Recent Comments

If there's a rule change that should be implemented, it's that if the QB doesn't actually throw the ball when he's spiking it, then it's intentional grounding or a fumble. That's the only thing that bothers me about the game that I think needs a rule change.

It's kind of tough to get a solid measurement with him since every time someone even thinks about him he grows an inch.

Dammit.... 1-0 Canada seconds into the 2nd

Are there alternate streaming sites? The NBC Olympics site isn't working for me.

Why would you point to Rector Field House as an example? The fact that the team practices there is a joke and is extremely inconvenient. It has been publicly stated as such on many occasions. The fact that the team practices across the street now, in Rector Field House nonetheless, obviously does not support continuing to do so.

With the exception of kick off coverage..none of your photos show 100 yards being used. Most of your photos show people standing around observing. You still havn't convinced me that we need x3 100 yard football fields.

You also pointed to how several big schools have multiple 100 yard fields, but not all of the major programs do. Yes, you're right, larger, southern schools, with lots of real estate, tend to have lots of football fields. What you failed to mention is that every school with multiple fields has located them all directly adjacent to one another. That is not a coincidence my friend. It is a necessity to hold efficient football practices.

All of Alabama's fields are directly adjacent to one another.
All of Auburn's fields are directly adjacent to one another.
All of LSU's fields are directly adjacent to one another.
Texas, has 3 small fields, and an indoor field, and they are all directly adjacent to one another.
Oregon has 1 full size outside field, 2 tiny outside fields, and a full size indoor field. All directly adjacent to one another.

I will also comment on how many of these bigger programs practice fields are further away from their stadiums. In my opinion, VT's particular arrangement, although relatively "light"on real estate, is pretty cool. I like how the practice fields, locker room, weight room, etc are all in the shadow of Lane Stadium. I like how the "Home of the Hokies" on the back of the score board is a prominent visual for the entire football footprint. LSU, as another example, has 4 full length football fields but they practice in the middle of fields across a busy street from their central campus. Texas' practice facilities are located adjacent to and under a busy highway.

"I seriously doubt that almost all D1 universities have multiple fields" - False. Most D1 universities do not have multiple 100 yard outdoor practice football fields. Most SEC schools with more real estate do.

What is factual is that almost all D1 universities have multipel fields directly adjacent to one another. VT made the correct choice to do the same.

Miller put 3 guys from PH in the ambulance when I was coaching there in '99. Physical freak!!!!!

They explored locations. Not design solutions. I appreciate the determination of these locations was made by people that know the university better than anyone and why they felt they were the ones to be considered. After doing that though, they scored those locations on an Evaluation Matrix and made a final decision when it should have gone through a design process first. As I stated with regards to the Cassell Lot option, one of it's biggest negatives was that it "created a poor entry sequence". How would anyone know this without seeing a design solution? the are assuming something in there mind that frankly they are not experienced enough to do. Once the steering committee got it down to, for example, top 3 (or even 5) options for locations it should have gone to a design process. maybe someone could have come up with something for another option that would be a better solution than compromising the 2 existing practice fields. How could you know without seeing it? Instead they choose a final option that created a problem that didn't exist previously.

And who said Frank isn't pissed. He all but begged for it to be in the woods and not on the existing fields. His second option was the tennis courts. perhaps he was told that the logistics and cost of moving them was too much to bear so backed Frank into a corner where he had to compromise. Did that happen? I don't know. But no one here does. If the choice was 'well Frank, we can put it on Chicken Hill or Sterrett Complex, because we won't spend to do anything else" and Beamer compromised does that mean he is not pissed about it? Just because he doesn't come out publicly and say "i'm pissed" doesn't mean he isn't. I'm not saying he is or isn't. Quite simply he wanted it to be somewhere other than on the existing fields. He didn't get it. Do you think he is happy about that?

Again I may end up loving the building but I absolutely do not like how the decision was made.

Also I don't really know any team that practices on fields that are half grass and half turf. The idea of garage like doors is novel but what are the practical issues of these two converted fields. Do players bring both sets of cleats to practice and when they are running a route stop and change cleats before continuing into the indoor facility? When they break into position drills on those nice weather days with the doors open do QB's change cleats after the opening talk to go practice in the indoor facility? And then again to go run plays back on the grass? Seems like as much of a time waster as walking across a street, especially for anyone with an ankle/foot injury that requires taping.

I don't mean to downplay the proximity issue. I know it's the primary "want" of the project but without at least exploring options for alternate solutions and really seeing them you may not know what is really acceptable to you in terms of distance. And as I said Beamer was good for the distance to the tennis court option, which is at least the same distance if not more to the Cassell Lot option. So if he was OK for one why not the other?

Anyway, my main gripe is on how the made this decision. I dislike that it took away the opportunity to at least see creative solutions to the problem. I also dislike that the compromise they made created a problem for the football team that did not exist previously.

I disagree with the rule. Sometimes you have instances when it comes down to who not has the best players, but who has the best strategy. Football is a lot of X's and O's, and teams with less overall "talent" can beat better teams because they have a better game plan.

I mean, sure, this rule would probably benefit VT in the long run given that we are usually a defensive team, but isn't it more satisfying that you beat an opponents best?

Poor Caleb. Already forgotten.

Preventing a 9th second snap would prevent an offense from trapping a defense in the process of swapping out players during a substitution.
You can prep to substitute then have the guys get off the field while new ones come on, not drawing a 5 yd penalty.

Unless you planned for it. Then, it could be designed that way.

Thank you. Understood about the difference, best friend is an architect, we've had this very discussion regarding building a brewery with rooftop beer garden.

Cost, cost, cost.

I don't think either one of is saying that this is not the case. But we are obviously sitting on either side of the fence. To be honest I would not use design build contracts for anything other than infrastructure projects. I personally believe that there is a design process that must be followed to achieve the best results. Designers design project. Engineers construct project. Contractors build projects.

I have seen the work of brilliant engineers and contractors, and have seen first hand how much they can contribute to any project. But I think these 3 skill sets achieve the best results when they are left separate and not housed together under one contract.

Inherently there is a need for these sides to conflict so that different perspectives come to bear. The weight of the separate contracts ensures that the various sides will push the other to be better. I believe that this is the only way to get the best finished product, no matter how frustrated I sometimes get at the weekly meetings.