Recent Comments

I look at it this way. Anyone comparing it to Season 1 is going to be disappointed. Not only because of the greatness of the first season, but because you have seen the first season in its entirety, so it is fleshed out and complete. Comparing the two, at this point, is unfair to this season for two reaons:

1. It is essentially a different show. The only similarities are the title, Nic Pizzolatto, and the style of the opening credits. If you watch it as a new series you can better judge it on its own merits.
2. We are only two episodes in, so we have no idea how well it will turn out. I would much rather prefer an episode or two of exposition and world building that leads to eventual awesomeness, than to have the first two episodes
end up being the best of the series. I thought this season was going to be a slow-burn, but the end or the second episode basically said, "Sike!"

I don't get why everyone is so down on the second season. I didn't watch the first season until a couple of weeks ago because I couldn't get through the first couple of episodes. I think that is just how the writer writes and I have no doubt things are going to pick up quickly from here on out. I was already more interested during the second episode of this season than I was the first episode.

With the roster we're assembling, within a couple seasons, I absolutely think this could be the case. We are bringing in the talent to get to this level, now we just have to actually do it.

The name of that school doesn't provide a lot of confidence for anything. (Totally just based on the name and knowing nothing about them.)

Although I absolutely agree that there's no reason why we shouldn't be in the top 15 or top 20 every year in rankings and that we have let a lot of high quality recruits slip away, college recruiting has changed a lot. No longer are programs focusing on in-state kids as their top priority; we now have Florida State and Alabama using states across the South and the nation as their recruiting grounds. One of our biggest problems is not looking more out-of-state for top recruits, however we are doing much better at that now with Scot Loeffler (you can criticize his coaching but disregarding his recruiting is a mistake) and we have been able to lay a pipeline in Florida (Luther Maddy and Dwayne Lawson come to mind).

You're missing the point. I don't have an issue with playing OSU. But as it is, VT had one of the tougher non-conf schedules in the country last year with ECU, W&M, and directional Michigan on the schedule.

When virtually no one else is scheduling three (let alone, as someone suggested, four) power-5 non-conf games, it's not advantageous in any way right now to want to play that kind of schedule unless that's the norm and it's not.

Now I do believe that we are going to see playing 10 reg season power-5 games become the norm among teams that want to compete for a playoff spot. You can see that VT anticipates that as well by looking at future scheduling. But to play 14 and have the the 4 non-conf games be all top 25 programs? No.

Please find anywhere I've ever said FB doesn't care about recruiting and doesn't do anything to recruit. You won't find anything. I will say that he isn't very good at it and doesn't spend the required amount of time doing it to have a top tier program though.

It's not the criticisms, Alum has lots of great points as do many others, about a wide range of issues they see with the program. It's your continued use of one liners based on no actual facts that FB doesn't care about recruiting and doesn't do anything to recruit.

Edit: I replied to your comment I didn't realize I had already used it once in this thread.

Pages