Recent Comments
After some of the hype regarding this season, I will believe it when I see it.
They defintely could use a run on linebackers. With the current talent available (Both Van Dykes, Cole, McKinnon) at whip and so little depth elsewhere, if Edmunds stays at tailback I would not be shocked to see Ronny Van Dyke end up at backer at some point. Perhaps sooner than later if Edwards has a Bruce Taylor/Barquell Rivers damaged goods type of recovery. Backer requires more lateral movement and coverage responsibilty. We know Van Dyke can cover and take on blocks when he isn't playing robotically. His body certainly can grow into the position. I wouldn't be stunned to see it happen, especially with Williams and Clarke more suited for mike.
Are currently on vacation somewhere in Costa Rica. They'll be coming back after the bowl game if they think it is safe. I hear they live somewhere near Hooville.
too bad we can't recruit linebackers as well as DL and DB ... looking better but lots of misses over the years
As I wrote for Gobbler Country, the 2013 class is loaded with defensive backs and I sincerely hope that rather than to redshirt, maybe the staff can go ahead and let them get as much reps as possible to get them up to speed. With the starting secondary slated to return intact, Frye, Coles, and the other who have sat on the bench, I think the secondary can be the best since the group of Fuller-Rouse-Parker left. Maybe I'm mixing up the wrong class, but I honestly think with the talents coming in defensively, it may be the next best defense Foster will get to coach.
Now if only the coaches can land some offensive talents...
rocco is EXACTLY right .. this is why espn tells the big12 to stick it .. this is why the big12 hasn't expanded yet .. because they're a bunch of greedy bastards .. and it could do some of them in long term (texas will always have a golden parachute, oklahoma too)
Who are these O'Cainspring supporters you speak of?
Unless the OC at Oregon is getting a HC job, going anywhere else would be a downgrade.
No way does CFB leave after a garbage season like that, or even before his contract is up.
Lets just squash that rumor now please.
Duane Brown is one of the best OL in the NFL today.
Jeff King is a starter and has been since his 2nd season in the league.
Will Montgomery has been a starter for the last 2 seasons.
Josh Morgan has been a starter for the last 4 seasons, except for missing much of last year injured.
Eddie Royal started for most of his first 4 seasons in the league, but not this year.
Michael Vick's road has been well documented, currently riding the bench since Foles came in and played well after Vick's concussion, and the Eagles are having another bad year.
Ryan Williams would be starting for the Cardinals if he would stop getting injured.
David Wilson is currently starting due to injuries ahead of him.
So, depending on how you look at it, anywhere from 4 to 8 of them. Which is a good bit.
|
13 years 6 months
# | An Unlikely Candidate for Offensive Coordinator but a Good One: Chris Klenakis LT3 needs to sit down and watch highlights of RG3 this offseason. If this is the type of offense we plan to run, Logan needs to get better at running it along witht the rbs and o line. My main point is that he needs to let the ball go in to rbs hands a lot more times than he does to set up the keeper/ play action fake. RG3 runs this to perfection, he sets up the keeper with just handing off the dive almost everytime, also he we will fake the dive and pull up quick pass or long bomb to wide open wr everytime. Logan and our offense need to sit down and watch the Redskins run this offense and go out make 2013 a special year for us.
I have it before and will say it again, why doesnt beamer go after the O line coach and offensive coordinator at oregon? Their system works, and they recruit the players that fit the system, we run the same type of offense or at least attempting to, take a page from the Redskins with rg3 as well. Also how many of those peopel on that list are starting in the nfl? Im thinking not that many...
Better scouting each week for teams ahead. I love it.
Here here.
I liked the article, makes me hopeful.
Spot on!!
ESPN is already paying for the ACC teams. They've signed a long-term deal with the ACC and are going to write large checks to the conference over the next 12 years. They already have those schools as content. Adding FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 would devalue their ACC asset while increasing their Big 12 asset, and you can't even say it would be a wash because the Big 12 has a TV deal with FOX. Which is why it makes sense that the TV partners would only consider ND to be the team that adds value, because that would give the networks access to programming they don't have right now. It would also kill their contract to carry the Orange Bowl if there isn't a marketable team left in the ACC. Yeah, a Texas/FSU game may have value, but you'd also be adding FSU/Kansas. Keep in mind that it was after the Big East rejected ESPN's contract offer and suggested they would try to negotiate with NBCSN that the ACC was told to add Syracuse and Pitt to improve their contract.
As for ESPN and the LHN, they can't get the LHN going in Texas; why would they want to try and get it in FL right now? If they can't get mass carriage in Texas where UT is the biggest program, good luck getting carriage in FL.
Why ESPN would tell them that they wouldn't get more money from expansion. If they take, for example, FSU and Clemson, that will expand their base dramatically, getting the Longhorn network in millions of homes on the east coast at roughly $.40 per month. There's no way they couldn't use that as leverage for better tv rights.
I also see that they have a "gentlemen's agreement" of sorts with the SEC stating that neither conference will expand beyond their current states, but in this day and age nobody in college football is acting very gentlemanly.
Wouldn't be that great.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/21177715/why-t...
"A conference championship game doesn't make much financial sense. One media consultant says such a game would be worth only $700,000-$1 million a year per school. Not an insignificant amount, but worth having to split with two more mouths to feed?"
The other issue for the Big 12 if they were to expand is that they wouldn't make more money doing so. Emails from Chuck Neinas to other members of the conference said the conference was told by ESPN that only ND would get them more money. Adding more teams would mean they would have to divide the pie further.
I realize people here want the ACC to collapse so VT can run to the SEC guilt-free, but it's not a given that the Big 12 is going to be adding teams any time soon.
Put on some VT wrestling or T&F or a softball game or something. I might actually watch it. Otherwise, it's just sucking the football money down the drain.
Maybe I didn't explain myself too well. Up through 2003, they weren't really any better than us. 2004 they started improving, as those numbers illustrate well, but even so, it wasn't until these past 3 years that they have been a truly top-tier offense. Still better than us though.
BTW, I didn't have the actual rankings by year, I was looking at total yardage output. Not that it really affects much, just cleans it up a bit
🍪 🐶 COOKIES 4 LIFE!
|
13 years 6 months
# | Thoughts on Aaron McFarling's "Time for a change at Tech" Column helping you prove your point :)
(yes, I'm being hopeful) must be what the recruiting base (state) will support. We believe, and most want, a power-ball control offense (ala Alabama). However, look at the linemen VA, MD, NC, SC and PA produce. Most are undersized and "projects". However, there is an outstanding amount of skill position players...who usual leave the state (which is a different issue). Foster has been successful because his system is built around his players. That's also why we don't put too many defenders in the NFL (also why we put so many DBs there...the "skill position" players on defenese). I gotta vote for an up tempo/quick hitting style of offense that doesn't require the OL to drive block or hold blocks for a long time (re: our idiotic slow developing plays which NEVER work). Don't know if that means Oregon, Clemson, Nevada, etc style...just the "feel" of the offense needs to be exact and determined.
Someone told me CFB will retire after signing day.
It seems plausible that, rather than make the tough decisions to let people go, he would leave it to his successor to clean house.
But a rumor like this would seem to have the opposite effect to disuade recruits rather then keep them on board through signing. Maybe the rumor is a ruse by a competing school. If you really plan to change leadership, the sooner the better for the program and the successor. What would waiting until after the bowl game do? Unless it factors into bonus payments for the coaches.
I don't anticipate any changes. If they were looking to improve the offensive staff they needed to have done it already to help with recruiting. If they are looking for changes they are missing out on the best talent (except for possible NFL end of season firings/resignations). Hmmmm....maybe there is a plan.
Are the wave of the future in NCAA athletics and will continue to be an ever-expanding stream of revenue for those conferences able to pull off a profitable network. If the ACC is already handcuffed by ESPN and unable to grow a new revenue source from a TV network like the Pac12, B1G and SEC are doing/going to do, then the ACC is going to diminish in stature towards the unimportant conferences (CUSA, MAC, MWC, etc...). Either Swofford and his crew find a way to save the ACC by coming close to matching the payments that the competition offers, or defections will happen again, and sooner rather than later.
#VT4SEC
To give some contex, Hokies have only had one five star DB recruit since 2002 (Macho Harris.) As I can recall, only two other DB recruits were four stars (Hosley and Dew.) We have always talked about Bud Foster doing more with less. Well, he finally has more.