Recent Comments
he already committed ... not to us
Awesome! Now let's get Soloman Williams from TA&M.
Agree on paying Benji, he has earned it. But for him to leave would be a little crazy IMO. You are close to home, in a place I imagine you love, with a coach who has a track record of putting guys in the league, and as OC will most likely emphasize TEs. You WILL play. Definitely as important to keep him as the guys we bring in.
What Cig is doing at Indiana is unprecedented, and they have Mark Cuban to fund their NIL (plus apparently IU churns out CEOs?).
It sounds weird to say but my answer would be, no I do not expect VT to be competing on the same stage as Indiana.
I'm trying to find a picture of it but I've come across a logo before that was essentially three small Hokie bird heads laid out diagonally that had V, P, and I on them - anyone know what I'm talking about?
I remember seeing it and thinking it would be a really cool retro logo, then promptly never seeing it again.
Minchey was a good choice, but he committed to Nebraska. I think QB #1 was the most important position of need for VT, followed closely by QB #2. In a 12-16 game season, every team needs a competent QB #2 due to injuries or non-performance. For me, that would be either Grunk or Pribula whoever loses the QB battle. If Pribula can't beat out a limited experience QB, then he is not going pro. Then what? Coaching would be a good route and who better to learn from than an up-and-coming QB coach in Danny Boy O'Brien? My question of Pribula is, why did you leave a stating gig in the SEC?
Baker would be another excellent QB #2. Talented, big, fast kid who needs time to develop. Once again, VT is a great place to be for him. Close to home, Danny Boy to help him improve, and excellent competition to push him, Same for Kromo who s--- the bed at FSU and Miss St. (not all his fault).
Brand was rated higher but I personally like Ryan more (I'm not a good judge of QB potential, but seems like he can spin it). Brand iirc is much more dual threat.
Are our goals to be competing on the same stage as Indiana? If so we should try to match for Gosnell who is one of the best TEs in the country especially since we can expect heavy TE usage in next year's offense and we don't know what we'll get out of our WRs. Keeping Gosnell would show an increasing seriousness about our program.
I think people grossly underestimate the legitimacy of simply grinding out first downs and getting some decent FG attempts along the way. I know you aren't winning all of your games doing that, but you're giving your team a chance at the very least... Something we haven't had in the recent past.
I would assume one of Brand or Ryan will transfer since they are the same year.
Is one considered better than the other?
If we pick up Luke Reynolds, we'll have a really strong TE group. Love to keep Gosnell, but not sure matching $ with the potential national champs is necessary.
I don't disagree, but I think the difficulty of evaluating transfer portal additions is what's holding that back.
Well, guess I meant building a team in the traditional sense - develop players, gel, become a cohesive unit - not plug and play as many pieces as you can from year to year
I would argue it's the only thing in the portal era. Well, that and MONEY.
NLI's aren't a thing anymore. They can sign scholarship agreements/grant in aid agreements, but it's really a matter of when they enroll in school at this point. The agreements I believe are binding, but we've seen guys get out of them for a variety of reasons, which also happened in the NLI era.
This is wild
CRAZY STAT 🤯This is the first ever College Football Playoff semifinal without Alabama, Ohio State, or Virginia Tech. pic.twitter.com/PKOokkTZPC— Deablo fan account (@DeferredWalkOn) January 5, 2026
For a moment there I thought you were talking about Grunkenmeyer
I'm curious what you consider binding, because "signing" is usually the binding part where they sign what is usually considered contractually binding documents. Granted, certain things get them out of that, but I think it's only usually if the coach leaves or if they don't maintain the grades required to get into the school.
It's not a signing day thing. In reality, none of these commitments have any sort of binding moment until they are enrolled in the school.
I don't know if Franklin can afford to wait "a couple of years" to have a good offense.
We need to have a good offense in 2026. Now, when I say good, I'm worried you (not you specifically, "you" the general populace) think I mean we need to have an elite offense in year one. That is not what I'm saying. We need to have a good offense. That means we need to be able to move the ball down the field, buy time for the defense, and score points. All things that offenses are expected to do. I'm not expecting to do any of those things at elite clips. 40 PPG is an unrealistic expectation. Good isn't.
Now, that said, I also don't think we need to have a fully developed passing attack to have a good offense. We need to be able to run the ball well, and find ways to get the ball into the hands of playmakers on the perimeter to keep defenses honest but I'm not subscribed to the idea that we need to have 4 and 5 WR sets and run RPOs every other play to rack up 300+ passing yards just to be good at offense. Ground and pound can be very good and very effective. The west coast offense, while fun to watch, isn't the only way to be good at offensive football.
Ultimately, I'd love to be "fun to watch" as well and we may get there. But if in year one we are good at running the ball and managing the game and it helps us win a bunch of 24-21 type games I'm fine with that. I don't expect our passing offense to be elite any time soon (if ever) but if we can run the ball reliably that will be a big plus.
So am I correct to assume even a commitment or intent to transfer is not sealed until the next signing day?
Cignetti said I'll take production over potential any day. The tape doesn't lie.
Sad. 247 must be running behind as I checked before posting. Thanks.