the 'ship next year, because we could have the pieces in place to make a run if we also mature at certain positions (oline in particular).
He's already far better than LT3. Evans has a much better pocket presence and decision making, along with better accuracy, touch, and consistency.
With a much, much, much better receiving corps. And not that LT was a world-beater at going through progressions as a junior, but he was better than Evans. And he
He is more accurate but he's not already far better than LT3.
"With a much, much, much better receiving corps."
Agreed, it's hard to really judge these quarterbacks stats side by side for that reason alone. I don't think anyone can deny that Evans has the benefit of operating under the best receiving corps we've ever had, and you can argue that LT only had a legitimate D1 receiving corps for his first year as a starter.
I will say that I think Evans is better than Logan simply because he has better touch on short and medium passes and is much smarter with where he throws the ball, and I think that matters a lot more than LT's relative strengths (long throws and being a human wrecking ball).
I disagree with your by position talent argument to a degree. Our DL and OL were fully capable of playing with Free Shoes U. Our LB'ers weren't on the same level and our secondary was a smidgen off FSU's talent level. Our RB's were serviceable, not elite. Where we were really lacking in talent compared with FSU was at WR. Andre Davis was a bullet, but our remaining receivers were not on FSU's level IMO. Of course, Vick was next level above everyone on the field, and that includes Peter Warrick. (Vick should've won the Heisman) that year.
I thought we were starting the trend into elite in 95.
I can't wait to see the team develop further over the spring and into fall camp. But I am going to miss the hell out of the seniors we've had this year. Their leadership, their poise under fire--they have been the intangible difference...the real glue. I give Fuente credit for having the ability to cultivate that also. He named four seniors as permanent team captains for the entire year, paid homage to the bonds they had with Coach Beamer, and basically held them accountable as leaders.
This is just so much fun to watch this team grow!
Oh hellz yea!!!!
Yes. A moral victory would imply that Clemson cheated. Other than the questionable P.I.'s the Hokies were not cheated.
This team knew what they faced and that the odds were against them! What did they do? They clawed out of hell and punched back. This team put everything on the line for the cause.
The loss against Clemson makes me salty.
Beating them in Lane next year would be sweeter.
How can we be so happy when Lawson just transferred?
To Illinois with 2 yrs eligibility, apparently.
Lawson transferred?
Lawson transferred? I wonder how that affects his playing time.
Lawson?
We had a Lawson on the Team?
What was he...a TE or something?
I can't wait for next year when Lawson is handing off to Drew Harris!
Joshua Stanford is supposed to be transferring back.
Joshua Stanford's new cd is turnt.
....said no one ever.
In all seriousness, what happened to that guy? He came in as our top receiver a few years ago and just fell off the earth.
Didn't want to do football at this level, basically. Not in a judgmental or bad way at all - I would do the same. But essentially had more interest in music and other things than being totally gung-ho about football 24/7 and you can't be half-in like that at a major D1 program, for better or worse.
It's a rare thing that I agree with you as much as I do here, Joe. Hear hear.
I didn't realize you were a big fan of pants.
okay maybe less rare
You've given me a lot to think about. How would a beard even wear pants? How would one figure out where the beard's leg began and ended? How many legs are in a beard? What would Billy Gibbons or any member of the Robertson family do? Would the average beard prefer to wear denim, khaki or something else? Would there be more beards wearing pants than fans at UVA's spring festival? (spoiler: yes)
Further research must be conducted
Out of all the things said & done in conjunction with CJF's arrival, I think the one that stuck with me the most was that the hard smart tough preparation didn't guarantee a win but would give them the opportunity to win. That so much was evident with this game. So, no matter who we put out on the field next year, they will be ready to be 1-0 each game. The fact that we only (so far) attract non-blue chippers mostly, they will play like 4 & 5 star athletes. Those kind of players just almost shocked the world. Not a soul that I talked to coming home from Orlando was down. Everyone saw what could become a reality. If we do manage to now pull in some blue-chippers, that's icing on the cake (sorry, no icing on pies).
Crust on the pie. Pie crust is the best, and beats cake icing any day.
you misspelled streusel
I don't know about any day. Chocolate whipped cream icing vs plain empty pie crust? I know which way I'm going, and it ain't for the crust.
You haven't had a really good pie crust then.
Yeah, I have. And I like it. I always eat my wife's leftover pie crust as she doesn't care for more than a little crust with her filling. It isn't that I don't appreciate the naked crust, but I just happen to prefer the creamy goodness of chocolate whipped cream icing more. Now, in a perfect world, I'd have both, therefore turning it into a pie, but if I could only choose one, it's the chocolate.
WHAT IF I TOLD YOU THAT YOU COULD HAVE BOTH???
Next week on
ESPN'sTKP's 30 for 30: Chocolate Chess PieFair enough, fair enough!
I'm halfway with you as far as the cake...
... but I think whipped cream icing is terrible.
Well, there's just no accounting for taste, is there?
On the other hand, my wife loves whipped cream icing on cake.
But she also married me. Make of that what you will. :)
Something something something about the transitive properties of taste?
Yeah, the analogy falls apart for me too.
His bit about 'expected outcomes' really hit home with me:
Throughout high school, college and still, I play(ed) a lot of Tennis, and a lot of poker. In each sport/game, you just want to make the best decision with the information at hand. You have to understand that you can make the perfect shot/bet, but still lose. You can also make a terribly stupid shot/bet but still win. In each sport/game, if you chose the correct play 95% of the time, execute correctly 80%, you'll probably win 70ish% of the plays/points (sometimes you make the wrong play, get lucky and win, sometimes you make the right play and lose, etc). If you win 70% of the plays, you're most likely going to win the match/game. It all comes down to executing an average play constantly.
"Expected outcomes" resonated with me as well. Very succinct way of stressing process over results.
I'll just leave this here...
I'm glad they released this one after the loss. Normally don't see that.
I wouldn't mind a post-loss TKP Giftory either.
Especially the cute blonde hokie with the *wink* with about 3 mins left. I thought she might be a omniscient fairy who knew the outcome before the rest of us with that *wink.*
Enjoy!
Glad I'm no the only one who saw this. I was like "wait, did that girl, who seemed like she didn't know she was on tv, wink at the camera??" haha
One wink: I know something you don't know OR hey there cutie
Two winks: crap, my tic just got caught on national television and immortalized in gif form
That is Josh Jacksons GF I think.
That's impossible. We all know this is Pacey's girlfriend:
Please...
Son of bitch now I'm mad at Kevin Williamson again.
Loved that coaches handshake at the end
"Go win the rest of em" -Fuente
Hadn't caught that, glad you mentioned it.
This showed me 2 things:
1. This team has heart, its got grit, and it's got some tenacity. These are the traits that will get us far!
2. The team may hit a ceiling without blue chippers. We want to win it all? We need the talent and athleticism paired with #1. Its fun to be a giant-killer (Boise St, TCU of old), but I'd rather be the giant, and that ONLY happens with elite recruiting (top 10 or 15).
Considering how recruiting is apparently going this year, you may get to see that play out
well, per ESPN, we have the 35th ranked class for 2017. Not saying thats everything, but that doesn't indicate to me "elite". More than half the ACC is above us in recruiting (per ESPN). We have some serious work to do on the recruiting trail.
Just in the ACC:
Clemson - 7
Miami - 9
FSU - 11
UNC - 19
Duke - 25
Louisville - 30
Pitt - 32
Syracuse - 34
Others
Notre Dame - 8
Penn State - 20
UMD - 21
Rutgers - 33
247 has us at 20th and 29th in the Composite. Far from "elite", but finishing with Hunter, Holston, Garbutt, and Dazz Newsome would make for a very solid class for Fuente's first year.
2018 and 2019 is when I expect for the recruiting to hopefully take that next step.
We finish like that, and add in a couple more pieces that are rumored to be sniffing around, and you're going to see our ranking shoot up from 22nd/29th, and I'm guessing we'll be sniffing a Top 15-20 class.
That's more what I was getting at. Yeah, our current ranking isn't eye popping, but our main recruiting pieces have yet to fall into place, and I expect our place in the national ranks to adjust accordingly after they do.
Recent recruiting has made me a pessimist. I REALLY hope we can pull off those signatures, but I'll believe it when i see it.
We won't be close to sniffing a top 15 class
Thanks for the response. I'm just saying even though that's what people want to hear, it isn't realistic. Sorry
Do you plan on providing any substance to your comments or are you just here to emulate the weather?
Sure. Even if we get the best case scenario with all the guys we want, I don't think it gets us a top 15 class. Last year you needed 8-10 4* players to get in that range,. Silas, Garbutt, Proctor, Capehart, Rivers and Hunter would give us 6. Even if guys like Keene and Deiuliis, who 247 is very high on, make moves in the composite, we'd still need a bit more. Top 15 class is very tough to crack. Its very unlikely we get all the guys we want too. The listed guys like Dazz and Holston might be major players for us on the field, but they won't do anything for our class ranking.
Best case scenario means we'd land just about all those guys and I'd be shocked if that doesn't put us in the high teens to low 20s.
I don't mean to argue semantics but that seems like we're pretty close to sniffing top 15.
All I mean is that's the best case scenario. Unfortunately recruiting is never the best case scenario. Close on Hunter, Garbutt and a couple lineman and this is a good first class. Somewhere low 20s hopefully, probably 25.
Right now it's lining up to look just like our 2015 class. Which was 29th.
Not really addressing anything being argued here but it's interesting to note that if we land those two guys we'll have four 4* guys in the 2017 class. I did a little digging and since 1999 (basically as far back as 247's composite rankings go) we have only had one class contain more than four players above 3 stars (which was in 2012 strangely enough). Honestly if we are already back at least to how we were recruiting before Frank left and before things started to take a downward turn then that's really pretty good improvement for the beginning of year 2. Then from there I can then I can only image things will get better in the coming years. Heck the 2018 class already has potential to be one of the best we have ever had.
In the first decade of the new millennium, Rivals was probably the preeminent source for solid recruiting information. We had many classes with 5+ 4 stars during that span. So the composite for those years probably isn't nearly as accurate as it is now, many others lagged behind and there was a lot more disagreement between recruiting sites.
Good point but personally I think that Rivals gives very poor and often unrealistically high rankings all over the board. They were popular because they were the only show in town for a while but they are always been highly inaccurate in my opinion. Heck if they are to be trusted then we pulled in 16 4* guys from 2014-2015.
So basically all I conclude from this is that the only rankings I can trust are the ones that all the sites agree on (ie. the very few, very elite players)
I'm just saying, they were the best we had during that period. The 247 composite was not good during that time period so it's a little unreliable. Recruiting coverage and accuracy has been on a major upswing for that last 5-6 years, so using that past data to illustrate a point in regards to what class we could have this year, in my opinion, is not accurate or sufficiently descriptive.
For the record, I think this could end up being a solid class. But we've had some decent years from a stars perspective.
To add on to what Chris said, the composite isn't great in the early and mid 2000s. So if a guy is listed as a top300 player nationally he's really a 4 star, even if listed at 3. So a guy like Eddie Royal in 2004 is listed at 3*, but was a top 200 player nationally and number 3 in VA. Definitely a 4 star by today's scale.
But yea we never really recruited THAT well under the 10 game win streak. We have a great chance to do that going forward.
How far away do we have to be to count as "sniffing" the top 15? Are we talking downwind from a cookie factory or across the taco bell from Wyatt Teller?
Yeah it's a steep step into the top 15-10 area. It's not out of the realm of possibility though, our refreshed recruiting tactics and a string of visibly successful seasons could really help swing us into that company.
The guys we have definitely aren't salesmen in the sense of selling a product that they can't show, so I think that put us a step back recruiting for 2017 unlike some other first year new HC programs that sell dreams. Our guys are very much tell it like it is, so I think 2018 will be very very good to us. Starting with Dax...
Thanks, Nostradamus!
You're being a dick. Just stop.
The substance is that we need to hit on all of our high ranking commitments to raise to that level......
....whilst almost all of the remaining high ranking players commit to MAC schools.
Otherwise, the top 15 keeps going up and we never catch up.
{Alternative: we could jettison all of 2* and low 3* kids to raise our average. Does anyone choose that path?}
Not by choice, but USC did that when they were under scholarship reductions. Their averages would be high but they'd only have 15 kids.
Also I believe Rivals caps their ratings at the top 20 players in a class.
What was Fuente's recruting classes like at Memphis?
The guys that he will bring in might not be Blue Chippers, but trust that he has a vision on offense that he wants to build. Might not be the 5 star WR, but he and his staff know what they are doing.
Memphis may be a bad comparison. Remember how he had originally recruited Evans to Memphis, but they didn't have the clout to land him? When the stars aligned and Evans was back on the market when Fuente came here, he had the program appeal to reel him in. It's a much tougher sell to bring talent to some place like Memphis so a lack of elite talent recruited there would not necessarily be reflected here.
As I see it, the big missing piece that our offense needs is his 'halfback', like Fuente had in Alan Cross(?) at Memphis. We don't have anyone quite like that on our roster yet.
I'm hoping this turns out to be Durkin
Agreed. 2018 will be the first class that this staff will have recruited for an entire "cycle"
Using 247's calculator if VT landed those 4 guys it would put them at 17th, not counting who the other teams land. That's assuming that all these guys come in. Insert the necessary fatalism surrounding VT's recruiting.
Well there's your problem.
If you're elite, you're noticed across the board. Our ranking may be depressed b/c its ESPN, but its a good enough indication that we aren't elite yet.
Holy shit. Didn't realize it was signing day already.
I think we really need to out-recruit UNC and Duke in order to get to that next level since they are relatively close geographically to VT. We have to become one of the top options for recruits coming out of VA, NC, and MD to realistically compete. Of course still pulling from the rest of the region and FL like we've been doing will put it over the top.
some thoughts...
the height of the recruiting pile is way less important than the quality of the components, meeting needs, and how well talent fits your scheme
recruit ratings are very long on precision and very short on accuracy
QB is the most important position on the roster...by far
60% recruiting success (players who pan out) is outstanding
Interesting read along these lines: Want a National Title? Sign Top Ten Classes
OU had 3 top 25 classes instead of 2 top 10.
It is very tough to play with the big boys if you don't have the same overall muscle.
Since college football is also about marketing, they could also point to facts like
1) If you want to win a national title, have a coach that has won at least one already (Saben or Meyer)
2) If you want to win a national title, play for a school that has won at least one already
3) If you want to be in the playoff, be a school that ESPN can market (FSU, OSU, USCw, Michigan, Half the SEC, token West Coast school for national balance, )
I agree though. It is easy to have a great season with good coaching, a bit of lucky ,and an overachieving squad of solid players. It is much easier when those players are elite talent.
Clemson last year played Bama to a standstill with just (yes, yes I know) 3 top-15 classes and the 4th best class from 2015. They had Watson at QB. My point is that you might not need to be completely loaded if you have an elite QB to cover up things but you still need talent.
If you want to get the recruits that can win a national title? Generate revenue.
Every NCAA football champion (for those with publicly available info*) in the BCS era (and actually going back to 1992) had revenues >$120M as of 2014-2015. VT's revenues were $80M for 2014-2015. That's 50% lower than the lowest revenue generating champion.
As I've written here many times (much to the chagrin of many who want to believe a cool offense or a few more wins are the ticket), if VT wants to get the players necessary to win national championships, Whit Babcock, VT alumni & fans, and regional business need to drastically up the ante - both quickly and permanently. PERIOD. Otherwise through the magic of compounding, the gap will only get bigger, not smaller.
* USC & Miami probably do not have $120M budgets, but they have built-in recruiting advantages over virtually every school in the country.
Absolutely. There is an exception: Oregon. They got to a national title game with their huge budget, but couldn't get over the hump.
How is Oregon an exception? There are a number of programs with large budgets that haven't won it...Wisconsin, Mich St, Tenn, Georgia, aTm, PSU, etc.
The real exception is Clemson. But they still haven't won it - and likely won't this year.
"If you ain't first, you're last..."
Kyle Tucker is the man.
Yeah I really miss him. Bitter is cool and all but Tucker really tapped into the emotion of being a college football beat writer. I get being professional, but Bitter never seems to care.
Bets VT beat writer ever, for my money.
TKPC hits 1,000, he's on the short-list of people I'd immediately reach out to.
HOKEEEEEEEEEZZ!
Sorry for the caps, but I don't do gifs.
I don't want to be a naysayer or a killjoy on what ended up being a surprisingly good season. But in the Clemson game, the VT offense blew it. Oh yeah, can can soften it and say the season was great, we did this and that ... but you know what? The offense had two chances in the second half and blew them both. The first one was the gift given to the offense by the defense in the third quarter. We got a pick and we have first down inside Clemson territory.
We go nowhere and punt. Choke number one.
The second was the last drive of the game. We just could not do it, could not finish it. Choke number two.
While yes, these season was good and I am pleased at the result, these two chokes do reflect an season-wide inconsistency in the offense that needs to be overcome if the Hokies are going to compete at the top.
A good season? yes. Room to grow? Oh yes.
Both of the drives you mention really illustrated one of our biggest issues all season and one that I hope (but am not sure) we can correct by next season, pass protection. Not just from an individual perspective, but as a whole, we really struggled in pass pro all year, and those drives were ruined by not being able to pass protect to let our offense function.
Speaking of pass protection, the PSU folks up here are anxious to see whether the OSU o line can stop the Clemson d line. PSU took advantage of their o line and it won them the game. I think Clemson's d line is better than PSU's, so I'm expecting to see them wreak havoc on Barrett.
Yeah, I am interested to see that as well. Another thing I'm interested to see is whether or not Tim Beck is going to be aggressive in his play-calling. tOSU has the talent to move the ball on Clemson, but their play-calling has been ultra-conservative.
I disagree that either of these were "chokes." If this were Syracuse of LOLuva, I would agree. We were playing the #3 team in the country with a good defense.
When we turn the ball over in our terrirory and then force a 3 and out we don't say the other team choked, we say in Bud we trust. When we hold the team in the last series of the game out of the endzone (e.g. ND) we don't say the other team choked, we say in Bud we trust.
Give Clemson some credit for making plays when they needed to.
Agreed. A "choke" is failing when you are expected to succeed. We didn't choke, we just got beat.
Yeah, I thought going 3-and-out and losing 5 yards after an int on CUs 38 was very poor. For the most part, the last drive was okay. I don't think the results of the game rest on the last drive. I think it's more on the first four drives of the 2nd half that all went for negative yards while Clemson was moving the ball at will. They were always going to move the ball and put up points, we just needed to keep up.
We still put up 386 yards on a top 5 defense, its not solely on the offense. I mean, the D did give up 470 yards and 42 points. Clearly the defense performs better in the clutch, but overall I think its a little unfair to put all of the blame on one side or the other.
It's funny, normally giving up 42 would seem like a letdown for the defense, but watching that game I could only really fault them a few times.
There were a couple drives in the early part of the game that were helped along by the refs (Note: Not pinning the loss on the refs, we got some calls too and I think over the course of the game it wasn't too unfair)
A couple of their late scores were... well I saw the play and thought "Hell, good play Clemson, no way we were stopping that".
Not saying the defense wasn't at fault for anything, but I thought they hung in there as well as I could have hoped.
You can never say, "if these two plays had gone differently we would have won." But I would love to know how this game would have turned out if we hadn't committed PI on balls that were not going to be caught anyway on three or four 3-and-outs. If there was one consistent mistake by the team that could have been corrected and might have made the difference, that would be my candidate.
The 2nd one was in no way PI. I could maybe see the first one as a touchy call, but the 2nd one was complete BS. Not saying it would have changed the game but I would love to see the alternate reality where that call never happened.
What an impressive game that was. Guys went mano a mano
with them and were basically equal to them for a good part of
the game, save for a few plays.
This VT team fought like it was the 3rd monkey watching two other monkeys board the Ark and the rain was just starting. We might have been beaten on the scoreboard, but they put it all on the field for 4 quarters (well, really 3 quarters, that first one..ouch) and didn't quit, not a single player. That is a new mindset for VT, that is actually going out and walking the walk of hard, smart, tough.
We are going to miss a lot of glue guys and a lot of starts on the O-line and are going to need young WRs to step up and find anything in the running game other than Jerod, but I believe that the optimism I have stems less from talent level we might have next year and more from attitude and culture this team embodies. It is easy to pull together when things are going well, but this team was getting absolutely manhandled and overwhelmed in the first quarter. Past VT teams would have rolled over and this could have been another Orange Bowl like score. But VT clawed back, leaders were leading by example (Evans, Rogers, Cam on offense) and the defense found a way to grind back into the game and get the stop we needed to give us a chance.
As bowl season approaches, watch to see how teams react to not being where they thought they deserved to be. Don't be surprised to see Michigan lay a giant egg or PSU get bounced hard because they thought they deserved more. I fully expect this VT team to come out like a caged animal and absolutely maul the Razorbacks because they WANT to fight together again.
Quoted for truth.
I'm still extremely upset that the Hokies couldn't bring this one home. After Venerables called that one formation in the 3rd quarter where the linemen didn't rush, and Bucky got the 42 yd reception, I wanted Fuente and Co. to make Clemson pay dearly for that arrogance. They almost did, but almost doesn't count. Ever.
My first thought when I saw that play was, "This should take Venables out of the running for the Broyles award." It was just such a bizarre, untimely, and costly call to make. If we had won, that would be one of the moments Clemson fans talked about as losing them the game. I just really can't get over the weirdness of not rushing anyone on your All-ACC D line on third down.
What I didn't understand, and maybe French can dive deeper into this, is why they didn't just rush 3. In my armchair analysis, it looked like Clemson's gameplan was solid: be sound in your assingments, rush to contain Evans, and live with the results. A few time they got to him, they were not doing anything other than that. And then up 21 and VT on life support, you drop 11!! ELEVEN!! And just dare him to beat you AND leave Bucky single covered on top of that? That was either arrogance or stupidity or both.
I was actually being coaxed out of my house by a few Clemson buddies to watch the second half at a bar. Not wanting to listen to a Clemson coronation party after Motu's pick stalled and Clemson scored on the ensuing drive, I watched a bit more from my couch. Once I saw that play and the way VT was playing with a big "Fuck you Clemson" attitude, I went out. Needless to say the good times did not last for VT fans, but Clemson fans were getting a bit tight after VT got the stop and the ball back.
I have no idea why they didn't rush three outside of Venables thinking 100% confidently that we were going to throw a screen or a short pass. Even in that situation, it was weird.
EDIT: Found an article about it. Some good quotes in here but for some reason I couldn't copy and paste anything. Venables and Carlos Watkins claim some or someones were supposed to blitz on delay based on coverage assignments but nobody did. Additionally, there is an excellent reference where Ben Boulware says Bucky is 7'5".
I can't see that formation meaning anything other than FUVT. Total disrespect.
I try not to take anything in a football game that I am watching on the TV in a personal way, but I did get a flavor of disrespect with that play and I was stoked when VT made them pay for it.
It took me back to to Stanford/VT with Harbaugh's ridiculous pre-snap motions....
That play along with a couple plays later when Travon housed it and Tankersley gave the weakest little shove at him as he ran by and carried another Tiger into the end zone. The shove wasn't even toward the sideline. It felt like the Clemson defense was playing like the game was already over. If i was a clemson fan I would have been so mad about that drive because it's what got the Hokies back in the game. I wanted so badly for us to make them pay and make them remember that drive for years, but alas we couldn't quite do it. We did at least make them sweat, so we had that going for us.
which is nice
Joe,
This post was a well written summary of how the TKP Hokie fan base feels about the state of the program one year into the Fuente regime. The idea of a progress report got me thinking: Would you consider having all of your key contributors do an assessment of the program (or parts of the program) one year into the transition as an end-of-season project? It could even be a multi-part series: State of the Offense, Defense, Special Teams, Recruiting, Facilities, Staff, etc. I don't think I have seen a comprehensive dive into the program from any online source, and I think the readers here would eat up that kind of content. It would provide an interesting benchmark at the end of each season that we could go back and easily reference to gauge progress over time. Just a thought. Keep up the great work and Go Hokies!
I really like this idea.
Start with an assessment of Whit.
Won't be a long article, just the following image...
Amen my man, Amen!
i'm drunk! Have at it!
@TKP staff - did I miss it? Where's the ACCCG game analysis? FRENCH DON'T LET ME DOWN