Recent Comments
Being at the bottom of the SEC would still be better than being in the middle of the ACC.
Is it though?
If we had SEC backing and SEC money, we would probably be on the verge of being a breakout basketball program if not already there given where we are and the additional money we would be bringing in. Cassell and Lane would have state of the art upgrades, and we'd be the unquestioned top dog in both revenue sports in Virginia.
We might be middle of the pack SEC, but middle of the pack SEC still has national title aspirations every year in both football and basketball. Right now, we might be further away from both than we have been at any point this century.
Read this on my commute to work this morning. If Whit is smart he'll point to this being picked up by major media during his presentation to the BOV. He absolutely needs to stress how critical this juncture is and the fact that people outside of our sphere are discussing it may be helpful to his narrative.
Well, no. Since 2012, the Hokies have hit or cleared that bar only twice, most recently in 2017. The team was consistently excellent from the mid 1990s through 2011, but the last 15 years or so have not been as kind.
To anyone wondering how we got to this point, you get what you pay for. Our school thought they could own a Ferrari on a Honda's budget. In order to win 9 games you need to pay for a program capable of winning 9 games, and when we routinely fund our athletics at one of the worst rates in the conference, it doesn't fucking matter how much history or tradition we have, we're going to have disappointing results.
This is a topic discussed ad nauseam on TKP for probably 10 years now. We don't budget enough money to have the results that are expected of us. We're so obsessed with never running in the red that we have been trying to win in college sports with one hand tied behind our back for the last 25+ years. In an environment that has routinely showed those who spend money tend to rake in more money long term, we decided to stop taking risks and play it safe.
We are exactly where we deserve to be right now.
I never said we'd be middle of the pack in the SEC. I said we'd be a pesky team that would win about half our games each year - when 3 or 4 of those are non-con then what we're really talking about is 2 or 3 wins in the conference, which likely isn't going to be "middle of the pack" - so we would basically be at the same station in the SEC that we are currently in the ACC but with better funding and access to better recruits and resources our program would still be elevated on the whole. We wouldn't be losing games to ODU - those would be cake-walk warm-up games most years and, at worst, nail-biters that the refs help us win (because #SEC just means more) in bad years. We would be a better team overall, with better resourcing and more potential to hit on a homerun coach or nab a couple under-the-radar recruits that help us make some noise once a decade or something. That would still be WAY better than where we are now. Being at the bottom of the SEC would still be better than being in the middle of the ACC. That's what I'm trying to say
At this point treat it like a major incident at any major web based company.
- - Immediate mitigation of the issue. All hands on deck to do whatever is necessary to get ourselves back on stable ground.
- - Develop a long term fix and enact policies to ensure we don't stray back into bad habits.
- - Determine how this was allowed to happen and implement reporting to ensure we are proactively aware of any developing issues before they become a problem down the line.
- - If necessary, replace individuals who actively encouraged decisions that directly led to the error, or were so far in over their heads that their own incompetence allowed it to happen.
in 2006, the ACC per team revenue share was the highest of all the Power conferences.
Not only was the ACC the highest per team revenue in 2006, but I believe they were the highest for like decades straight. The ACC basketball tournament was considered the greatest money make in college sports through the 80s and 90s.
And then the SEC-ESPN mega deal went into effect soon after that, and the race was on.
I really think of the BTN launching as being the big change agent - which happened the following year, and led to the B10 immediately jumping the ACC in revenue.
Matt Brown - the foremost expert in the back office of college sports - just published a piece titled Virginia Tech just spelled out the math behind college football's future.
Nothing new, but I highly recommend giving a full read - especially if you didn't want to read the slides/thread one by one.
The excerpt I think we all personally identify with most:
According to the projections, the biggest financial bumps start to kick in once Virginia Tech wins nine games or more. At nine wins, the program could reasonably expect five games on network TV, leading to more eyeballs, and thus, a larger cut of conference revenue distributions. The revenue difference between eight wins and nine wins, based just on how the school is modeling ACC revenue distribution probabilities, is over a million bucks.
If you're about my age (I'm 38), that doesn't seem like a particularly outrageous expectation. Virginia Tech wins nine games all the time, right?
Well, no. Since 2012, the Hokies have hit or cleared that bar only twice, most recently in 2017. The team was consistently excellent from the mid 1990s through 2011, but the last 15 years or so have not been as kind.
In which case I STILL don't want to play them.
Yes, please.
Let's be honest, though. We'd have more money, and be recruiting better, but we'd be in a conference where everyone had more money, and recruited better.
If we're saying that we are capable of stepping it up among people with similar resources, we should be able to do that in the ACC.
I agree that we'd have more resources and be more competitive if we had SEC resources, but if we could be middle of the pack in the SEC, why aren't we able to do that in the ACC, where the competition is also hamstrung? Though that's changing, and we're going to have to fight a bit harder to be in the "haves" category.
The TSL pod had an episode in the last year or so where they mentioned that in 2006, the ACC per team revenue share was the highest of all the Power conferences. This was right after the expansion was completed and we were being hailed as a super league for adding Miami and VT to pair with FSU and Clemson. And then the SEC-ESPN mega deal went into effect soon after that, and the race was on.
the department/university became complacent.
I think it was less complacency, and more... lacking creativity or foresight? The Weaver/Steger administration could not fathom the 2025 reality of college sports. If you time traveled 15 years back in time and explained the new reality to them, you'd be laughed out of the room. The idea that the ACC could fall apart was laughable. In 2010, each ACC team brought in $12.9m before any post season paycheck. The idea that in 15 years that number would triple(!!!) but the ACC would be such a mess that it had to resort to unequal revenue sharing would be insane.
Meanwhile, the SEC and B10 were continuously pushing boundaries.
it feels like everyone felt the school had finally checked all the boxes necessary to have a successful program and we just needed to be patient; a NC would eventually happen.
I mean, we literally had an empty trophy case sitting there for 15 years. I think you nailed it.
I do wonder how much did Weaver's fight with Parkinsons factor as a distraction late in his tenure
I don't think it had anything to do with Parkinsons. Weaver was of a different era and had a different mindset. He could not fathom a reality where an exec from MGM resorts or the COO of Rock Nation are hired to be conference commissioners.
Exactly. As long as you have a committee of board members that is less than a quorum, you can discuss business all day long. That's typically how business gets done with public entity boards - committees and then one on ones between board members/staff. So no I don't think the board is hearing any of this for the first time, but this is definitely the first of the official public discourse on the topic with the board as a full body. I don't also see any action items requested so this will just be the beginning of the discussion which will move into budget season for next year. So some good discussion should come out of this but don't expect any official action for a while.
They did that while they were both still here.
I agree with this. It wasn't just being too loyal with staff, the department/university became complacent.
See my previous comment. Changes needed to begin during Weaver's tenure.
Looking back, it feels like everyone felt the school had finally checked all the boxes necessary to have a successful program and we just needed to be patient; a NC would eventually happen.
I do wonder how much did Weaver's fight with Parkinsons factor as a distraction late in his tenure
I would argue these things and more needed to happen during Weaver's tenure.
The department became complacent during the success of the 2000's and the results began to show during the 2012 season.
I tend to agree with #2.
The athletic did a pole of a bunch of miscellaneous coaches across the power five, and they all said that the SEC has a prestige or cachet associated with it that allows mid schools to punch above their weight class.
I also think that based on where we're located geographically, we offer unique appeal to kids from Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, etc who want to play for an SEC school, but may not want to live in the deep south/be immersed in the culture of the deep south.
This assumes that the influx of funds would be handled responsibly.
And I fear we'd be moving "tax brackets" but still in the same relative spot in the crowd.
As has been pointed out about VA law, our past "commitment" to athletics, and decisions made, I'm not sure we vault up the totem pole. We'd be in new air for us, but breathing the same air as USCe and Mizzou...
Careful what we ask for...
qb accuracy
who was the QB coach?
Very nice guy
throwing snowballs at UPS trucks
I mean, that sounds like a lot of fun and I'm sure it was (mostly) harmless but something about throwing snowballs at UPS trucks just seems antithetical to *being a very nice guy*
two big reasons
1. The cashflow we would have in the SEC compared to the ACC would enable us to go out and purchase better coaches and players so that we could compete. We just don't have the finances to keep up even in the ACC. Having that nice SEC media check would bolster us tremendously
2. The reputation of the SEC would make recruiting 100X easier and we would be able to bring in the types of athletes we would need to be competitive. The biggest challenge we'd have is competing against other SEC schools. I'm not trying to pretend that we'd suddenly be on Florida's or Alabama's level just by joining. But surely we'd be competitive with the tier that includes Missouri, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, SCAR, Ole Miss, Auburn, and Miss St. The worst team in the SEC would probably finish middle of the ACC regularly, and challenge for the league occasionally. Right now, we're not even capable of doing that. But with SEC money and recruiting chops, even if we were the worst team in the SEC, we'd still be better than we are today.
Gosnell
OL and qb accuracy..
But then lane was only wr that was able to get open
1 and 2 are insanely difficult to do. Can't just double revenue lol.