The cyclical nature of recruiting and playcalling

If I may weigh in on the state of recruiting and playcalling. Apologies in advance...this is going to be long-winded. Sort of a State of the Hokie Union, if you will.

Recruiting overall:

When it comes to recruiting, as long as you're a good program on solid footing, recruiting goes in cycles. Think about where Bama was just a few years ago. Not the cellar of the SEC, but not where they are now, that's for sure. Same thing with Baylor, K-State, etc. And Kentucky is now *blowing up* the recruiting circuit.

When LOLUVA had Groh-ing Pains, they didn't spend any time cultivating relationships with H.S. coaches, and that negatively affected their recruiting. Like, flat shutout of certain schools. We gleefully gobbled up the recruits during that timeframe, never thinking that it might not be all us, that we might have some inadvertent help from the French. But now the evil ones in Hooville are starting to get better recruits. Why? London's staff has realized that the trend now is with the 7-on-7 coaches, and that's where they've put their emphasis in recruiting efforts. And it’s paying off, especially in South Hampton Roads. Just like basketball coaches who realized the AAU circuit trend a number of years ago got in on some great players, LOLUVA has created a bit of an advantage for themselves.

Look at high school soccer players if you want to see where the 7-on-7 will likely go in the next 10-15 years. Soccer has been bigger and more competitive at the club level for years, and *that’s* where college coaches go if they want to see how good a soccer player is, not their H.S. team. The competition is just SO much better there.
So, we've got to put some effort into the 7-on-7 world to get back on an even playing field. And we’re already doing that, even though we’ve heard some bad comments from some of the 7-on-7 coaches. No need to name names and drag out the issue. Just like all other things, those tempers are likely to cool over time, and things there will likely turn around. If you remember the days of Mike Smith, we never thought we’d ever get a kid out of Hampton H.S., and that too came to pass.

Offensive Line recruiting:

Next, look at our linemen recruiting. It was great that Newsome was a 757 Peninsula guy and could recruit the area, but he was quite frankly in over his head at the D1 level. I’d be in the same boat if you let me run Apple, so I don’t really blame the guy, but yeah, it sucked for awhile. Anyway, when JB Grimes left, we had Stiney as the OL coach, and he honestly wasn’t half bad, but maybe a little task saturated with also being the OC or maybe he just wasn't tactically proficient as an O-line coach. Around that time, we also started having a little more trouble recruiting linemen. Not always, but a little more, plus quite a few of our top guys really didn't pan out all that well. Sort of the Perfect (Poop) Storm of O-linemen development.

To try and get around that, we started recruiting slower TEs who could grow into the OL position. That worked pretty well until the rest of the college and H.S. world picked up on it. Now, slower TEs grow into being OTs/OGs at the H.S. level and get recruited by colleges as such, and we're left with nothing left to pickup on. Just like the spread offense trickled down to the H.S. level, so too has the placement and development of personnel. So, enter someone like Grimey who can recruit kids who are straight-up junkyard dog linemen to start with. Back to the drawing board, but we’re starting to see some improvement. One caveat, though: we need to realize that linemen are the toughest to predict and evaluate, and that they need two to three years in a system before they’re really ready to play. Again, it runs in cycles and the line will take time to reverse, but I think we’re finally on the right path.

Playcalling:

That leads me to the final point: staff continuity. Think of all the Tech game broadcasts in the 2000s where you heard how long CFB’s staff had been with him, and how much of a plus that was from a coaching and recruiting standpoint. “Potential recruits know that if they sign with VT because of a particular coach, he’ll still be there in four years when they graduate. It feels like family to them.” Sounds familiar, right?

There’s only one downside to CFB’s legendary loyalty to his staff: when the staff member isn’t performing as well as we need them to. CFB is reluctant to upset his own apple cart. Frankly, I don't blame him that much. Well, okay, maybe I do, but I understand the mindset. I'd be thinking of how I didn't change much between the '98 and '99 seasons, other than having Mike Vick and virtually no injuries, and I came within a quarter of filling that damned trophy case. So, you keep trying the same old stuff because it's *almost* good enough, but not quite.

In the meantime, new opposing coaches will bring new schemes to trump your old schemes run by your older coaches. That’s just how the football gods work 99% of the time. Remember when Phil Elmassian was brought in to install the defense in the mid 90s and no one could figure us out for a few years? Remember, also, how Bud had to completely re-tool after the 2003 season because our scheme was stale and Aaron Rodgers was laughing at us (...bastard...)? Again, though, it runs in cycles and that’s somewhere else I feel that we’ve made a positive change with Lefty. Will it all turn around this year? Absolutely not. But the USS Gobbler is pointed in the right direction on the field and in recruiting, that much I feel pretty certain about.

Again, sorry for the long-windedness. The length of this post alone is probably worth a turkey leg subtraction or two, but what’s above has been brewing in my brain for a bit. Gracias for reading.