VT talk on Split Zone Duo

Richard, Alex, and Godfrey spent about 4 and a half minutes talking about VT this week. These are probably my three favorite commentators in CFB because they do a good job of storytelling while only dishing luke-warm, level headed takes. I like to share whenever they talk Hokie Football. VT talk starts at about the 9:00 minute mark:

Below I did my best to transcribe three comments/conversations that stood out to me. One that I didn't include here was a 30 second or so discussion about how the Mack Brown experiment at UNC is working out, how surprised they are, and why it's working. Anyways, the comments below were taken out of context, so take them with the appropriate grain of salt.

Richard summarizing the game:

UNC beats Virginia Tech... Virginia Tech down a million DB's, they just were. They were down 5 when the game started, lost another to a targeting call. I don't really know how Virginia Tech continues to play this well without those guys, and we're really impressed by that. Virginia Tech battled back really well this game, but at the end of the day, the depth is the depth.

Godfrey on Fuente/Saturday's performance:

I really thought Justin Fuente would be the perfect fit to bring Virginia Tech back We're all talking about this in the context of is Justin Fuente going to get fired, do we do that during COVID, what's our identity... They fought their asses off in the most cliche way that I can describe...

Godfrey and Alex talking about this season in the larger context of VT football:

[Alex:] VIrginia Tech has had so much going on due to COVID and they've been play so up and down as a result, especially in this game - which direction is the Justin Fuente meter pointing at this point, because it seems to change each month, at least during this last year?

[Godfrey:] These are always really tough questions to answer, because no one's career should be judged by 2020 in isolation... However, entering this season, there were systemic issues at Virginia Tech that we haven't seen them solve, but honestly, we haven't seen the Hokies with the capability of solving the problems they have because they've been so undermanned because of the virus, so I would hit a pause. Ultimately, I don't think Fuente and Virginia Tech workout, I don't think this is some miraculous turning point; I think they move on from one another, but to me it feels disingenuous to build a case against him based on what we've seen in these three games. This is not a full football team, this is not a complete roster...

[Alex:] They host BC on Saturday, a game they should win...

[Godfrey:] I will say this, people around Virginia Tech are going to look at games like this, when you see the rebuilding and the plucky teams, like BC and Louisville... these are games that you absolutely need to win to get people who have influence in Blacksburg to say 'this was a fluky year, lets move on to 2021.'

DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.

Comments

I just listened to this myself and I agree that these guys have always been really fair when discussing Virginia Tech as neutral observers. I always appreciate their thoughts on the program because it's easy for us to become completely stuck in the "inside VT" discussion we get among friends, family, TKP, etc. or whoever you usually discuss Hokie football with, and it's nice to hear a perspective from people who don't have a personal stake in the program like we all do.

This is good. And yes, these guys are level headed. It's always great to hear others from the outside (not drunk Herbie) talking about the VT program.

I am in agreement that it will be impossible, and unfair, to judge Fuente based on this year. He's been in a difficult spot from the start. However I don't think VT and Fuente ultimately work out. The trends aren't great. There hasn't been any true identity established. And the culture has always been just a bit off. I think Fuente is a good coach, but I'm not sure he's ready for the big time just yet.

Is coronavirus over yet?

And the culture has always been just a bit off. I think Fuente is a good coach, but I'm not sure he's ready for the big time just yet.

There was guy a long time ago, Frank something or other (Beamer? Idk, doesn't sound right). Surely people said the same thing about him after his first couple years.

Seriously though, Fuente had this year lined up to be one of his best with all the returning talent and a good schedule, then COVID happened. To win those first two games the way he did and come back on UNC like he did against all this adversity, this makes the case for the guy being ready for this. If you had told me we'd be missing 15+ guys every game through the first 3 weeks and still end up 2-1, I'd have called you a jackass. Fuente is making his case that he's a good P5 football coach. He made some questionable decisions yesterday (namely, Burmeister thru the 1st half), but that happens to everyone who isn't Nick Saban or Dabo sometimes.

I would root for the Russians before I would root for Virginia.

I agree with most of this. The major difference between Frank Beamer and Justin Fuente is that from day 1 Beamer knew what he wanted to do (win big with Va talent) and he sold the farm on that very thing. It took him 6 years to turn the ship, but he established a culture and shaped the program around it. I don't see Fuente in the same light.

I happen to think that 2021 and 2022 are going to be good years, but they will also the pinnacle of the JF era. Duke-like recruiting two cycles in a row doesn't set you up for long term success.

I'm well over the loss yesterday. UNC is a really good football team and we fought back punch for punch with a terribly depleted defensive roster. I'm not interested in all the ways in which we can dissect the game at this point. However I do think analyzing where we are as a program is perfectly OK. I'm going to enjoy this season and the next. But I'm also not blind to the reality of where things are headed.

Is coronavirus over yet?

If the expectations are to elevate the program then any one that comes into VT and says their goals to put a fence around the state of VA and not let the best players leave then they should be fired on the spot. Only a handful of schools have the talent in their state to do that. This isn't the 90s when no one had the internet and recruits didn't talk to other recruits on a daily basis.

Many recruits have said they heard Fuente's plan and they are on board. And you know what he has shared what he wants to do a lot with the fan bases, he wants to run the ball, and you know what he is doing that this year.

Fuente might not be a long term coach at VT, but I doubt the next guy will be either. I don't see VT being in a National title game ever again, and new years 6 bowls won't ever be a regular thing. We got a hot name coach last time, will they want to come after the constant hate Fuente has received, after the money problems that are constantly talked about? He had a 6-6 year and Baylor lined right up to give him more resources how do you convince a coach to come to VT with that happening?

I think you missed my point. I'm not so concerned about whether or not Fuente gets all the talent in Va to commit to VT. My broader point was more about culture building, which it seems Fuente might finally be establishing here in year 5.

I do not think the loss yesterday was in any way an indictment on Fuente. On the contrary, I think it's a testament to the work he and the staff are doing at possibly establishing a culture of toughness and resolve. My concern, for both Fuente and for VT, that it might be too little too late. Who knows though? Time will tell.

I'm going to be a VT fan no matter what. But if we are relegated to being a middling Coastal program, which is where we are headed, that will be disappointing.

Is coronavirus over yet?

Sorry if I miss read, I might be conditioned for negativity after a loss.

I hope its not too late, he got a benefit when he came with 2 all time great recievers, an athletic TE, and a ton of defensive players ready to go to the NFL the next year. The transition looked good, but the depth was superficial. He has filled up the cupboard as seen by being competitive with so many starters out. And I think he's been coaching his nuts off this season with getting the team ready to play every week no matter who is playing.

We got a hot name coach last time, will they want to come after the constant hate Fuente has received

Lol come on.

I have no idea why my username is VT_Warthog.

Arkansas blew a 24-0 lead in the Belk Bowl.

We've had a lot of publicized issues with the media reports of the Baylor thing and really just everything about how our athletic department is funded.

Uf there is an opening you can get:
1) Big name coach
2) G5 up and comer
3) Promote from within
4) Cheap

1 isn't something VT has resources for, 2 is what we got and maybe could pull again but well lots of P5 schools look a lot better with the resources VT has, 3 fans don't want that, and 4 fans don't want that.

It's easier to recruit to Baylor as the local poole is much larger and the money is there. That should scare lot of fans because that was unfathomable 10 years ago.

None of what our fans do is exclusive to VT. You're cherry picking to attack those of us who don't like Fuente.

Edit: the downvotes prove my point. This website is becoming an echo chamber for the pro-Fuente crowd. Between this and being called self righteous jackasses it's getting really fucking old.

I have no idea why my username is VT_Warthog.

Arkansas blew a 24-0 lead in the Belk Bowl.

The downvotes may just be an indication that folks are tired of passive aggressive attacks toward the coaches or team in general usually punctuated by a form of LOL to really turn off any poster that may actually want to have a discussion.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

Directions from Blacksburg to whoville, go north till you smell it then go east until you step in it

How was my comment an attack toward the coach or team? The post I replied to was an attack itself.

I have no idea why my username is VT_Warthog.

Arkansas blew a 24-0 lead in the Belk Bowl.

5) Big name coach comes back to rescue alma mater

This is what Michigan and UNC currently have. Bruce Arians is probably VT's only hope for something like this, but I don't know if he wants to get back into college. Maybe after he's had some fun with Brady, who knows. At a minimum, I hope he and Whit have a good and active relationship.

Exactly... that fiesty "roanoke" media market will get after ya

Just to nit pick shouldn't that be Roanoke "media" because it reads like you are suggesting Roanoke doesn't exist.

It took him 6 years to turn the ship, but he established a culture and shaped the program around it.

Not saying you ain't wrong, but no coach is going to get six years with a combined record of 24-40 (not counting the two ties) in today's game. Honestly, even if the bottom falls out in a year or two and Fuente leaves, he will have had the hardest job in Virginia Tech history. He was the guy who had to replace a homegrown legend and hall of famer.

We "might" of actually had a W for this game if Hooker started. D wouldn't have been demoralized and winded so early and O behind the 8 ball which got in Corney's head. Maybe J-Ham would have called a better game too.

HH was dabbed the #1 for a reason and looked exponentially better than BB after shaking the rust off during his first possession. Comfortable in the pocket, confident in his O line and reads, and waiting for plays to evolve. By all means, wasn't perfect so please don't point out that he did not make his 3rd and 4th reads, b/c BB can't go past 1 or even make a pass greater than 5 yards.

Another thing that caught my eye was the team's reaction to success (TDs, etc.) and improvement in confidence once HH started to lead scores. Watch any game this year when BB scores a TD, or even someone else while BB is playing. The celebrations are smaller, less enthusiastic., and only 1 or two folks come to give him congrats. It seemed odd to me but I thought maybe they were just staying cool-headed more so.

These somewhat inexplicable coaching decisions are what constantly occur with Fuente at the helm. Was it to give BB "a shot" b/c they "owed it to him" for pulling the team along the last couple games? That is high school / old school coaching think. He did what was needed while your #1 was out and now it is time to make him your #2. Do you think Saban or any other practical coach would have let BB start when they "KNEW" their real starter was ready and soooo much better? Saban pulls his starters at half in NC games. Even the moron ACC crew were somewhat dumfounded why BB continued through the 1st half.

Not to Jerry Kill this one, but I wonder if BB would have started if he was still around. Someone with experience to tell coach, ummm hey, it is simple, this guy is better, you should start him. Eerily familiar........

We weren't winning the game with Michael Vick at QB. Our defense was a fly trying to stop a truck heading down the highway. Great job by HH and company to compete, but our Defense was hot stinky garbage, and we didn't deserve to win. Hats off to UNC, they played a great game.

Also, Dazz Newsome talking trash- stop them and he will shut up. If not, he will talk trash all day. Oldest game ever. If you want the trash talk to stop- play harder and shut them up. I commend Dazz for talking shit and putting it to his opponent. That's what good teams do. Kick ass and talk about it.

I couldn't disagree more.

UNC's defense gave up 45 legit points. They were nothing special. Do you think it more or less likely that UNC goes up 21-0 if Hooker is playing and our offense isn't going 3 and out on the first several possessions? What if Herbert is getting the ball for more than 1 carry in the 1st quarter?

UNC didn't worry about the pass at all to start the game, with good reason, because BB isn't good at throwing the ball. Good kid, but not a good passer.

With respect, your take is a bad one. I'm not saying that VT wins, but the decision not to let Hooker just start the game falls squarely on bad coaching. If he was fit enough to play the entire second half, he was fit enough to start. That falls on Fuente and is another in a long list of questionable decisions.

I think it would have been very unlikely that the good guys fall behind by 21 points TWICE if our best quarterback is playing from the jump. Again, not saying we would have won, but the odds would have been better.

Carolina punted once with the game in the balance. The only way we were winning that game was to score 65 points on offense.

The cognitive dissonance going on with the VT fanbase over this game has been mind-blowing to watch. Hooker wasn't going to stop UNC's RB's from getting 7-8 yards before they were touched on every carry, no matter when he went in. I really don't understand this.

Were we not within 1 score twice during the game?

Proud author of one plaid comment.

And other than 7-0 we weren't able to really get a stop until unc extended the lead to several scores again.

I don't think anyone is arguing that we'd have had more stops on D if Hooker had played earlier. I think the point is that it's not inconceivable that we could have gone blow for blow with UNC had our 1st half offense been as effective as our 2nd half offense.

It's not a question of us getting stops. It's a question of us scoring more points.

Proud author of one plaid comment.

That's absolutely true. UNC was blowing us out of the water. However, take a look at the first quarter. UNC had the ball for over 8 minutes and scored 3 times. If our first two three and outs are slower scoring drives (we averaged 3:20 per scoring drive) or at least clock draining run heavy drives ending in punts, do they get that third TD in the first quarter?

Or look at the drive at the end of the first half that stalled out and created the chance for UNC to get to 35 before halftime:
BB pass incomplete
BB run for no gain
BB pas to Robinson for 9 yards
UNC off sides
KH run for 2 yards
BB run for 4 yards
BB pass to Robinson for 1 yard
BB pass incomplete

Yes, our porous D gave them a TD 55 seconds later, but could a more competent offensive cast have used up those 55 seconds or, gasp, scored?

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

Haha. Between this and your comment in the Fuente post-game thread you have convinced me that all the blame for the loss falls on Fuente/Corny soley for bungling the drive at the end of the 1st half and giving UNC the ball back.

Proud author of one plaid comment.

Unless HH didn't have the conditioning to go for 60 minutes.

I feel like it's better to prepare for "what happens in case hendon can't keep going" instead of "let's just try to tread water until we can bring him in"

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

All these replies simply indirectly justify Fuente's decision to start BB by saying we would lost anyway. BS.

For anyone who has played a sport, especially football, when the other side of the ball or both can't keep up, it affects the WHOLE team. This was the dilemma that played out a few years ago that players are still bitter about. You cannot argue that if the O was one for one with UNC in the 1st quarter with HH, the energy, play calling, and outcome on both sides of the ball for both teams would have been absolutely the same.

Let's just say 7-7, 14-14, I can guarantee our D is schemed differently (a little more aggressive), possible momentum swings occur affecting UNC possessions, and the overall mood/psyche of our D and UNC team are changed. May be Reed or Ashby make a play b/c they are hype about our O and don't feel like this game is going absolutely no where from the start, B/C they are tied 21-21 instead of down 21-0. May be we cause a turnover or something wild happens with UNC's O b/c they feel like they need to run something cute or press due to our O burning it too.

Hey D, the O is killing it for us, all we need is a stop here = more energy, focus, etc. Have that happen a couple times and the outcome is maybe different or at least puts us in the BEST POSITION TO WIN, which apparently Fuente & Co. find a hard time doing consistently.

I think this a stretch. There is years of evidence that indicates the D doesn't need the O to perform to give that little bit of extra effort to get a needed stop.

Sure, but the old football adage usually is true- if you win the trenches- which UNC did with ease, you win the game. We might have gone score for score with them, but at some point in that game the team that could line up and dominate the LOS would have been able to play keep away. Saturday, that was clearly UNC. They crushed our DL with ease, all afternoon.

Didn't we do this to them too?

Our offense played a shitty first half. We outscored them in the second half. If we could've put up a couple more scores in the first half or made a few more conversions, we certainly could've won. We had the game within one score late. Our defense sucked, but the back end was decimated and without key leadership. It took us playing our worst game in 30 years on D and them executing to perfection to beat us by 11. It sucks, but to say it's inconceivable that we could've won that game doesn't ring true to me.

They took a knee to avoid putting 62 on the board. I -suppose- we could have scored 63 points, sure.

Maybe like three touchdowns on the opening drives that we went three and out on. That would've put us above 63. And had we scored some points early, they don't get that last possession. Also, maybe our defense gets a break and plays a couple of meaningful snaps if our offense is scoring. Maybe we also get some momentum and elevate our play somewhat.

If we play this game 10 times knowing what we know now, with the same personnel, you don't see a way we could pull out one win?

If the UNC OL dominates the LOS the way they did Saturday, Could we win 1 out of 10 games with UNC? maybe- I doubt it though. And there is a whole bunch of room - especially at VT the past 30 years- between a 3 and out and an automatic touchdown. UNC crushed us on the LOS - men against boys. The final score was closer than the game was - Carolina was forced to punt - ONCE - when the game wasn't out of hand. Total domination of our defense. That was the story. If you are relying on your offense to score 50 points while the other team is rushing for 8 yards a pop, you aren't winning- at any level of football.

If we played 9 more times, one thing I would expect is a little more chaos in the form of turnovers. 100 points and zero turnovers (unless you include the onside kick) is nutts.

I would rather talk about who is the better team when both have full rosters.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

IMO, unless we get an SEC DT or two from the portal, they will dominate us in the trenches for the next 2-3 years. Mack isn't stupid, just like Paul Johnson isn't stupid. You attack a Jerod Hewitt and a Norell Pollard- relentlessly- they are easy to move inside, they are not big time DT's.. You don't play to the strength of VT's defense- Mack Brown gets that. It's going to be a huge issue the next 3 years minimum. He is not going to 7 step drop Howell and open him up to the blitz, nope.. he is going to pound our front 7 relentlessly. He knows the talent or lack thereof we have there.

My point is we dominated their line of scrimmage too outside of three series that started the game. Even if you give them the touchdown at the end of the game, we still outscored them in the second half. If we'd done that in the first half, we would've won. That's how it works. The score was 42-37 at the start of the fourth quarter. We couldn't have played worse D, and yet we still had a chance late in the game.

I think we can fix some of the problems that we saw on D. If we get our starters back, that's a low hanging fruit upgrade. We had the worst defensive performance in three decades and lost to a top ten team by 11. Make it 18 if it makes you feel better. It sucks. But I'm happy to watch the team play and not give up. I've conceded that I'll never see a VT team go undefeated and win a championship in my lifetime. If they can play tough and show fight in an ugly loss, I'll take it. If I couldn't, I'd start rooting for Clemson or Alabama or whoever is winning at the time.
I'd rather suck and stick to my guns. Go Hokies.

I dunno - there's a reason track teams put their fastest guy on the last legs of relays - you want them to be able to finish out and make up any ground possible. If his conditioning was garbage, I could see wanting him in at the end of the game rather than the beginning. Suppose we had started HH and he'd only performed well for a half before his performance went to crap from conditioning. How do we think BB would have finished the game? Would he have been able to lead drives the same way?

I'm not necessarily saying I buy that. I have no idea why he didn't start. I saw someone else give some plausible reasons, but ultimately, we'll never know because Fuente doesn't talk about stuff like that.

The other challenge I just realized from the defensive perspective is they're not getting the test results back until right before the game (day before or same day), so it makes it very difficult for the D coaches to game plan and try to figure out what you can do with the personnel available. Hopefully that gets better as the season progresses.

There is no hard push to "buy" a Hokies win in this scenario. The MAIN POINT is, that Fuente did not put the team in the best position to win. If you want to be a Fuente apologist and argue starting BB put us in the best position to win and was the right thing to do, then that is sad and the evidence is clear to the contrary.

This is not an anomaly folks. These sometimes seemingly benign and non-impactful decisions that are constantly discredited here as "you are not a true Hokie fan or Fuente Hater", actually are a trend that compile over time and lose games, recruits, and happen over and over due to illogical overthinking or dumb reasoning.

Your judging Fuente's decision making on a very limited data set and results (which obviously aren't available when the decisions are made). Fuente has a lot of additional data which is influencing his decisions.

If HH starts the game, do we win? Maybe, but probably not. And if that happened and we didn't, the Fuente haters would be complaining that he pulled the starter who won the first two games.

Some games, based on the circumstance aren't winnable. I think this was one of them for us. That doesn't mean we give up or don't show up. But there is no reason to want to run Fuente out of town either.

Decisions are easy in hindsight. Imagine if in a form of revisionist history Hooker started and we throw two picks to go down 21-0. It is definitely a possible reality. Hooker is better than BB but he was not sharp.

It is what it is at this point and I hope Hooker can progress even more this year and most importantly, stay healthy.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

I mean there were plenty of people saying "why the hell isn't Hooker playing" when Burmeister came in for the first series. Its not hindsight when people were actively questioning what the hell was going on while it was playing out in real time.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

It is hindsight because if we had won nobody would care about the decision and we would just be excited Hooker got some time and would start next week.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

Hypotheticals being stated as fact aside, I'd still be questioning it, because even if we had won, we didn't put our best chance to win on the field to start the game. Combine that with only giving Herbert one carry in the first quarter, and I absolutely question our gameplan going into this one. Regardless of result.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

I used a hypothetical because everything is a hypothetical when an actual decision is made in real time. We (fans) judge results instead of circumstance. People are acting like the coaches don't want to play the quarterback that has been publicly stated as the best on the roster. Don't you find that a bit strange and wonder what maybe the coaches know that fans do not?

As far as Herbert goes, you know he can't run the ball every play. If I am picking on when to give the defense a heavy dose, it is in the second half when the defense is on roller skates. As it turned out our defense was on roller skates the whole game so a big fat monkey wrench was thrown into the plan. I personally liked the thought process of softening the edges early when everybody was expecting heavy run. Our execution on those plays just happen to have been horrendous. This offense has great potential if a healthy HH spreads the defense and we are able to use a two headed monster of Blackshear and Herbert. For whatever reason, Blackshear hasn't broken out yet, but I think it is coming.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

The problem is you are projecting a decision on "is BB the best QB to put us in a position to win" with no variables. You believe HH and BB is a straight comparison while completely ignoring that HH had to miss a LOT of practice and conditioning. You're ignoring that, just because he didn't do well in this game, BB didn't lead our team to 38 points in our first win and 52 in the second (I know we only scored 45, but we downed it at the 1 intentionally not scoring). The coaches didn't know if HH might come out rust and throw a pick 6, putting us even further behind. Yes, after seeing that HH came out and was able to play that you could say he should have been in from the beginning. The coaches had no guarantee that he would play that well though, and like I mentioned, BB had just won 2 games. Maybe they thought he'd be able to get something going and wanted to give him more time. If Hooker HAD been rusty and missed a bunch of throws and reads and they kept him in, everyone would have been saying he was too rusty from missing practice, put BB back in. Ideally the coaches could have put HH back in under center in a game like GT or Syracuse or something to see how he'd do, not against UNC. Fuente DID pull RW and put in Hooker. But despite that being a good decision, you find fault in why he didn't start the year with HH instead of RW. Then there's questions JJ vs RW, which I find to be a joke because neither one of those guys was obviously far and away better than the other - each had their own downside. I don't think most people dislike the decisions Fuente makes about the QB's, it's more questioning the timing of those decisions. And, like has been pointed out, Fuente has more information than we do, and we have the benefit of knowing results after the decision whereas Fuente doesn't know the result when he's making the decision.

No one is denying Fuente has more information than we do. The problem is that he has a ton of information and he still seems to get it wrong. It's a constant track record of misevaluation. What does it say about Fuente when he is proven wrong on field?

As an aside, these debates are another negative side effect of his desire to shroud the program in secrecy. He does himself no favors.

I have no idea why my username is VT_Warthog.

Arkansas blew a 24-0 lead in the Belk Bowl.

So Fuente has more information, great. Fans continue to justify poor decisions that are inexplicable to even the most basic of sport. Wonderful.

I guess it was better to shake the rust off in the 2nd half after we got our asses handed to us with only 14 on the board. BB leading us to two wins should have been negligible in this decision. We played two mediocre at best teams and it was fairly clear to me, and I am sure as hell is was to UNC coaches that do analysis, that BB would be easy to minimize and our D would be far easier to exploit.

UNC Conclusion: run them off the field early and they likely won't come back. This isn't rocket science. VT Conclusion: play it safe to protect the D (don't run Herbert in that calculation?) instead of go to shootout mode from the start w/ HH b/c that is what you know is going to be needed anyway, based on your mountain of data/information.

It was beyond obvious that HH is a hell of a lot better rounded QB than BB after 10 plays vs UNC. How many times (data/information) over the last two years do you think Fuente witnessed that, and maybe that is why he HH was dubbed #1?

data *(Fuente and Corny) = FuenteCorny information = overthinking = confusion, miscalculation, and inability to make straightforward decisions.

HH = better chance to win. O, that was simple.

Every Monday morning QB has a perfect QBR.

actually, it is pretty straightforward. set your team up for success and not get lost chasing things that do not matter.

Yeah..these comments are on-point.

Ultimately, I don't think Fuente and Virginia Tech workout, I don't think this is some miraculous turning point; I think they move on from one another

This it 100% what I see in the future, esp. after the Baylor fiasco. I think Fuente wants to be and probably fits better in the Big12..i think he heads out of BBurg for the next Big12 job he can get--and I'm not sure we will do much to try and persuade him otherwise either.

plucky teams, like BC and Louisville... these are games that you absolutely need to win

So much this. I'm more upset by the way we lost to UNC than that we lost..I honestly didn't have much confidence going in. I really don't see how this D is going to matchup with King at scUM and we obviously won't beat Clemson. I'm okay with that. But losing to BC or Louisville--that would be tough to take and really reflect poorly on Fuente's progress so far.

If you take off the O&M glasses, VT is an okay opportunity. It has potential. Nearby fertile recruiting in the DMV, 757, Charlotte, Triangle, ATL. History, a legendary coach. New facilities. The potential is there....

... Resources are low, fan base is loyal, but tired - think Nebraska, but on a smaller level, and we have a school President that is far more worried about recruiting high end students than our agricultural blue collar history dictates. And by 2014 the cupboard was bare.

It's a tough ask for a rebuild back to glory days when resources can't dictate success in a new era of CFB. At the same time, we have gone from a 6-6 program to an 8/9 win program. Fuente has at least elevated the level of play. Now he's gotta get past the next hump, 10/11 win teams.

But if he can't, that might be VTs ceiling for the near future, until he leaves, or we move on from him...

TKPhi Damn Proud
BSME 2009

VT is top 16 all time in division 1 wins- it's a premier job. Resources are not "low" for football- that's a myth. Do we spend what Bama spends? no. Are resources low? no. And Beamer's last 4 games against UNC- 2 of those recovering from cancer and pending retirement were more competitive than Saturday, especially on defense. The bare cupboard-which is also 100% myth- propelled Fu's best season- 2016, and has yielded more NFL draft picks than the more recent rosters.

The bare cupboard-which is also 100% myth- propelled Fu's best season- 2016, and has yielded more NFL draft picks than the more recent rosters.

there is so much to unpack in this -- is it possible that the cupboard was largely bare but there were still a handful of NFL contributors? It's pretty clear that Beamer's '14 and '15 classes had both talented players and very little depth behind them, which did not pair well with the transitional '16 class. When the NFL talent left for the NFL, the team suffered a significant dropoff and the roster gaps were obvious and clear because the players behind them either weren't good or weren't ready.

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

When there are 100 posts parsing the deep roster as an argument that the cupboard was bare as opposed to acknowledging that there was more actual talent left than there was in subsequent years proves my point. Did Beamer leave a great 5th DT prospect for Fu? Probrably not. Has Fu signed quality DT depth since he has been head coach? Why is the standard diffferent?

You make a great point that the knife cuts both ways, but I think it's mostly a matter of it being easier to maintain depth than it is to build depth. A huge factor in developing talent is time -- how many practice reps are they getting, how physically ready they are, and so on all tie back to how much time a player has to develop before seeing the field.

When those handful of NFL-ready (or not-quite NFL ready) players left for the '17 and '18 drafts, it really accelerated the timeline for other players to have an on-field impact. This is why we have seen so many true freshmen and transfer players come in -- the entire roster was top-heavy and razor thin. We were patching holes at the end of Frank's tenure at QB as it was. Jerod leaving after a year meant the job was handed to JJ a year too soon.

Since you used DT as an example, I'll expound on that position group a bit more. It's not that Beamer didn't leave a 5th DT prospect for Fuente, it's that Beamer left exactly two defensive tackles on the entire roster: Tim Settle and Ricky Walker. Now those are great players and great Hokies -- but the DT depth behind them was DE Vinny Mihota moving inside and true freshman Jarrod Hewitt. (Hewitt was part of the 2016 transitional class). Is it Fuente's fault that there weren't any DT's behind Settle and Walker when he took over? Of course it isn't. Is it Fuente's fault there weren't any real DT signees who panned out until the 2019 class? Of course it is.

Is our roster deeper now that it was in 2016? I don't think it's even a conversation. "The cupboard is bare" is an exaggeration, but so is calling that assertion "100% myth". It was suuuuuuuuch a thin squad.

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

In summary, it seems to me that Fuente isn't bad enough that we certainly want to fire him but he isn't good enough we certainly want to keep him.

I agree with this. We need more data and much of the data from this year is corrupted.

Proud author of one plaid comment.

They seem to imply VT will part ways with Fuente when his current contract ends, but not before that.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Jet Sweep

Who is "they"? VT administration?

Godfrey's comment, specifically. He's not in position to make that decision obviously, just commenting that seems to be what he's implying.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Jet Sweep

Which is why we will likely continue to win 6-8 games a year under him.

Occasionally sniffing 9 wins but also having to put a few together to get to a bowl game each year.

Based on his buyout, I'm guessing we have him for at least three more years. Hopefully, he'll get the defense, offense, and recruiting all improved and heading in the right direction by then. Fuente is a guy that I think represents VT well so I really hope to see him succeed (not just VT succeed). But, you're probably right.

Keep in mind that 65% of p5 coaches have been fired in the last 20 years. So if we end up firing Fuente, that shouldn't be statistically unexpected.

The three outcomes are fired, hired up and retired. And he's pretty young to think he would retire here. So we might be higher than the average.

To talk about firing Fuente at this point this particular season seems crazy to me. Through all the adversity the team has faced through these three games I can't believe how well prepared and disciplined they have looked on the field. They way the team kept getting up off the mat every time UNC knocked us down on Saturday was a major credit to Fu in my eyes. There was no reason for them to keep fighting like that but they did.

I don't think the defense is as bad as it looked against the Heels. Covid outages aside, UNC is uniquely capable of taking advantage of our weaknesses in a way that I think only 1 or 2 other teams on our schedule are the rest of the way.

I don't know why we insist on trying to play OB's not named Hendon Hooker (if available) and I wish we would take a few more chances on offense when we don't necessarily need to. My feeling going into this season was that we would probably be in a lot of shootouts this year and we had the tools and experience returning on offense to win many of those. I still think that's true but only with 2 at OB.

Proud author of one plaid comment.

If there is one thing that has stood out to me being better under Fuente, is that our team seems to have more resiliency, not rolling over when we get behind the eight ball (with early season last year maybe being the exception). It seemed with Beamer that if we got punched in the mouth early, we'd never recover. But this is my gut and not from any statistical analysis.

Guys - RELAX. Fuente absolutely changed offense and it's paying dividends LITERALLY RIGHT FRIGGIN NOW. If we expected D to become awesome too then we should've pulled off the Foster Bandaid when Beamer retired, but we didn't and now we're suffering. Hindsight is Hindsight, but we probably should've just pulled it off then and lost the bowl streak *shrug*.

So we're awesome on O and shitty on D. Never would've thought that about Tech but here we are. We need JHam to now get his resources to pair with our O. No real D player would've come to the sunset of Fosters career, so we too need the horses on D to catch up with our O. This will take time no doubt about it. So RELAXXXXX....

I really think the defensive recruiting will take off. We made what looks like great hires on defense with TnT and Smith. Just look at how much DJ Harvey's dad loves that guy on Twitter. Now that recruits have answers as to what the staff will look like, the cruitin will pick up. Then we hit the snag of 2020. Pretty much 0 in home or on campus visits. HS seasons and camps cancelled. This will be a pure evaluation class and throw out the star rankings IMO. I am with AXD, we will be okay...

"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken" - Colonel Sanders via Ricky Bobby

Tim Settle was the last big time DT we signed. In the "sunset" of foster's career. Tremaine Edmunds was the best LB we have had in 15 years- signed in the "sunset" of Foster's career. The sunset of foster's career is not why we have missed on dozens of big time defensive prospects - especially those that don't play DB over the years. I don't expect that to drastically change in the near future if we mire in the middle of the ACC standings.

You mentioned two recruits that we got while we missed out on dozens. Glad we got Settle (though we only got him because he got his grades up last minute and no on else wanted him since he was a risk like that) and Edmunds (Brother connection with Beamer always helps), but we've missed on so many other defensive recruits because the negative recruiting against Tech was that "Foster didn't get an extension". It's not that hard to understand. Sure glad we got Mook and others that have looked good, but again the sheer amount we've missed vs what we've got is enormous. Please do your research before you care to add to a conversation.

LOL. Foster signed a 5 year contract in 2014. So your impeccable research indicates that all of the DT's we have missed on the past 15 years were because Foster was in limbo in terms of a new deal perhaps in 2018-2019 recruiting cycles. Gotcha. Thanks. This is one of the lamer excuses for poor recruiting that has been offered on here.

You continue to not know how to read. I can't really help you with that part, but let me remphasize by copy-pasting:

You mentioned two recruits that we got while we missed out on dozens. Glad we got Settle (though we only got him because he got his grades up last minute and no on else wanted him since he was a risk like that) and Edmunds (Brother connection with Beamer always helps), but we've missed on so many other defensive recruits because the negative recruiting against Tech was that "Foster didn't get an extension". It's not that hard to understand.

A 5-year contract under Beamer that wasn't renewed. That means for a 2020 season, if you want seasoned players, you need to start recruiting them in 2018 at the latest. Which means that if you're contract expires in 2019 and it HASN'T been renewed then that's a negative sign to a recruit that your D coordinator isn't going to be around much longer. Who wants to have that uncertainty? And you never acknowledged my fact that getting 3 out of (sake of argument) 20 targetted recruits on the D doesn't constitute success at all. Stick with the facts.

And I'm not talking about last 15 years at DT (hell I don't know how you pulled that out of your ass, but ok). I'm talking about why we suck at it right now. Jesus it's not that hard to understand. Please make a kindergarten attempt to do so.

Can you put a number - or even a guess- on the number of DT- hell defensive- recruits we missed on in the 2018 cycle because Bud Foster - in his 26th year of coaching at VT- was going to be unceremoniously fired/not retained to the point that Dabo and Mack could use that on the trail? Thanks

People who have better connections (insiders) than I do have all stated as such - PSU, UNC, Clemson and all the others who we went head to head for have used this against us. It may not have been the one and only reason, but it certainly was a large reason that we were passed on. I don't have the time to provide you a detailed list, but I'm sure LAHokie or others with better insight could probably chime in.

Justin Fuente has improved our offense and is fun to watch when clicking. After Foster retired, he went after a proven defensive coordinator (Barry Odom) to improve our play on that side of the ball. Because we couldn't afford to pay a proven DC, we ended up with an option that wasn't Fuente's first choice. I hope promoting Justin Hamilton works out for both VT and Fuente. If it doesn't work out, is this Fuente's fault? Until the administration, athletic department, and fan base go all in for football, any future head coach we have will be at a disadvantage with other p5 schools.

As we are currently seeing and what we saw during the Baylor fiasco, VT is small scale when it comes to financing the football, the money just isn't there and if it is there, it hasn't been prioritized.

If anything, 2020 is about to show us that there are very few schools that are willing to go all in for football. Or any sport, for that matter.

I love VT football, but it is literally at the bottom of the totem pole in terms of priorities. It's barely even on there at all. And thats not a slight towards the program. It's the reality that most people have more important things to worry about. Look at the NFL ratings, down. NBA Finals ratings, down. MLB playoff ratings have been trash for awhile. Sports is taking a back seat quickly, and college football might end up with 10-12 teams that can actually compete for a title. And thats pretty much how it is now anyway.

If our entire AD stays afloat through all of this, I will call it a success. We see cuts all over the country. Whit's job to improve fundraising isn't a 2 or 3 year thing, It is a 10 year deal to make those connections and contributions.

"I'm too drunk to taste this chicken" - Colonel Sanders via Ricky Bobby

Fuente wanted to groom Galen Scott into that role. Scott was his guy. Scott slept with married women on recruiting trips, so here we are.

It seems like most of the people skeptical about Fuente have lived pretty a sheltered life and haven't experienced the norms of new hires in the FBS.

Fu came here and took a broken team with no offensive line but a few good skill players to the ACC championship. He followed that up with another 9-3 season after losing most of his talent to the NFL Draft. In 2018 we had lost basically all of the contributors from the weak '15, and '16 classes and had to rely almost entirely on Fu's young guys. We still made a bowl and almost beat a 10-2 Cincy team in the bowl game. Last year Fu took that team to 8-4 and within a play of a return to the ACC championship game (including a 1 point loss on the road to a top 10 ND team with our 3rd string quarterback!?!!).

Compare that to ~any of the new hires in P5 football at non blue bloods, let alone the average one. Another team I follow, NC State went through the new hire process in 2013. Can any of you accurately describe the first 4 years of his tenure? They were horrible. In fact his first win over a P5 team to finish over .500 came in his 4th year against a 7-6 Wake Forest. His best win with the program before last week's game at Pitt was against a 7-5 Louisville team in 2017. Yet he still recruits top 35 every year and looks to have a pretty good team this season. The first 4 years don't necessarily define a tenure.

If Fu was at State and had just one of his good seasons from here, his contract would be extended to infinity. Doeren's highs have been Fu's lows. And Doeren is considered an above average hire in the business for a program very comparable to ours (although they do have more money, more resources, and are in a much better location).

I'll promise you this, if we fire Fuente without cause and end up with a Dave Doeren, or worse I will never let the anti-Fuente crowd hear the end of it. Please buckle up and be patient. Fuente's trajectory is a lot closer to Dabo's than any other coach in the ACC an I will stand by that.

Preach. We are better to allow this staff to grow and learn than recycling to a lesser version of the past several years. And, in today's portal climate, even if a new coach gets a new car smell recruiting bump, there will be a ground zero full of growing pains.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

Compare that to ~any of the new hires in P5 football at non blue bloods, let alone the average one.

PJ Fleck's Minnesota team has looked and fared better in each of his three seasons

side note: I found it amusing that the guy he replaced is our linebackers coach now, and the guy he replaced was brought in as a consultant because our OC can't break down film, and the guy he replaced eventually went on to help UNC put together what's looking like a top-15 2020 recruiting class.

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

Fleck is a great hire, but he's gone 5-7, 7-6, 11-2 in an even weaker division than ours. That is at least comparable to Fuente's record here, from someone who is considered the best of the best new hires.

Sure. Obvious year over year improvement being a clear difference

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

We still made a bowl and almost beat a 10-2 Cincy team in the bowl game.

That's a pretty rosy way of describing the '18 season. Another description would be that we backed into a Bowl game by scheduling a gratuitous game that we wouldn't have even bothered with had we not beaten our rival on a lucky fumble as they were slicing their way towards our Endzone. This, after a season with multiple embarrassing losses.

And we lost to Cinci, a team 3rd in their division in CUSA...beating G5 teams should be an expectation, not something to get excited over.

I think the Doeren comparison is quite apt, but not from the standpoint that Fuente is far superior. Honestly, I think their resumes are pretty similar. Both mid-level teams that haven't really distinguished themselves. I think Fuente is a superior gameday coach, but Doeren is a better Recruiter and doesn't have a hideous Bowl Game Record..save an epic collapse by a
Arky and Fuente would be winless in bowls at VT.

I don't think Fuente is a bad coach, but I also don't think he is a great fit at VT. I think ultimately, he and VT go separate ways when Fuente takes a HC job elsewhere.

Okay about 2018 but then you agree that's mostly on Frank Beamer. We had a couple studs in the 15, and 16 classes but once they left we had no depth at all. Those two classes on the whole were pretty awful and it's not realistic to expect Fuente's class of redshirt freshmen to go out and win 8+ games, it just isn't.

Fuente being similar to Doeren is hilarious to me because 1) clearly you haven't compared their records and 2) if he was actually our coach you would be screaming for Dave to be fired and he probably would have been year 3. Dave had 2 good years each being 9-4. That 2017 team had more talent than any Tech team has had while Fuente is coach and they still lost to South Carolina and Wake Forest. The only P5 teams over .500 they beat in that stretch? Two 7-5 BC's and a 7-5 UVA.

Fuente's record as tech is far and away better than Dave's at State. As a fan of both teams that comparison would make me angry if it weren't so ridiculous.

Edit: Cincy is not CUSA, there were 3rd of 12 teams in the entire American that year.

So we are going to place responsibility for the 2018 season on a coach that was 3 years retired by that point?

Does he then get the credit for '16? Which was by far Fuente's best year with 95% Beamer's players.

By that logic, does Doeren get to blame his Inaugural season on Tom O'Brien?..because if you take that year away, Doeren and Fuente's Win% are pretty close to equal.

The fact that I can't even remember what G5 Conference Cinci is in only further proves how inconsequential they are.

Remember when we lost to Cinci and the Munchie Legaux show in 2012? Do you remember any positive feelings after that? I sure don't...I remember a meltdown. Lauding a coach for almost beating Cincinnati is what's ridiculous.

To respond to one point in your post, Cincinnati is currently ranked 8th in the AP poll. The idea that every G5 team is bad because they're in the G5 is silly. Cincinnati is a fantastic football team right now and was a good/really good team when we played them in the Military bowl.

Right, Cinci is 8th in the AP poll in a year when the AP Poll is essentially meaningless---their victories Austin Peay, Army, and USF---most years that resume wouldn't get you in the Top 25.

Let's think Outside the Box a bit...

Let's pretend you are a P5 Position Coach going in to visit a really important Recruit at a position of need. You know many of your Rivals also want said player. You need to pull out the best you've got to convince this Recruit that your Program is the one for him.

Do you include the phrase..."well, we almost beat Cincinnati in the Military Bowl in 2018.." in your pitch?

That's why Cincinnati doesn't matter. They have a solid Program, quite honestly they have had a solid Program going back well before Fickell got there, but they don't move the needle.

This is where VT is at this point--we need to start Winning many more recruiting battles. We need personnel to fit our Defensive scheme and we need significantly more quality depth. Victories against G5 opponents (particularly moral ones) don't help us with that.

I don't think think playing Cincinnati close should be a recruiting pitch, I never said it should be. I agree that in terms of optics, close games with G5 teams probably hurt more than help, even when the G5 is legitimately good.

My point was that when discussing the quality of a team, like the 2018 Hokies, discussing a team like Cincinnati in the context of "they're G5 so they're bad" is unhelpful. My point was more of an aside than anything. Another aside, even though the AP Poll is very weird this year, Cincinnati is a very good team, G5 or not.

Otherwise I agree, recruiting needs to get better and winning games is more helpful than not winning games.

We hemorrhage kids to the portal while bringing in bottom dwelling recruiting classes.

That isn't 'normal' for a P5 coach.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

I don't think it's fair to say we hemorrhage kids to the portal without also giving a nod to what we've gained from the portal. Someone else could flesh out this list, but off the top of my head I can think of the following impact players who didn't believe that the cake is a lie:

Burmeister (I may bitch about him, but he gave us 2 wins to start the season)
Justice Reed
Khalil Mother Effing Herbert
Raheem Blackshear
Brock Hoffman

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

I honestly struggle to think of a transfer out of the program that feels like a mistake in retrospect. The only one that comes to mind was Trayvon McMillian. Trey Edmunds is the biggest loss in recent history IMO (dude had success at Maryland has been a serviceable backup in the NFL) and that was under the Beamer administration.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Jet Sweep

THIS!!! if people are going to complain about how many people who've left through the portal, you better show that they're having an impact at another P5 school (I don't want to see a player who's having a great year in a D3 program). Here's the link I was posting last year to show that most of the players weren't even playing on non-P5 teams. If they're not even playing at those schools, there's zero chance they would have had an impact here and we shouldn't care that they left. Meanwhile, we picked up BB, Blackshear, Herbert, three REALLY big contributors. And even if you aren't a fan of BB - he was able to play when HH was out due to COVID. I think we're making out way better from the portal than any losses we've had. Hazelton was the guy who I think most people were upset at losing. He's recorded 100 yards through 2 games and no TD's. We're running the ball a lot more this year, so I'd guess the blocking issues French brought up might have limited his playing time this year if he were to have stayed.

This is fair, but also unnecessary if you're doing your job on the recruiting trail and in the developmental category.

It's great to land quality transfers and I'm quite happy to have the ones we have, but you can't build a program via the transfer portal.

Is coronavirus over yet?

Sonny Dykes and SMU would love to argue with you over building a program from the portal.

This.

Discounting the role transfers can play in modern college football is dated thinking. Particularly for fans of a team whose offensive heavily involves transfers to great success.

The Orange and Maroon you see, that's fighting on to victory.

I'm not sure you read my entire post. I value transfers. I just don't think you can build a program on them.

Is coronavirus over yet?

I happen to agree with you. The only coach in history to build a program on JUCOs/Transfers is Bill Snyder. That said, the transfer market is more dynamic than ever before. I definitely have my concerns, but I'm interested to see if this level transfer activity becomes the new norm, or if it's something that Fuente relies on less and less over time.

Twitter me

Gotcha. Sorry if I didn't pick up on that.

Is coronavirus over yet?

Hit me back when you are talking about P-5 football.

Is coronavirus over yet?

LSU should have recruited a better quarterback instead of taking a transfer that broke record books and won a title. Bottom line is it takes both in this day of college football. My hope is that a few of the successful transfers leads to better talent in recruiting if the staff does not run out of time first.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

Exactly. Selling 8-4, and 3rd in the coastal is tough in terms of top high school talent. So hopefully the portal can turn that into a couple ACC coastal crowns and good bowl wins to attract more high school talent. Winning matters. There is little to no juice around VT football right now. 2-2 in our last 4 ACC games, etc. Needs to start trending up

What if I told you we're 7-2 in our last 9 ACC games, would that change anything?

I agree with you though -- portal is great to bring in nice depth pieces and to patch holes at key positions of need with an immediate contributor. I don't think it's a viable replacement for recruiting (edit: high school) talent.

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

Or we have the 2nd best conference record in the ACC since Fuente took over. But that may say more about the rest of the conference than us.

I was a little surprised and encouraged to hear that during the game as well.

Proud author of one plaid comment.

Miami and FSU each have had 2 new head coaches in that time frame. GT, UNC, BC have had coaching changes as well. FSU is a complete dumpster fire compared to the last 30 years. That has a lot to do with it.

FSU is a complete dumpster fire

You just love to hear it. Made my day being reminded of that.

oh hey, look, DC is trying to explain away perfectly relevant statistics.

In other breaking news, water is wet.

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

conveniently ignoring the fact that we also had a new head coach in the time frame because the timeframe is literally as wide as it could possibly be to include us having a new head coach

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

Nope- or I would have mentioned Bronco. These all happened after Fu coached his first season at VT

......the timeframe literally starts with a VT coaching change by definition

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

I think his point is all those coaches have coached less seasons than Fuente, which is a valid point for that statistic.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

Not when the 2 losses to our closest recruiting rivals come off the heels of losing to Duke and BC, thus placing us squarely medicore in the ACC pecking order and perception. But you have a point too. Just win more, baby!

LSU's transfer QB was surrounded by the most talented team in the country. Apples - Oranges. The transfer portal can certainly serve to fill in the gaps. But I'll stand by my statement that you can't build a program on them.

Is coronavirus over yet?

I agree but you may be able to spark a program with them. Traditional recruiting will always be important. The difference today is you better be able to do well in both categories.

"If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"

I get wanting people back, but it's not like the players that left have done much of anything. Ladler has 14 tackles for Louisiana Tech, Hazleton has minimal stats for Missouri. Phil Patterson, Grimsley, Becton, Gaines, and Proctor aren't even playing. Webb went to Missouri State. Did Watts do anything, is Kumah or Savoy still around?

Would it be nice having those guys as depth?Absolutely, especially when we're down 20 players a week. But it's not like were losing Jalen Hurts every time.

Watts elected to sit out this year. The people we lost in the portal accelerate the development of some of the younger players.

Kumah redshirted last year, only playing 4 games, but finished third on the team with 18 catches for 192 yards. And then ODU was one of the first to pull out of the 2020 season completely, so it looks like he's going to the draft.

Savoy didn't finish the season with Maryland, and might have entered the portal again.

/Ctrl-F "Sports Illustrated Article"

Zero results found

I'm amazed that people find parroting conventional wisdom and stating the obvious is insightful.

I don't think it's particularly insightful - rather, I'm always interested in knowing how the 'national media' perceives VT. Honestly, we haven't gotten much national media attention in the last decade, so I try to share it when it does happen.

Twitter me