Recent Comments

I got refunded most of my VAT from my recent trip to Ireland - does UK have similar policies? Because that's basically the difference between which is more expensive.

Well you just deflated his whole theory...

Oh wow. I need to know what bar that is.

I find the argument interesting that the current recruiting malaise isn't based on Beamer's age. Okay, then why?

1. Recruiting isn't slipping. Okay, fine. I guess you can believe that if you want.
2. VT has a staff of bad recruiters. Maybe true, but we have consciously been trying to improve that. So we kinda failed.
3. VT's on field performance is the most significant factor. Very likely, but you need better players to fix that. And let's say we have a great 2015, that likely would have a minimal improvement on the next recruiting class. So that then puts that "win equity" into the 2017 class, with Beamer another year older.

So, we've been shit for three years, we don't have the best recruiting staff and our coach is going to turn 69 this year. Not much you can do about that but grit your teeth and bear it.

Nailed It!! We can't expect to get high 4* and 5* wr's te's rb's skill players because our offense is poor and has been mentioned as boring/not explosive enough.

Yeah we get an occasional top WR or RB but for every top WR/RB/ATH you get there will be 2 Joel Caleb's. However when you get 3-4 top WR/RB a recruiting class the miss of that 1 top WR/RB that didn't work out goes unnoticed because other 4-5* players worked and slotted into his position.

When Beamer was Saban's age, those questions already existed and were already hovering around the program. What is happening now is nothing new, its just the same rehashed bullshit that goes on every year, and the main difference between now and what was going on in 2010 is that we had a scrambling QB leading the way that did just enough on offense behind a terrible Offensive Line to put enough points on the board to allow the defense to keep winning. Once O'Cain's coaching got exposed with Logan's struggles, the issues with the awful coaching by Newsome for the Offensive Line became damning, and throw in an uncharacteristically mediocre defense, and things snowballed a bit.

But here's the thing. We're recruiting better now than we were in the years that led to those teams. We have more energy and excitement with this program than I can recall at any point in the past 10 years. Our depth chart looks to have more talent spread throughout both sides of the ball than we've had since the early to mid 2000s. If Frank is on retirement's doorstep, it sure as hell ain't showing in the actions of the program over the last couple years. In fact, if anything, I'd argue the program is showing the signs of a rejuvenated coach that is leading a program head on into a changing environment putting together the pieces for yet another run at the conference. Definitely not the energy of a coaching staff preparing to send out its leader of nearly 30 years.

Beamer needs to be out on the road more in order for Tech to have better success on the recruiting trail. With that said, there are only certain windows on the recruiting calendar when he can do so. This year was an outlier with his health. How aggressive he is on the road during the lead up to national signing day 2016 will indicate to me how much emphasis he is putting towards recruiting.

I do remember him doing an in-home with McLaughlin in 2013 that wrapped him up for Tech.

As much as it's unfair, his health can't be an excuse again either. College football coach is a year-round, 24-hour-a-day job. Frank has to put in the effort during the offseason, and if his health becomes an issue he has to prioritize that for his own sake and Tech's benefit.

It was a crazy, awesome last few minutes of the game, by my memory. Until that point, I recall that game being less than amazing.

Stupid question or not, it's the question every family asks. It's clearly not all in the coaches control.

By probability, Beamer/Spurrier may not be at their school any longer than Larry Fedora or Dave Doerren. But it's the perception. "If I get you to commit, I will win more games and be there for five more years" says Larry Fedora. "If my health is good, I'll be there five more years" says Beamer. It's different. There is at least the perception that Fedora controls his situation whereas Beamer doesn't. Thus, a greater sense of instability.

soon as saban has a team that is near .500 the questions will pop up. Until then age won't be used against him.

Yeah, that's what I said. Did I phrase that so it wasn't clear?

The 5 year window is the key window. So Saban being 5 years younger than Beamer puts him in a completely different tier. I get your point, Saban isn't young by any means and those questions will start to come up. But he's not facing the same type of age-based scrutiny as Beamer or Spurrier.... yet.

it makes sense to recruits. they want to see offenses that have WRs as a focal point. we can't sell that. maybe in two years we can if Ford keeps developing like you and I think he could, but until then what do we really have to sell other than PT and hypotheticals?