The Virginia Tech era of Moneyball is over

From 2001-2020, The ACC Coastal teams Virginia Tech and Miami played every year. The overall record of the matchups between these two teams is 10-10.

While many of these matchups were close both on the field and in the lead up to the game (Vegas only predicted a double-digit winner in only 4 of these matchups), it's important to point out the vastly different amount of talent amongst these two programs.

Miami nearly had 50% blue chip recruits over this time frame. Virginia Tech sat right around 20% over this same time. So what gives? How could these two programs compete so closely?

In fact, Vegas went 14-6 in predicting the winner.

Let's look at the margins. How do lower-ranked kids eventually make it in to the FBS?

As it happens, many teams west of the Mississippi river have a local resource in recruiting in their Junior Colleges. Junior Colleges are a pretty good deal for underappreciated athletes; play 2 years under scholarship, hope to impress some college coaches, and play out your college career in front of lots of fans at an FBS stadium.

East of the Mississippi, Junior Colleges are scarce. There's a league in Mississippi and another in New England, but they're not among the top leagues. You could always take an FCS scholarship or walk on to get your foot in the door.

There's another route to an FBS scholarship, however- Prep School. Prep school isn't available to everybody. Your parents have to front cash to get you in the door.

If your family can swing it, the upside to Prep school is that none of your college eligibility is taken. You enroll for a semester or a year in Prep School, you hope to impress college coaches as well, and if you end up at an FBS school, you get your full eligibility time to get on the field and contribute.

Up until 2013, Virginia was home to almost 85% of the enrolled Prep School athletes that would play at a Power 5 school. The two largest Prep schools in the nation were housed here; Fork Union Military Academy and Hargrave Military Academy. (In a distant third, the Milford Academy in New Berlin, NY produced most of the other 15%).

It's important to point out how this relates to Virginia Tech. First off, we're not the only program benefitting from Prep School signees. In this graph, you can see how the Group of 5 schools utilize Prep schools to boost their numbers:

Amongst both the FBS and the Power 5 programs, Virginia Tech is the leader in Prep School signees:

So it's clear that Prep School players worked into Frank Beamer's roster management philosophy. It's important to point out that the last JUCO player Frank Beamer signed was James Griffin out of Pasadena city college.

In 2003. So why would a coach stay so far away for so many years from Players with limited eligibilty?

I imagine Frank Beamer was a proud fella. He probably felt it was beneath him to beg for things.

So in 1995, when we made it to the Sugar Bowl and beat Texas, he refused to beg.

In 1999, when we ran to an undefeated regular season all the way to the National Championship game, he refused to beg.

In 2007, when we completed a run of 8 consecutive 10 win seasons, he refused to beg.

Frank Beamer was well aware that playing in Virginia, he had a resource that didn't require the nicest facilities and the coziest creature comforts attracting the top talent in the nation required.

He could bank on his experience and go toe to toe with all the talent in the nation, and he could win as often as not.

Throughout the Frank Beamer years, we targeted Prep School players for the extra eligibility. We utilized the gray shirt and red shirt like no other program in the country. And while our performance against the top ten teams were lacking, we managed to pull together a successful, winning program.

On the cheap.

So in 2013, a funny thing happened.

Hargrave Military Academy decided to forgo their post-graduate football program.

Reference 1
Reference 2
Reference 3

No sweat, right? We got this.

Except no, we don't. This was a big deal.

The top Prep Program in the nation folding might actually be a big deal...

I can't tell; this graphic is kind of all over the place-

Oh. Yeah. That's a big deal.

The greatest influx of talent Virginia Tech ever got was joining into the ranks of the mighty Pitt, Miami, Syracuse and West Virginia programs when we joined our first ever major conference in the Big East.

This is a helpful reminder that the Virginia Tech football program hasn't kept up on Premium facilities that attract the top talent in the nation (checks notes)


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


Playing FUMA and Hagrave every year you always were on the lookout for them trying to sneak down a prep player onto Varsity for the playoffs in the late 90's and early 2000's.

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

The facilities argument is so lame. so lame. We are pouring millions into them, and Auburn just announced a facility that will be better than Oregon's- playing the yearly arms race- VT will never win. At some point you have to win fucking games against Wake and ODU and close on players better than 11th and 14th in the ACC. What better home stadium ( is Lane a "facility"??) is there in the ACC during a game? Keenan? LMAO. Doak? 20 years ago. Clemson- yes maybe. Is Lane a "facility"? Or does that not count? The Beamer Barn is miles better than Alabama's- which is closer to Rector in design- I've been in both. It's better than UVA's. It's better than GT's newer one. Is that a "facility"? I guess not? Before Beamer left he built a new locker room with the largest lockers in CFB at the time- that's now a middle school changing room I guess? And the horror that Whit occasionally let's other teams walk into Merryman is the latest farce. Merryman is 99% "football fucking only"- the holy grail talking point now. It's also recently renovated with the largest weight room in the conference. We also opened the best nutrition room on the east coast last year. Fucking bullshit talking point excuse for poor recruiting and coaching. Mack Brown comes off the couch and sells a 40% capacity stadium to kids in virginia immediately. Shane Beamer jumps right in and lands talent at USC as a first time head coach. Mike Locksley sells a total shit stadium and football experience to kids in the 757. It's a fucking lame excuse.

Sounds like you've got it all figured out. Glad to hear that. Hopefully your plan comes to fruition and fixes the program.

Well the lame excuses isn't helping winning.

We both want Fuente to win more games. Let's start from there as a common ground.

And at 5 mil per, perhaps he could do that without pointing to the fact there is not a putt putt course for the football team ONLY

The problem with top athletes is that this becomes a battle of attrition.

ACC (Power 5) school? Check
Loud and filled stadium? Check
On-campus dining on point? Check
Storied history of great defense narrated by a lunch box? Check

Freshman dorms that can't compete with the first half of Full Metal Jacket? Oh shit

Freshman dorms that can't compete with the second half of Full Metal Jacket? Oh shit

Yeah, we're close.

1. You obviously have never been in Harper Hall? It is a very nice, relatively new suites dorm where the Edmunds bros among others lived. Nothing like full metal jacket or even pritchard for that matter. 2. We are breaking ground on a multi million dollar ballers dorm. 3. Will it be comparable to the literal vegas style private condo's on the main strip in tallahassee that Florida State boosters conveniently rent for cheap to only athletes? maybe not. I concede that point.

Let's pray we can get a few years out of it until its compared to a Motel 6.

Bates Motel.

We both want Fuente VT to win more games. Let's start from there as a common ground.

I wouldn't be shocked if there is a portion of the fanbase (and I'm not saying that DC is in this portion, just using this space to point it out) that wants to see Fuente fail so they can be justified in their calls for a new HC. There are still others who just want Fuente to fail because they don't think he has what it takes and they just want it abundantly clear that he's not cut out for this job and the only logical move is to fire him and hire someone else.

I think it's less accurate to say that VT fans at large want Fuente to win more games. I think VT fans want VT to win more games. And some folks probably believe that the fewer games Fuente wins in 2021, the more likely VT is to win more games in, say 2025.

It's always darkest before the dawn ~ Thomas Fuller

Personally, my continued donations and support of the program say anything but I want Fuente to lose to wake for shits and grins. Nope, not at all. I want this staff to stop making fucking excuses. Or feeding their excuses to the media. That's what I want. There is no excuse for Virginia Tech football to lose to Liberty at home. None. There is no excuse to get run off the field at ODU's stadium without running water and port o johns. Busch League. VT should not lose like that- ever. Stop the fucking excuses- the latest being that we can't beat Wake because the baseball team also has a meeting room in Merryman. Fuck all of that.

Don't have a stroke

It's Time to go to Work

It can be true that the facilities are hurting VT, and the current leaders of the program are not getting the most out of what they have. In this case, both are true.

Five star get after it 100 percent Juice Key-Playing. MAN

I respectfully think your first sentence is vastly overblown.

I think they are overblown as well but lets not pretend they are meaningless. Otherwise, the nice facilities you have mentioned wouldn't have been worth doing

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K

Fuente got three top-30 classes with the facilities we had in 2017-19, I 100% agree with you.

Winner right here. We could give Fuente and Co. the resources and facilities of Texas/Bama/etc. and I still think we would vastly underperform. On the other end of the spectrum, we could hire Nick Saban and every top assistant in the country, but if we don't upgrade and modernize our facilities (with credit where it's due that Lane and the Beamer Barn are both upper tier IMO) we would also underperform. VT athletics does need the capital investments, but I think we also need the right head coach to light the fuse to the Reach campaign powder keg. Fu isn't the charismatic personality that I would want to be the face of a multi-million dollar fundraising effort and champion-brand football program.

I think the 2nd half of your statement is spot on... the Beamer regime consistently did more with less and maximized the utility of what the athletic department could provide. I will not go as far to say that Fuente has pissed away investments, but its hard to see how they are getting close to the maximum utility of what they have been given to work with. Beamer was given a Chevy Nova and figured out how to mod it to race with the big boys. Fuente was given a 5 series and has yet to take it further than around the block and back.

It's Time to go to Work

Dc , you Preach brother- excuses is what we get from this staff. We are not hard smart tough. Our identity is crap. We are weak, dull and tiresome. Nothing but excuses are spewed to the fan base. We cant even see a freaking spring game on tv. Somebody might figure out our weak ass defense, and QB one read and haul was QB run offense.

This is the best post I've read on TKP in a LONG, LONG time. Spot on. This post summarizes exactly how I feel about CJF and all the BS excuses about donations/facilities. I hate coaches making lame excuses, and you totally nailed it. And since the football program is closed, the only thing fans can discuss is lack of donations...lame. VT NEVER, EVER should lose to Liberty, UVA, or ODU. I'm sorry, but I don't care about anything else - those loses never should have happened, and they should not be forgotten when evaluating CJF's performance. That, coupled with poor recruiting (seriously, getting crushed by UNCheat whose students & fans don't even care about football - what happened to NC2VT?) is where CJF has lost me. CJF must be too busy recruiting TX (also lame, but I think we can guess why he's focusing on TX). Lame, lame, lame.


Sir, this is a Wendy's drive thru.

But in all seriousness, how did you get to this point from reading what the OP said about prep schools? I know that last line said something about facilities, but I think the main point of this topic was to discuss the ways prep schools impact player development and, by extension, wins and losses.

I understand the tendency to just yell WE GOTTA RECRUIT BETTER AND WIN NO EXCUSES (we should definitely do those things!) but it's ok to look at why we're not winning from a bunch of different angles. Does funding affect wins and losses? Yeah, maybe. Recruiting relationships? In game coaching? Player development once they're here? Prep schools? Obviously all of those things contribute in one way or another to our success, some more than others. But just leaving it at WE GOTTA WIN doesn't really contribute to any broader point. It IS the point that all these other "excuses" are pointing toward.

This is a great comment. Brockman put a lot of research and effort into his post as we search for answers as to the steady decline of VT football. To use this as a jumping off point to go on several tirades is wild.

To see all these comments calling his research an "EXCUSE" and "SO FUCKING LAME" go green is really disappointing. I'm just reading a lot of what Joe calls: "Dickishness".

These well researched posts make thekeyplay a great community and usually spur good discussion that abides by maintaining decorum. Jumping all over them with loud opinions with nothing to back it up greatly discourages anyone to make an attempt at building a good case and coming up with some pretty substantial points with data to back it up.

Just because he did a ton of research doesn't mean it's 100% percent the reason and we have to agree with it. But but holy shit boys... pointing our frustration with VT football at each other is fucking exhausting to read...

FOSTERS: Australian for defense

Great write up.

So, most of those prep kids were recruited heavily by VT in high school and some were even high school commits before needing to detour the prep school route. My question, where do those kids go now? And my statement, we still need to recruit better high school talent.

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K

Great read and interesting perspective. Thanks for this.

Can I ask if there was a reason to use colors multiple times in the pie charts? I only ask because I'm dumb and my brain won't shut up about which is which in the pie charts.

I tried to use colors that would correspond to the football teams, but many colors repeated.

Marshall is the dark green and Ohio is the light green in the G5 graph.

UConn is the dark gray and "Other" is the light gray in the G5 graph.

Ole Miss is the big sliver and Georgia is the little sliver of red in the P5 graph.

VT is the big sliver and Alabama is the little sliver of maroon in the P5 graph.

So to summarize - one could draw a conclusion that a big reason for the drop off of VT football is that the recruiting pipeline from the prep schools was an important piece of Frank Beamer's recruiting but that got interrupted by the closure of Hargrave, and since then VT has not been able to replace said recruiting pipeline through other means.

The philosophy of "my experience can compete with your talent" is crippled when the Prep school pipeline is throttled down to almost zero.

We've never had to match the talent of our greatest peers. Now our "secret weapon" is disarmed.

We've never had to match the talent of our greatest peers. Now our "secret weapon" is disarmed

I actually disagree with this comment, and I think that you're looking at the wrong inefficiency. IMO we DID have enough talent to match our greatest peers, however, there was no one identifying that talent (except for us) pre-2007ish. 247, Hudl, Social Media, etc changed that.

So why would a coach stay so far away for so many years from Players with limited eligibilty?

Taking players with limited eligibility is a risky game. See what happened to Charlie Weis at Kansas. There's only one coach who made this work for a sustained period of time - Bill Snyder.

Twitter me

IMO we DID have enough talent to match our greatest peers, however, there was no one identifying that talent (except for us) pre-2007ish. 247, Hudl, Social Media, etc changed that.

In John Iezzi's "Sons of Saturday" interview, two of the more shocking disclosures are that we didn't employ recruiting staff until 2014, and we didn't pay for a Hudl subscription until 2018.

I find it hard to believe that our program was really that much better at evaluating talent when it's quite clear we really weren't looking that hard to begin with.

Our coaching staff's ability to find "hidden gems" wasn't a matter of diligently looking under rocks; we simply relied on networking with HS coaches. There's nothing wrong with building those relationships, but we relied solely on that Gerry-rigged setup while all the other schools were already busy doing their own homework. If our ability to find talent was as great as we like to think it was, we should have been on top of the new technology as it arrived; not strangers to it a decade on.

Not having a recruiting staff until 2014 seems like pretty solid evidence in the case for Moneyball.

So why would a coach stay so far away for so many years from Players with limited eligibilty?

The risk schools in Kansas and Iowa have is to watch just how many JUCO players they sign because the majority of FBS bound players in their geographical footprint are simply not high schoolers.

Virginia Tech was a distinct outlier not to have taken a single JUCO player from 2003-2016 (we did take Michael Brewer as a Transfer QB in 2014). I think maybe Temple and a MAC school or two might have also eschewed JUCO players to a similar degree, but pretty much every team in the country has some dealings with Junior College players.

There are a few hundred JUCO signees a year, so the average at a school is about 2 or 3. I wasn't pointing out that we weren't meeting the average. We weren't even bothering to offer any JUCO players throughout those seasons. It appears there was a "Hard Pass" philosophy on JUCOs within our coaching staff.

Our coaching staff's ability to find "hidden gems" wasn't a matter of diligently looking under rocks; we simply relied on networking with HS coaches.

1000% agree

In John Iezzi's "Sons of Saturday" interview, two of the more shocking disclosures are that we didn't employ recruiting staff until 2014, and we didn't pay for a Hudl subscription until 2018.

Yes - I'm talking way before 2014. I think our method of recruiting became somewhat obsolete between 2005 and 2008 - Those were the last period that our top 25 class significantly outplayed their ranking to multiple 'hidden gems'.

We weren't even bothering to offer any JUCO players throughout those seasons. It appears there was a "Hard Pass" philosophy on JUCOs within our coaching staff.

This is a fair point. I don't think it had anything to do with Beamer being 'too proud' to sign JUCOs; I think he could land kids out of high school that his team rated higher.

Twitter me

I'm old, so my memory may be incorrect, but Beamer addressed the lack of JUCOs in an interview in the late 90s. Or maybe it was the early 90s. The problem wasn't that he didn't want JUCOs, it's that VT had more stringent transfer requirements at the time. We had problems with a couple of JUCO transfers ( I seem to recall that a WR, Ricky Hall, from the 90s was one of them ). I don't recall what the issue was, but pretty sure it involved math requirements.

[Edit - spent 5 minutes googling, so now I am an expert - in internet terms - on what the issue was. The issue wasn't math requirements. The issue was that we used to have a policy that we would not take JUCOs that did not qualify out of high school, so that seriously limited the JUCO possibilities. I don't know when that changed, because apparently Ricky Hall did not qualify (I think?) and we took him as a JUCO.]

Anyway, that's my recollection, but like I said, I'm old and my memory doesn't work so good any more.

Wait, what?

Before I really paid attention to the fact that we really didn't deal in Junior College players at all (I just knew that we didn't regularly take them), I always thought that they would naturally tend to sign with "lesser" academic schools.

What's wild is schools like Northwestern and Stanford have had histories of taking Junior College players about as regularly as anybody else. The discerning characteristic for schools that tend to avoid JUCO's is more to do with geography (east coast, mostly). The ACC and Big East typically took less JUCO's on average than the other P5 conferences.

I thought the non-qualifier requirement for JUCOs was a VT policy, but it's possible it was a Big East and ACC policy, and that would account for a large portion of East Coast football not using JUCOs.

But that's a guess more than even a theory. I just don't recall conference policies at all from that long ago.

Wait, what?

I've never seen an entire conference that completely balked on JUCO players, and that's looking back to 1980. It's possible that conferences have different standards, but it's clear that since academic standards have been enforced there's never been a no-JUCO policy conference-wide.

It makes geographic sense for less JUCOs to be playing on the East Coast.

No, you misunderstand. You are correct, no conference has or has probably every had a policy that you cannot take any JUCO players.

However, has there been a conference policy that does not allow you to take players that did not qualify out of high school? And there is even hair-splitting there: it could be that this type of policy does not allow non-qualifiers (had neither the grades nor the test score), but it could allow partial qualifiers.

It's true that there aren't many players like that as most JUCOs did not qualify out of HS. But that's why we didn't take many back in the late 1990s - they were allowed, there just weren't that many JUCOs that qualified out of HS and that had an interest in playing at VT.

Interestingly to me, just a little after that time, there was some complaining on the Clemson board about not taking JUCOs at Clemson. Dabo gave a different answer than Frank did in the mid to late 1990s.

Why doesn't Clemson take JUCOs?

Also, at least around 2007 to 2011, it wasn't an East Coast thing, it was an ACC thing. See this article at The ACC took the least JUCOs of all conferences (almost half as many as the next lowest, the Big 10). But other conferences recruited them more heavily, and several East Coast schools like ECU, Temple, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and Syracuse took quite a few compared to the ACC. article on JUCO recruiting

Anyway, none of this is very relevant to your article. Your comment on JUCOs just triggered that one memory of a throwaway comment by Frank way back.

Your article was interesting (not just because I happened to mention the same theory to some friends a few months ago!) and thought-provoking. Thanks.

Wait, what?

Also because JUCO students are finishing up JUCO and want to continue. With that + their foundation in academics (strong ones at that), those schools will eat them up.


UH BS 20, VT MS 23.

Go Coogs, Go Hokies.

Whenever I think of Hargrave its always as the place that you were threatened with if you were bad. That is where you were sent if you were a bad kid, Hargrave Military Academy.

Also, it always makes me think of this movie....

Living in Southern New Jersey, when I read Camden Military Academy I think about someone in the Camden Public Schools or just surviving the gauntlet of getting from your home to the store.

Recovering scientist working in business consulting

Had a stepson that we looked into FUMA and Hargrave in the 1998-2003 timeframe but that went out the window when we saw the $15000 per year price tag. We were "comfortable" but not THAT comfortable to be spending $15000/yr on high school!

From the 2018 VT-uva game-"This is when LEGENDS are made!"


This was a really interesting read, thanks for all the hard work that went into it. Now I'm interested to know who the top prep players of the Beamer era are.

The player ratings outside of 247 are approximate.

There are a lot of players who didn't pan out at the top of this list.

The success rate of Prep Players taken seems to be completely independent of the recruiting grades. A lot of starting Left Tackles, DBs and QBs came from Prep Schools. I don't know that a single successful running back came from a prep school, though.

how dare you besmirch the legacy of hokie legend drew harris like that

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

Nice article but missing a lot of context IMO. A lot of what Frank did to manage his roster and where he got it was born from the plans of the AD, particularly Weaver. I wouldn't say that had to do with facilities in large part until mid-2000s. Between Texas and FSU there was almost zero national exposure school to school on the facilities arms race, unless you were a diehard fan. After FSU we had a moment to do something great that Weaver choked the life out of.... then somewhere post 2005 facilities mattered. Vick was gone, the post Cinderella glow was gone and the Era of recruiting sites and recruitniks were born, and our lack of facilities was really exposed.

I tend to be in the middle. I don't think it's reasonable to say facilities is as great a reason as some people believe, at the same time certainly lack of quality facilities has hindered VT as national media and now social media exposure to recruits has grown.

I'm not sure that Weaver had much control over who Beamer recruited. Frank Beamer was taking Prep players regularly just as soon as the Dooley sanctions went away. I imagine it's one of the reasons Braine gave him a sixth season at the start of his tenure- he had a plan; it just took a while to kick in. But the Prep Players started rolling in in 1990 (Will Furrer was taken in Beamer's first class).

I really believe Frank Beamer discovered and exploited a brilliant geographical feature of coaching in the state of Virginia. It's pretty disheartening that now it's effectively gone.

I don't have a lot of inside knowledge of what went on under Jim Weaver.

Control, no. I didn't say that. Affected it, yes. He absolutely did. After '99 Beamer wanted to grab opportunity while it knocked and push VT forward on a lot of fronts, including facilities, coaches, asst coaches pay. etc, that he knew was impeding/going to impede VT in the future. Weaver's plan was to stay the course of remaining cash rich and investing little to none. The impetus for Beamer's dalliance with UNC. Despite making a deal after the UNC decision, the tight purse strings and Weaver's knowing "what the fans want" continued to affect the program and stymied recruiting. It changed who Beamer was able to attract to VT because recruiting was becoming a national focus and VT was losing appeal, and was the start of the slide from when we had the nation's attention to ten years later when the cupboard was dry.

Thank you for clarifying that.

I can see pretty clearly in recruiting numbers that success clearly separates schools by conferences first - the P5 schools attract almost all of the top talent.

Amongst the Power 5 schools, success runs distantly behind the biggest and richest programs; far less significant is success on the field. One of the clearest examples I can find is our program, in the aughts when we were kicking ass on the field and spinning our wheels going nowhere on the recruiting trail.

I've heard similar talk about Weaver, but I don't pretend to know the details. Your reply is very succinct.

Apparently there was a time where 5* players, two or three of them would go to one school. Now with the P5/G5 divide, specifically in FBS, yeah, 5*s will go to places where CFP Committee will select that school only.

And G5s have more first round picks then the entire Big 12 :D


UH BS 20, VT MS 23.

Go Coogs, Go Hokies.

I look at recruiting numbers back to 1980, and the distribution is similar to what we see now. There was a slightly better chance for a smaller school to land a local big fish, but it's really not much better than today. Nowadays it's rare for a G5 school to land a 5-star player (Houston landed Ed Oliver in 2016). In the 80's every 2 or 3 years it happened.

There typically had been only 30-35 5***** rated players a year; a couple of years ago 247 finally standardized it, so there are now 32 every year (that coincides with the number of first rounds draft picks on purpose).

Schools like Alabama, Clemson and Ohio State land a lot of 5-stars but so do schools like Texas, Penn State, Michigan, UCLA and Florida; none of which have been to the Playoff.

Perhaps an outlier, Michigan State remains a relative lightweight on the recruiting trail; a playoff appearance hasn't really changed the cards much for them. But even our National Championship appearance ended up helping us sign the #1 overall recruit in the nation 2 years later. It's definitely something that moves the needle in recruiting.

people talking about facilities in this thread totally whooshed themselves tbh

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

What in the world does whooshed mean?

Edit: Completed the sentence

It's Time to go to Work

It's an unwritten law that it's my lunch pail. I've issued the challenge. If someone outworks me, they can get it.
Darryl Tapp

Brockman has to partially take the blame for the facilities taking over the conversation, though.

This was a great, well-researched article that clearly shows how one of our main sources of players (both starters and depth) basically disappeared overnight when Hargrave shut down their football program. It has had a significant, measurable effect on VT football. That is a great topic so kudos for that.

But the last paragraph just comes out of nowhere, is completely unrelated, and worst of all, is false. To say that VT never kept up on facilities ignores the fact that the locker room was cutting edge when it debuted and it had the largest lockers in the country per Beamer's request. It completely ignored how unique and ahead of its time, in both design and size, the Beamer Barn was. Posters discussing facilities are viscerally reacting to the last thing that they read. Brockman prepared a delicious meal, but somehow made the last few bites taste like wet cigarette butts. Without that last paragraph this is an all-time post.

"Sooner or later, if man is ever to be worthy of his destiny, we must fill our heart with tolerance."
-Stan Lee

"Never half-ass two things. Whole-ass one thing."
-Ron Swanson

"11-0, bro"
-Hunter Carpenter (probably)

Noticing the schedule every year, why is Whit scheduling against FCS/C-USA teams? What about scheduling out other teams from other states, then recruiting the heck out of there?

(On the note, if ACC ever expands and takes a Texas team (UH?), you're accessing a decently fertile recruiting ground and competing with those in the likes of Big 12, who hate adding schools from big cities because they lose that recruiting.


UH BS 20, VT MS 23.

Go Coogs, Go Hokies.

The current coaching staff has ties to the region, so that's a big reason why we can expect at least some success recruiting there.

There's a non-zero chance that we'll have a new coaching staff next season, and schedules are developed years in advance. If we had a long-term history of recruiting in a region like this, I imagine we'd naturally want to plan a home-and-home.

We used to have a long-term pipeline out of (Delray Beach) Atlantic HS, just down the road from Florida Atlantic. I'm not sure if we ever looked that hard at planning a home-and-home with them.

Slightly OT because I can't post new threads yet, but there's a bigger shift of analytics in football, I talked with a VMI grad about how they're using data to predict a team's next play.


UH BS 20, VT MS 23.

Go Coogs, Go Hokies.