Recent Comments
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." So did Ike Whitacre.
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." Heck, I'd even take two 7 or 8 win seasons to get to the MNC.
I'd gladly take an appearance in playoff #1, though.
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." I've heard that the bad season motivated their players to train extra hard during the off-season. They said something along the lines of never letting that happen again and that they were sick of losing.
I was originally in the let's give JJ some time camp; but I am moving toward the I don't think he can do it camp. I think we have better players this year than last year; but we are playing worse. If Raines is sitting to give younger players a chance to develop, why isn't Eddie sitting. He is not contributing recently. See if a younger player can contribute in his spot.
Wish him the best of luck in philly
To say sg "wasn't a good coach" is ridiculous imo. In the end the measure of a coach comes down to wins and losses. sg was a winner. Yes, he had 2 poor seasons in the ACC at 4-12 (wouldn't we like to see that this year). The other 6 seasons he was a combined 12 games over. 500. That is a winner and therefore a "good" coach. With each passing year I think we well see how good of a coach he was. Btw, I would argue there was stiffer competition then the current level of play in the ACC today - there are some really mediocre teams in the conference this year and last. Call him an a**hole, not a team player, whatever but you can't justify calling him "not a good coach" imo
Those chances haven't really paid off.
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." 10 wins as a stepping stone makes sense in that it creates higher ongoing expectations for the program. When a team expects to win 10 games, it makes perfect sense that they get rid of their offensive coaches after a 7-6 season. Which is the type of "risk" I think you are referring to here.
The element of luck cannot be overstated. A few big time players can make all the difference in the world.
The last part is $. Our program just doesn't rake in the $ that some other ones do and that makes everything more difficult (coaches salaries, recruiting footprint). See the Hokie Club thread. If there was a similar thread on a Bama or even a Clemson blog, it would look different. I am not hating at all with that last comment, just saying that resources are of paramount importance and that the program and staff are doing an amazing job with the resources they have.
Other than coaching changes (which most folks agree should have happened earlier but they did happen and could have easily been delayed and would have at other programs), what are the risks we are not taking?
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." Agree with this. If we had to survive a 3-9 year to have a MNC the next, I'd do it.
I say all that mainly out of jealousy. I mean, it's quite amazing how passionate they are. My wife and i always jokes that of we wanted to start an instantly successful business in BTR, we would just: a) put "Tiger" in the name, b) make the business colors purple and gold, and/or c) sell LSU paraphernalia inside regardless of our business purpose.
Kyle swatting away the McCarron pass to
Exactly. LSU has the entire state in its grasp for CFB attention. In fact, they have a 5-6 hour radius all to themselves for d1 sports. Bama and aTm are the closest. Tulane doesn't count. The vast majority of fans did not go there, but the culture of the area to people immigrate to the area is" Love LSU, or forever be an outsider." Because the vast majority of people from there never leave, the school is an extension on their state-cultural-pride. It's quite borg-ish.
By comparison, we share fans (revenue) with several other reputable/popular (even la ball cop U) universities IN THE SAME STATE who have good/great sports programs. Not to mention the number of other big schools outside the state that are within a 5-6 hour radius: UNC, Duke, NCState, MD, Clemson, UT, Wake, WVU...
That's a lot of revenue dispersed over many schools, even considering the increased popultions in our area.
This is exactly my thought.
Don't do it, David! You have so much to live for!
Oh wait, you're a NY Giant.
Eh, fair enough. Make a smart decision.
This isn't directed at you, Duffman, but this was a convenient place to put this response...
Listen, folks, loyalty is good. You should be as loyal to your people as they are to you, and Frank is the first one to extend that opportunity. We all know that Frank has been loyal to a fault, but he has made changes. The fact of the matter is that he kept bad coaches around for too long because of loyalty. But I think the reason they stayed around so long was because they weren't good enough to be hired away. I would think that, if I were in Frank's shoes, I'd want to keep all my guys if they were being recruited away by other staffs (see: Bud, Grimes). But if they aren't being recruited away, how good are they?
The reality is that we didn't make the best hires in the past. They stayed because it was their best option and we didn't have the cash to pony up for someone else.
I just started working on a cloud application where our minimum requirements are IE9. We support IE9-IE11 and Chrome (its the only supported browser on Macs). I don't get why the poster above can get Firefox but not Chrome. But at least we killed the possibility of someone using IE8 in all its Trident-inspired tomfoolery. Or if they did try and use it, they get what they get with no support for us.
If you use IE7, I feel bad for you, son. I support 99 browser but not that primitive one.
I'm ok with selling the stadium name to a corporation but only if the corporation is VT related. So, let's say some of our ChemEs and EEs build the next great energy company building the best solar panels on the market, ushering in a new era of energy generation. I'd be happy to have their name on the building.
🎸OG LEG KING 🎸
|
12 years 6 months
# | "...especially with a weak non-conference schedule that includes Navy, Virginia Tech and Cincinnati..." This is why I'm not weighing in on this thread. I have my opinions, and I'm reading others', but honestly every time someone posts about the Hokies not getting respect, it just sets us up for the same battles to be re-hashed. Everyone here is making reasonable points on both sides of why we should or shouldn't have the reputation we do, etc. But you know what? None of it matters. All of us will be watching the VT-tOSU game, cheering for the good guys to win. That's what being a fan is. Maybe we'll win, maybe we'll lose, but we'll all be watching and hoping.
Moss has been great in DC. Rogers was great when we had Ryan Clark and Sean Taylor, RIP. Letting Ryan Clark go to the Steelers was one of the worst personnel moves we've ever made. The entire secondardy is still suffering from those losses. If we still had Clark, with DHall, the other safety and CB spots could be must more functional, even with our current personnel.
I now have a goal in life.
I donate to the Virginia Tech foundation for the purposes of the College of Engineering.
I love Hokie football, but I love education more and engineering is our bread and butter.
Former Hokie walk-on here. Having known many D1 athletes (at VT and elsewhere), the "piece of the pie" argument never seemed to be an issue, except with high profile/publicized players, which is usually a very small percentage of the entire athlete department as a whole. Generally, most everyone I knew seemed more than content with getting a free ride (except me, a walk-on), the perks and fan/student worship, and opportunity to showcase their talents to maybe get drafted. It was only when someone would put that bug in your ear of being undervalued/slighted that the resentment may start to creep in your mind.
Honestly, the NCAA has tried to make it a even playing field for every school, and nobody is handcuffing student-athletes to make them stay in school if they feel so undervalued. If a student-athlete feels like they are being "taken advantage of" and wants to see their true market value, OR just doesn't think school is for them, they could try out for The Canadian Football League, arena leagues, and semi-pro leagues all have age requirements of 18 or 19. I think the current system is ok. Tuition, room and board to potentially finish a graduate degree depending on redshirts, avoiding having to pay student loan interest on all of that (I never see anybody mention this), as well as training and skills to potentially become a professional.
My only suggestion would to have an NCAA-paid health insurance benefit that's fully funded while still a participant, then available at an extremely low premium (based on number of months as a participant) after playing days are over. All of the conferences/schools would have to contribute based on number of NCAA athletes. This fictional NCAA Insurance Department would create dozens of jobs at NCAA HQ, and jobs in regions/universities, and make athletes and their families happier, and save the economy. The end.
