Now that the news is official and Fuente is out, what are you expecting for the new coaching regime?
I'll start with mine.
1 - Emphasis on recruiting, recruiting, recruiting. You have to have good players if you hope to compete, and we just haven't been hitting the mark consistently enough in this area of the game to be the kind of program we know we can be. If anything, the head coach should be the de-facto Recruiting Coordinator for the program with a staff hired that each has a background in recruiting excellence, preferably in our region.
2 - Hire excellent coordinators and delegate the handling of the offense and defense to them. And be willing to replace coordinators who show they are in over their heads.
3 - More engagement with media and fans. Open up practices, embrace social media. The program doesn't have to be locked down as tight as Ft. Knox. The only times we hear from staff and players shouldn't be in their weekly press conferenced when the coaches decide to make them available.
Not sure who fits the bill here, but I'll admit that I was very skeptical of Mike Young when he was hired, before he built out his staff to create the monster we have. So I also encourage everyone to wait to see how the entire staff is put together after the new coach is announced before making any sweeping judgements on the process.
Comments
Anything but this:
Name rhymes with Nilly Bapier
Silly Tapir?
Mulva?
Gipple?
Confirmed
omg this is so stupid but i love it so much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm glad the hours of hard work I put into this MS Paint photochop job are appreciated.
if i had an inverse nuclear upvote, i'd use it
It's better than I could have imagined when I made the comment. Excellent work and talent.
But interestingly enough, is still pronounced "Kevin".
Someone who knows how to sell the program, and doesn't piss people off on the recruiting trail (within reason, of course). Even the O'StineCorn shamblerific offenses we're used to cooked with gas when they had talented players on the field.
edit: and a modicum of proficiency at breaking down film, enough to avoid harsh words at bars with consultants
Don't think it will be Napier or Fickel, doesn't make much sense.
Someone I know had mentioned Joe Moorhead. Seems to be doing well these days at Orygun. I dunno though, why did MSU fire him?
from what I have read:
-not a great cultural fit being a northerner in starkville (seems to have been a concern at the hire)
-probably too big a jump for him at the time, made some comments in the media that made it harder on himself
-i get the impression that after mullen Miss st fans had expectations of pushing upward. I am not sure how realistic that is
his w/l record there isn't awful. if he learned from it and has learned a few things from Cristobal it could be a good fit
People weren't happy with his players fighting each other at a bowl practice.
Just win baby, back to being kings of the coastal with the occasional new years eve or day bowl is a reasonable goal
I think CMY has a twin brother who coaches football.
1 - Emphasis on recruiting. The new HC doesn't have to be the best recruiter out there but we have to have at least a few ace recruiters on staff that can sell what VT can do for these recruits.
2 - Proven experience at what they are going to be asked to do. Personally, I don't want someone coming in as head coach that's never been a HC before in college ball before. I realize this excludes the Tony Elliots of the world and that's okay. This also extends to the staff. I'd rather not have an entire staff of first time coordinators learning how to do their jobs in a P5 conference because they showed potential as a position coach at a G5 school.
3 - I'm going to swing for the fences here and say that I would like a coach that can hire someone specifically to scout the transfer portal to our advantage and work NIL management. Both of those aren't going away. Having some sort of "player manager" on staff would make us unique and could really help us in these uncharted waters.
4-Someone who doesn't tarnish the program (coughcoughHughFreezecoughcough).
Recruiting and wins.
Represents the university well.
Develop the players into men, and increase their skills.
Seems simple enough, right?
This is a key element for the next coach, however, I would add position coaches to this. Perform well or find a new job.
Another thing I want to see is a coach that plays to win instead of Fuente who played not to lose. I want a coach that looks at every offensive drive as a chance to score. No more being conservative in the final drive of the first half and just running out the clock.
Haven't seen it stated yet, but I want a coach whose pre-season and post-game comments align with reality and what my eyes are seeing in the games. Some humility and not deflecting or blaming the players for obvious coaching missteps can go a long way. Mike Young is a good model here.
Yep, if we get the Mike Young of football we do great.
And by that I mean get a great guy who is an excellent developer of talent and excellent game day coach who understood his own limitations as a coach and built out his staff to specifically target those areas of deficiency.
This part in particular is a good reminder that regardless of what I'm looking for in a coach I should probably be cool with whoever we get (other than freeze) and just give it time. When Fuente was hired I was thrilled with it. When Mike Young was hired I hated and criticized that hire and I was very vocal about it. Turns out I don't know everything, lol. There are no guarantees of success or "cant miss candidates" when it comes to college coaches.
By this logic Freeze may be the right guy π
1. Recruiting. Like Alum said, you need talent to win games. Make sure we aren't just signing guys because of the number of stars next to their name, though. We need to be elite evaluators of talent.
2. Development. Both as football players and as athletes in general from a strength and conditioning standpoint.
3. Makes good hires. This is really what did Fuente in the most, in my opinion. The entire passing game was anemic because the quarterbacks coach and wide receivers coach were completely underqualified.
4. Program transparency. It's more fun for the fans that way.
I think it's in the title what we want..a coach. Someone that can take players and develop them into better players.
High floor and high ceiling.
Understands the importance of recruiting and develops the talent.
Honors the culture of the past but isn't stuck inside it or overwhelmed by it.
Engages the fan base.
Willing to make difficult decisions to both (a) cut losses in areas of weakness (b) lean into and bolster strengths.
Manages the clock well.
Doesn't embarrass me for my school having hired him given his high-profile public past personal failures.
Give us your list
Realistically, I think Billy Napier checks off a lot of those items, and I think Dave Clawson does too. Those items aren't equally weighted, I'm willing to emphasize a given coach's strengths provided that he builds his staff out to address his weaknesses -- whether it's hiring proven P5 recruiters, retaining a Hokie on staff to bridge between cultures, etc.
I think someone like Chadwell COULD be a lot of those things, but he also comes with a lot of unknowns. If he's the guy and brings a G5 staff here, I'm not happy but I'm willing to be patient.
I don't know if I'd be able to stomach Hugh Freeze -- I'm all for redemption and forgiveness in someone's personal life, but I don't think being "a changed man" and swearing off the escorts should absolve someone of all consequences. Especially in a role that is so public facing. In a world where the past often stays present, I don't really want him being the face of my university or program -- nothing against him as a person, but it's just a natural professional consequence of a public personal failure that greatly affected his employer.
I'm also willing to be patient with a Mike Young-style hire -- someone off the radar, who may not fit the typical profile of candidate for the job that we're all imagining, but proves to be the right person with the right skill set and the humility to know where his weaknesses are. I don't know who that is, because I didn't really have Mike Young on my radar when we went into the basketball hiring process. Sam Pittman was this kind of hire for Arkansas. Could it be Matt Luke? Joe Moorhead? Both have previous SEC HC experience. Jim Leonhard? There are almost an infinite number of people that I have no opinion on and will be patient with.
Clawson seems a lot like Fuente - respectable, class etc....I like it for representing the school big I don't think if hypes vt and brings in some stars.
I think a Buzz type hire is in order. Stir the pot. Get some fires burning. Get the kids interested.
Let the Beamer style rest a bit.
Clawson's never really having been Big Time concerns me a bit if we want to be Big Time. He had one meh year at Tenn as OC. But I think he could be good here. I know it's easy to be underwhelmed by Wake (bc it's Wake) but what he's doing there doesn't necessarily means it's an apples to apples direct port to VT. Better job, better school to recruit to, better program, bigger fanbase, etc. Could he energize the fanbase? I think so. Does he raise our floor and ceiling relative to Fuente? I think so. Does he raise our floor and ceiling relative to Frank? Oof idk.
Good. Good. Let the dark side consume you. Search your feelings. You in your heart what is true.
Very few active coaches raise the floor and ceiling relative to one of the best head coaches of all time.
I think Clawson can stabilize the program and elevate it to "generally the assumed Coastal favorite" status with a realistic goal of competing for the conference and making NY6 bowl in '24 or '25? Like this isn't an overnight turnaround right now with the last few years of bad recruiting classes (and possibly another one).
But just because someone hasn't had the opportunity to do it doesn't mean they can't do it. And just because someone has proven they can do it before doesn't mean they're a lock to do it again.
Someone is going to have to help me understand the Clawson infatuation. His records before this year are up & down, and his success this year, as I understand it, is in large part because a lot of his players stayed for that extra year of eligibility--something most teams couldn't or didn't do. I'm not sure he can sustain this year's success.
It's not looking to directly port what he's done at wake to tech, it's looking at his track record of development, his unique offense, his personality, and his clean program and saying "take the process and give him more resources and better players, and we think he'll be successful in this situation"
All valid points - my concern is that it all sounds like Fuente 2.0. It may be worthwhile to try another approach - a little more flash, spice, excitement. Without embarrassing the school of course.
except that Clawson has been a head coach at four programs and left each one better than when he got there.
Where Fuente had the impressive Memphis turnaround, he jumped to P5 HC after four years of G5 HC experience. Clawson's demonstrated the ability at HC to work with what he has to improve a program and develop a winner at four different schools over 20+ years, including one of the tougher P5 jobs in Wake. Are the concerns that he's an unexciting candidate? Sure, I'll admit that, and I'll admit that things are likely to get worse before they get better. But 22 seasons of HC experience and successfully working his way up from Patriot League to A-10 to MAC to ACC gives me confidence that Wake to VT isn't a step too far and that his experience is an asset and not a liability -- not worried at all about the Peter Principle coming into play where he doesn't have the skill set required to handle the job and gets "promoted" beyond his ability to handle the responsibility. The question is whether or not he can sustain 9-10 win seasons given he resources he would ahve at VT. I think he could -- but "could" and "will" are different things and it's definitely a big decisions Whit can't afford to get wrong.
You make great points - Clawson's track record is quite impressive. I can get behind him. I just sense a similar style in the way he coaches and leads the team, which worries me with regard to what I feel is the biggest issue - bringing in an retaining high quality players. Maybe Clawson can do it, but I have my doubts - he seems to lack the charisma I think the program needs. But nuts and bolts wise (career path, Xs and Os) he definitely checks the boxes.
As hard as it is to do, we should probably stop comparing all our coaches/candidates to Frank. We'd all love to hire the next Frank Beamer, but that probably isn't happening.
Everyone keeps saying recruiting but I'd prefer player development (with recruiting being a very close second). Players won't come if the school doesn't have a reputation to develop them. 10 running backs without a star breaking through is damning. Not a single successful QB developed by THE qb 'guru'. WR's never getting better after Wiggins left. The hallmark of Beamer's years were recruiting for an established identity and developing those players into studs.
We have to establish an identity, recruit for that, and develop those players.
Yes yes yes
I think VT's recruiting ceiling is a top 20 class (as in, we typically get a top 25 class, with a top 20 class every 5ish years). Give me a coach who can get top 25 talent, and turn it into a top 15 team.
Once we get back to that level, we can start aiming for an improved recruiting class.
I want a guy who understands the importance of recruiting -- we shouldn't be on Plans B and C every cycle, and if it is it means we either aren't identifying realistic Plans A, or we aren't good enough at closing to get those guys.
But that being said, a guy who will emphasize recruiting with the right support staff hires, knowing what it takes to put the work in and hiring guys who know what it takes to put the work in. Even if we top out at 20th and a typical class is 20-25 with an average rating between 20-25, that represents a significant improvement vs what we have now.
Yes i ultimately agree that development is more important, because nobody cares about stars when you're on 1-on-1 in the hole and need to make a guy miss or need to make the tackle. but having better players to start with really helps a lot too.
and pls don't hire dan mullen
Totally agree with everything. Focusing on player development does NOT mean you ignore recruiting.
I just don't believe that Blueblood Assistant X who recruited at a top 5-10 level at a blueblood school could come to VT and recruit at a top 5-10 level here. I'm also suspect that someone who wins with top 5-10 players could win with top 25ish players.
Wins
1. Recruit DOGS
2. Develop DOGS
3. Put DOGS in position to win on GAMEDAY
So.. this guy?
I still quote this guy.
BOOTS AND JEANS!
WE NEED SOME DOGS IN HERE! FEIST DOGS!
Recruiting
Recruit, Develop, Win!
Some one that likes popcorn?
1. A good recruiter
2. Beat Virginia and UNCheat
3. Good communicator with press and fans.
Have to go beyond that Fuente was like 10-2 against those programs. I'd just like to win the games we should win, win 75% of toss up games and 50% of games against tougher competition.
Yeah I want to make acc championships and NY6 bowls more than just beating unc and uva. That's how you get stuck in mediocrity Hell
Another Idea:
Hire Deion Sanders, sign an Amazon PRIME NIL deal for recruits.
Better than 14-18 against the rest of the ACC, and continued dominance of UNC, UVA and Duke.
This is one of the most confusing graphics that I've ever had to parse to understand.
OX is an interesting guy to put it mildly.
1. No Corn.
what about Korn, though?
I can see I can see I'm going blind
porn?
Popcorn is doing well for VT.
We need a recruiter who will rebuild the roster back to the upper third of the conference. The only schools who should ever be out-recruiting us are Clemson, FSU, Miami, and UNC. We should never finish worse than 5th, with punch-ups between the listed group ahead of us.
We need the head coach to establish strong connections in the region for recruiting purposes Virginia, NC, DMV, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, etc. Continue to find some guys in places like Florida and PA as well.
The other thing I'd like in the next HC is being the CEO type, willing to move on from coordinators or underperforming staff when necessary, and focused on recruiting and building a winning culture/atmosphere in the program.
Why are we always assuming we can't recruit at the top?
Get the right and crank up the donations.
Because, historically, schools' recruiting always regresses towards their mean. Not man schools have drastically changed their recruiting profiles, and those that have typically did it with (1) a large influx of cash (a la Oregon), (2) Switching Conferences (a la Texas A&M) or (3) some drastic change in the recruiting/cfb landscape.
I'd argue that A&M was more if #1, they are the 2nd largest Athletic department. The SEC was probably the catalyst for the money, but it was the money.
I think being the only Texas school in the SEC really helped them recruit Texas. Will be interesting to see what happens when Texas arrives in the SEC
The money that started pouring into the program a decade ago was insane to the previous decade. When we played A&M we beat RC Slocum for his first non-conference home loss every. He was a Beamer type of coach. They weren't spending UT type of money, they were content with themselves, then they moved on from Slocum and realized they had to play the arms race, which they did. I would bet that when we played them their athletic department was close to ours in money, maybe a little more because they have more sports. Now it is 2nd overall. Thats a huge swing.
Whoever it is people will need to give time to the cupboards are pretty bare and it will take time to be competetive at the top of the ACC for a few years if I had to guess. As long as it isnt freeze or chadwell I can get behind the hire,.
I understand (and agree with) the Freeze issue. What's the Chadwell issue? Is there something disqualifying I haven't heard of?
This is probably a just me thing but I see his offense as kind of like a cliche thing, again its probably just me but it feels like a triple option like thing where its very unique and requires specific players and if they dont recruit the exact guys the system wont work. I'm probably nit picking there but its just not someone that I would be over the moon about.
I can totally see that. But that's also the same description of Urban Meyer at Bowling Green and Utah.
I think college football is about line play, QB play, and team speed. Beamer's best teams had that. They couldn't pass block worth a shit and it was a vanilla offense; but they'd knock you on your ass, the QB made plays, and they had speed all over the field on both sides of the ball...kinda what Arkansas is doing right now. Personally I'm more interested in someone who can build a team with these attributes and less concerned with exactly what system they run.
Yeah I get what you're saying and cant disagree with it. I guess my fear is more based on someone who only runs a gimmicky like scheme and if that doesnt work is a bit lost but only one way to find out! I could talk myself into it probably with enough beer in hand but thats just me, I would like to see us get back to nasty defense and running the ball with impunity but thats me. The biggest thing I see is we need a coach that can utilize his roster the best.
Would you have been ok hiring Paul Johnson?
NO!
because it's a rush-based offense and there's a lot of pitches? it's not the same at all
Idc if it's apples to oranges they're both fruits. Kids aren't going to want to play this system and it's easy to recruit against.
it's okay not to be thrilled with the idea of Chadwell because you have doubts about it translating to P5, but you're making very definitive statements where it's pretty much impossible for there to be any supporting arguments for or against what you're claiming. maybe you're wrong, maybe you're right, but it's not a settled foregone conclusion either way.
Someone will have to remind me. Was his passing efficient or was it effective?
There isn't a chadwell issue, there is an issue with people posting ill informed comments.
People hear that his offense is 'based off triple option philosophies', and automatically assume he runs the Paul Johnson wishbone, despite the fact their QB has thrown for >2000 yards at >13 yards/attempt and completes 73% of his passes through 8 games this season.
Additionally, Chadwell's resume at this point appears similar to Fuente's (despite the fact that Chadwell's offense has drastically out performed Fuente's Memphis offenses by any opponent adjust measure), and I think a lot of the fan base is scarred. It's like the guy who dates one crazy blonde girl, and refuses to ever date a blonde girl again.
Mike Tomlin and Chris Beatty together and we'd win the state of Va every year in recruiting... Also it won't happen, not even a slight chance! Just like those who keep saying Foster or Shane, won't happen. I bet Chadwell, Dykes, or someone similar. At this point all I am looking for is to keep the talented players that we do have on the roster and hold this signing class together. IDK what to think about the defensive coaches, all Va Tech ties just about but if we keep them that does to the new coach what we did to Fuente with keeping Foster. That will be interesting to see how it plays out. What if Price becomes the new head coach or Hamilton? I can't say I'd be happy at all but it could happen.
1. No lame excuses. 2. A guy that can connect with top end recruits at a better pace. A team that doesn't get pushed around by Pitt and BC every year. 4. A team that can get 3rd and 4th and 1 with a running back carrying the ball.
no nepotism (cronyism)
no excuses
no fear
a coach who is honest about the performance of the players and coaches
a coach who is confident in hiring and firing coaches as needed
a coach who is excited to be here and makes his excitement contagious
a coach who wants to win and win big
Oh yeah, and get the damn Black Diamond Trophy back next season.
If Whit focuses on supposed recruiting prowess and fan/media engagement, he will be following Miami's AD out the door in 3-4 years.
Coaches, by and large, rarely make an appreciable difference in recruiting. Recruiting is about money, money, money. And that's the AD's job far more than a coach's job.
Fan engagement is what fans think they want when things aren't going well. When things are going well, other than a few dozen message board obsessives who live to complain, nobody cares about how much a coach engages with media or fans.
I think the focus should be on a coach who has shown the ability to
1) develop 3* recruits into 4* talent - particularly QBs - and find/create playmakers. The lack of playmakers on offense and defense in the Fuente era has been the missing piece in many close games.
2) be resilient enough to adapt a system - without reinventing itself - to meet the naturally varying skill and talent sets a program like VT is going to find itself with at its recruiting level
3) the ability, in the portal era, to recruit and utilize players in way that balances team performance and player expectations to minimize transfers. This is not easy and may very well be a unicorn. Narduzzi has done this well with his current group of seniors, but it remains to seen how much of a cliff Pitt falls off of next year.
4) Develop mental toughness. Getting players to not give up and play hard is nice, but Fuente's biggest failings as a coach were probably with a) his teams not feeling a sense of urgency when they had an opportunity to put it's foot on the neck of an opponent and b) believe they will make the big play when the big plays come.
5) Of course, much of this requires identifying quality assistants - both before and after hiring.
Mack brown didn't make a difference with recruits? Also, retaining recruits will be almost an equal task.
For whatever reason, studs didn't want to play for Fuente. We need the opposite of that.
^^^ This. Mack has bumped recruiting significantly.
Chicken or the egg situation. Good schools with good resources hire coaches who can recruit better. Look at Georgia. They went from good to world class at recruiting under Kirby and it shows on the field.
Same with UNC, they are recruiting so much better with Mac. They can't put it together on the field, but they have the horses if they can figure their shit out.
Same with Clemson. Under Dabo, their recruiting exploded, even before they started winning championships.
Same with Alabama and Saban.
Same with Oregon and Chip Kelly.
Same with Virginia Tech and Frank Beamer
This isn't entirely true...
UGA's rise has coincided with (1) a population boom in the state of GA and (2) a significant investment in high school football in the state. The state of GA is now producing more stars per capita than any other state, and producing the third most talent of any state (surpassing California). To add to that, UGA's in state rival is down AF.
Again, not really. Before Dabo, clemson frequently recruited at a top 15 level, with a very occasional top 10 classes. It wasn't until after thief Natty that Dabo put together a top 5 class.
Nike money
Blueblood
Schools always regress towards their mean, unless something changes the landscape
The sanctions for UNC would explain quite a lot. Typically a school takes their punishment. After a couple of years the restrictions go away and the recruiting scores bounce right back (Penn State, Baylor).
SMU never recovered from the death penalty, but that was largely a decision of the tiny Methodist school itself to stop trying to fly with the eagles in the cheatin'-ass SWC.
UNC had two consecutive scandals going at the same time.
The scandal involving academic fraud and improper benefits was specific to the football team. That scandal broke in 2010, was fairly straightforward, and was pretty much wrapped up by 2013. They were good sports on that one- mostly just self-imposed bowl bans and scholarship restrictions.
The scandal involving fake classes broke in 2011. Not only did it affect the entire athletic department, at one point they were ballsy enough to leverage the whole damn school against their accreditors. Their legal strategy also involved meticulously delaying, while pushing to edit the NCAA rule book until they were no longer "breaking" any rules; and only then let the NCAA pass judgement. That delay lasted all the way until 2017, and them getting off scot-free was, well, not as surprising as it should have been. But not exactly an expected outcome.
Bear in mind, the scandal related to the football team involved Marvin Austin and Greg Little (99.79 ***** & 96.14 **** in 2007), Robert Quinn (the 6th highest recruit in the 2008 class at 89.93 ****).
They had a recruiting dip for most of that time (even though they bounced back halfway- to consistently 25th-30th rated classes after 2013). But yeah, somehow that empty-stadium-having football program has been attracting top recruits at a fairly good clip since waaay too long now.
I put "engage the fanbase" in my post but I think I mean "can rally a fanbase". I don't care if you're on Twitter, do your press conference generate conversation or does everyone collectively roll their eyes at how intentionally uninsightful the answers are.
CMY. Give me a Virginian.
Whit said he wants someone comfortable with being atop the ACC. Thank god he knows/publicly admitted the athletic department agrees with us fans: VT expects conference titles.
Things I do not want:
Freeze, he's gross.
Shane. His last name is the main reason people want him, and its nonsense. If he were Shane Miller he wouldn't be on anyone's list. No one was happy with the job he did as a recruiter/position coach while he was here. If he starts winning at USCe (one of the hardest jobs in all of CFB), then we can talk.
Say what you want but Shane Beamer does have South Carolina improving based on the results of the last 2 seasons. If he gets them bowl eligible it will be considered a good start in year 1. South Carolina was 2-8 last year and 4-8 the year before that. They are currently 5-5 with a chance to get a marquee win in the last 2 weeks of the season.
I'll say that he doesn't have enough head coaching experience, nor has he shown enough *yet* to be someone that I would like as the head coach in Blacksburg.
*Maybe* you get him before his star is really shining and he's a candidate for bigger gigs, but I haven't seen enough yet.
Plus, following in his dad's footsteps may just not be something he wants to do. That would be a LOT of pressure.
I agree and I don't want to put that man in that kind of position and I don't understand why so many people do. Let Shane go do what Shane wants to do and make a name for himself.
People think it has been bad with Fuente but I would bet it would be worse with Shane if this was what we got after hiring him.(Not saying that is what would happen, but it could) Beamer is the past and not the future of VT football. And that isn't a bad thing!
What you mentioned is fine, but in addition i want to see Development of 2-3 Star recruits. Along with that, we need better Strength and conditioning, I'm not seeing these guys getting bigger and I'm seeing a lot of Injuries.
Agree, and it's about a lot more than just getting bigger. We need our version of Scott Cochran. The S&C coach spends far more time with the players than anyone else, and it's critical that we get that hire right.
Right on, right on - I don't know all the intracies involved in S&C but its not looking good under Hilgart.
Someone with a growth mindset who can relate to 18-21 year olds. A LEADER who owns the failures and deflects the successes that will come with the program. Someone who recognizes when a staff member is not doing their job, and then have the stones to fire them. Provide a psychological safe place for the players and staff. This is not a combat unit, it's a football program and GEN Z does not respond well to "Because I said so!"
Develop and retain talent. Period.
Build relationships in the region. With HS coaches and fans.
If they can accomplish all of that then the recruiting and the winning will happen on it's own.
My expectations: Win, or top 2 of the Coastal every year, with the majority in the win column. Non negotiable.
Win the ACC every 3-5 years IF Clemson gets back to their dominant ways. Every year if they continue the downward trend of this year. I envision a scenario where we win the ACC and not make the current top 4 playoffs, I can accept that. Once we go to 12 teams I cannot. Obviously, represent the university in the manner that it deserves.
I would personally love a coach with Ric Flairs personality.
Primetime....cause those Aflac commercials would be great for recruiting!
He does have an ACC pedigree and is the direct cause of Beamerball
I'm not really following OPs ask here in either of my posts but another thing: we need to be *patient* with the next guy.
This isn't a "cupboards are bare" thing, as much as its a we're a rebuild not reload kind of program.
No matter who the next head coach is, there's going to be some painful games, and possibly painful seasons to come.
Yes, absolutely! Don't anyone go off the deep end if we are 4-8 next year. As long as there is a reasonable and articulated vision, know that they will need time and give them the support.
https://footballscoop.com/news/virginia-tech-coaching-candidates-billy-n...
This article has some interesting notes on the potential candidates. Interesting read, the last Potential candidate mentioned is Dave Clawson...I like it.
In addition to the obvious have a clear vision, recruit well, be able to get the team focused ...
A track record (or a clearly articulated willingness) of getting rid of badly underperforming assistants. Especially offensive coordinators. We have had too many terrible coordinators staying around for too long. I am all for loyalty. But like most things, too much of even a good thing is often bad.
Dennis Dodd: Gary Patterson, Hugh Freeze, and Shane Beamer among top candidates for Virginia Tech.
God I hope not.
that list does not inspire confidence. Article also mentions Napier, Fickell and Chadwell at least.
Nope, nope, and nope.
I'm down for Shane Beamer but I doubt he would leave SC right now. He has something to prove
Lol. How does dennis dudd (SWIDT) still have a job?
For what it's worth, on the SZD paywall show, Godfrey named all 3 of these candidates as people it's definitely not.
Shane has since said he's not interested in leaving SCar
1. Recruits
2. Develops Players
3. Coaches to strengths of players
These are the three things I am looking for in a coach. I'm tired of systems over players. I'm tired of "my types of guys". I'm tired players not showing growth.
We need a big personality - not a Fuente (tom Landry) or Beamer (Down to earth good ole boy).
We need A Buzz-like hire to energize the fanbase and recruits. More visibility. Someone to galvanize all of Sw Virginia and get the region fired up.
Recruiting, development, strategy, and fan engagement. Basically everything the previous regime promised and failed to do.
Not Freeze, that's my number 1,2 and 3 most important requirements.
I know it's definitely not Freeze, but I was really looking forward to a series of Mr. Freeze gifs for the announcement in the slim chance it is him.
Fantastic. So you're ok with RichRod now!
I like this list. I'm high on Freeman. If you can't get a proven top end HC like Napier then screw it and try to get the next big name who is going to shoot you the ranks in the building now.
Been listening to ACCN and local richmond sports radio today and the one name no one is saying but that I would really really go after is Marcus Freeman. Everyone local and ACCN is saying clawson and I get it but I still feel VPI could go for someone with a higher cieling. Only issue is will we sink lower aiming for a higher cieling a la USC and texas.
One thing Whit mentioned was someone who could inspire the fan base or something to that effect... not sure Napier fills that box. Freeman knocks it out of the park- charismatic and great energy.
Rich Rodriguez
Less than 2 minutes to reply, I am impressed.
damn't, late to the party once again. leg for you, drink for me
I will give anyone who we hire my full support, and hope that everyone here does as well. 2022, 2023, and 2024 should be years that might see us initially get worse before we start to get better.
And when I say I will give that support to anyone, I mean it. Doesn't matter if its Billy Napier, Hugh Freeze, or Brad Cornelson, anyone we hire needs to be given the opportunity to succeed or fail before we judge them. And we need to see how the entire staff is built out before we even make any predictions on how good the staff will be down the line.
Any hire except one, Hugh Freeze.
I'd support Hugh as well.
I think I know what you're getting at. It's pretty obvious by all of our posts in this very thread we have a wide range of what we would like to see in the next coach, which means that there's not going to be one singular hire that pleases everyone (other than maybe something over the top like Bruce Arians). That said, I'll remain fully dipped in football for the next two seasons with my donation, season ticket purchase, sporadic donations when the Hokie Club asks, etc. with whomever the head coach is because I'm so damn happy we made a change.
I do have two exceptions though: Hugh Freeze and Art Briles.
If it ended up being Briles, I'd probably put all of my VT gear in a dark bin in the shed for a long time. I know this won't happen, but that might be the worst possible outcome of any.
Yeah knowing what the worst case scenario is really puts this in..... perspective
I'll see myself out now.
Someone that can bring some energy and rejuvenate a stale brand...that will win recruiting. Other than just knocking on doors, kids need a brand they can be excited about telling their friends and locker room they're committing.
For Virginia top talent kids right now UNC has it. Ohio State. Penn state. Alabama/Clemson (as if it's needed to be said)
If I close my eyes really tight and imagine what I want from the new coach it'd resemble this:
That wont ever happen so I'll take this:
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13465882/UVA.gif)
Finally getting around to listening to Whit's presser today. Specifically on the attributes list he ran through for the new coach, I heard a lot of good things. "CEO" "someone to engage the fanbase and community locally and beyond" "recruit the footprint" "can understand today's NCAA landscape and players" "comfortable at the top of the ACC." That sounds like the makings of a very big-time hire. I really hope he nails this one. I'm sure all have learned from the last six years and where we need to go as a program, and importantly what it takes to get there
I have mentioned this elsewhere, but I feel strongly enough to reiterate: on-field identity. I don't care what it is. Establish an on-field identity to work from and that will help recruiting.
FFS, Baker Mayfield walked on at Texas Tech. He hosted some recruit named Patrick Mahomes, who also wanted to go there. Not sure how often y'all swing through Lubbock, but that doesn't happen if they weren't a video game offense where QB and receiver dreams come true.
Is there any road-grader O-Line prospect or carries-eating RB who doesn't have a long think about going to Wisconsin? Does any QB prospect decline Mike Leach's first call, wherever he is coaching? If you are a burly TE you can't not think about what Iowa is cranking out at the position. That's what I am talking about, and I would love to see us establish something like that here.
Outside of that, I deeply care about the character of the coach / program and appreciate Fu's efforts there, great guy, didn't act like a dirtbag, didn't run a dirtbag program. I also shy away from the CEO mold and instead think we would do better with a family-type program where players are cared about.
Hmm, seems like I heard or read something about that somewhere...
Others have said something like this ("represent VT well") but character is very important. The coach who has integrity and insists on his staff and players also have it will draw quality people to the program. The two Vick brothers had talent but lost their way and fell hard. (I think Mike Vick did turn his life around and deserves the second chances he got but there are those who will not forgive him). From all I can tell about him, Beamer had that characteristic. That is where Tech developed the reputation of it being like family and the many brothers that came to VT.
Obviously, more is needed than high character (Fuente seems to have had the right character) but without it our beloved VT could become an embarrassment.
My top 3 priorities:
1. Win
2. Win
3. Win
There's a guy who was a successful P5 coach in the SEC who runs a damn good offense 1.5 hours down the road that could get us back to relevancy. He's done his time for his indiscretions and we may as well lock him down before someone else does. Some people won't like it at first, but let's bring in Freeze and get back to winning. If we want the guy to give us the best chance to get back to winning (not competing for) the ACC championship, he gives is the best chance to get there the fastest.
Could you explain how he has "done his time" has he apologized? Made amends in any way? Admitted his errors? Figured out how to not use a state issued phone to get call girls then not be smart enough to delete it when given the chance TWICE! Did he say a word about how the school he works at has covered up sexual assaults?
Saying he is sorry and making amends has nothing to do with Ws. He's been in exile for 5 years. That's a long time for a coach of his caliber. 5 years away from the P5 and no problems since shows he's smart enough not to repeat the mistake.
Well being a college football coach even for the best is about more than just wins. Your teaching and molding young people. Go look at how Saban past players talk about him.
Smart enough to use a burner, anyway...
Can't do it. I want to be able to respect the coach and the program, be able to be proud of what we do AND who we are.
Serious question, would you tell your son "play for Hugh Freeze and listen to him try to help you become a good man."? Then why would you expect someone else to do the same.
"Serious question, would you tell your son "play for Hugh Freeze and listen to him try to help you become a good man."?"
I would have zero problems with it. Apparently, lot's of people who sent their kids to Liberty felt comfortable with it too. Hell, they will kick you out of school for even having a girl in your room by yourself or drinking a few beers. If Liberty University fans can get past him calling a few escorts, we should have no problem with it.
This is going to go down the wrong path with regards to CGs. Jus' sayin'.
Nope nuh uh not going there nope nope nope nope nope.
Whether or not Liberty "University" folks are okay with something is not the metric I want to make decisions with.
If W's are all you care about then really lean into it and start the Hire Bobby Petrino thread.
That's just silly. He isn't as good of a coach.
LEADERSHIP -Buck stops with coach. Inspire authentic Hope in the people he touches!
VISION- Can actually define WHO WE ARE! Not just regurgitate slogans and sayings from other programs! (GRIT??? Also if someone brings a turnover chain or wants to row a boat - please just put me out of my misery!!!)
GROW AND DEVELOP COACHES - Develop a tree. Help people get other jobs and get better! Someone who values loyalty AND performance!!!
COMMUNICATOR - See Mike Young!!!
SELLING/RECRUITING - People join other people!!! A person you want to trust and hitch your wagon too!!!
ABUNDANCE MENTALITY- No excuses. No pouting! (ESPECIALLY AT PRESS CONFERENCES) There's enough for everyone!!!
EXPECTATIONS FOR EXCELLENCE - Have some fire! Expect great things from others! Develop others! Do not settle for bullshit!
I want someone who has seen first hand how the big boys run a football program and knows what is needed to get there. I don't care if this is a stepping stone for them because if they move on to something bigger and better it means that they did something special here to earn it. As much as this site hates Buzz Williams, I'd take someone like that over a G5 coach who hasn't been associated with the blue bloods.
Napier pls
1. An emphasis on recruiting, and specifically on rebuilding local ties. That's not to say ignore outside the state, but the level to which Fuente basically tried to ignore VA to prove a point is unacceptable. G5 caliber recruiting classes are also unacceptable. We need to at least get back to getting a handful of 4-star players every single class, not one borderline 4-star every 2 classes. We should be building a roster of mid-3 star players, augmenting that with several 4-star playmakers, and hoping to coach a couple lower ranked players above their level in the meantime. Whereas Fuente was building a roster of low-3 star players with a few mid-3 star playmakers and hoping to coach literally everyone up beyond their level. It may not sound like it but there is a MASSIVE difference between those two roster philosophies. I'd love a guy who "coaches them up" as much as anyone else but we simply cannot accept less-than-mediocre recruiting again to get where we want to be.
2. Experience at a big-time P5 program. We're never going to be Alabama but I at least want somebody who knows what it takes to be at or near that level. If you know what that requires you can at least use that information and apply it to what resources you do have and get the most out of them. Fuente had never even been around a P5 program (TCU before they were in the Big 12 doesn't count) and never had any kind of baseline for what it would take to win at that level. You need to know what you're missing before you can MacGyver a fix to make up for it.
3. Minimal loyalty to current staff. I want a coach focused on building the best staff they can for VT to make their own job easier. A few current staff members or even keeping a few of Fuente's staff is okay to a point, especially if they're qualified and meet the first 2 points I described. But, for instance, Jamey Chadwell bringing his entire offensive staff from Coastal Carolina who is similarly inexperienced to him would be a MASSIVE red flag for me. Fuente riding and dying with his buddies is a huge reason we're in this mess. Mike Young being willing to tell his Wofford staff to take a hike is a huge reason we're becoming a basketball school.
4. HC Experience - I think there is some value to this but not at the expense of any of the first three points. All things considered I would like a guy who has managed a roster and team before, but if it's between a guy who meets the first 3 criteria and has never been a HC or the opposite, give me the non-HC.
5. Energy/Personality/Salesmanship - To some degree I think this largely goes hand-in-hand with Point 1 about recruiting - usually to be a good recruiter, you have to meet this criteria. But if a guy was a complete stone-faced weirdo with zero personality but somehow met all of the first 4 criteria, I probably wouldn't care that much to be honest. It's something that was easy to get on Fuente's case for when he was failing at everything else, but also was something we overlooked pretty easily the first year or two when we were in that honeymoon phase.
Gidddy-Up
LETS GOOOOO
Also just want to point out. I don't really have a feeling either way out of the names being thrown out
All I care about is that we put an 's' on the end of his name.
Chadwells.
he has become my #1 choice. i'm not going to pretend to be an X's and O's expert, but i have watched a few of their games this year, and they play fast. we seem to play in slow motion compared to them. i would love to see what the run game would look like with blackshear, king, and thomas. also, his players seem to love playing for him.
if he gets hired, we need to have an AMA with Sam Denmark on here.
Blackshear and King would be wildly successful in Chadwell's offense.
Personality, sure, I'll give him that. Chadwell is 10x more interesting a personality than Fuente.
Offense he runs - Sure, it is not schematically the same offense, but it is at its core a similar philosophy. "We're going to mis-direct you and out-scheme you to the point where a talent deficiency doesn't matter." That sounds great when you're at Coastal Carolina or Memphis but when you start playing real talent on a regular basis that can devote time to picking that scheme apart it's a whole different story. Maybe it really is better! I really don't want VT to take the chance to find out coming off of being sold a similar fool's gold 6 years ago.
Coaching background, if anything, is worse than Fuente. Not sure why Connelly seems to be arguing it's different for the better. Fuente did not have a great coaching background pre-VT to begin with and I would take his resume 10/10 times over Chadwell's.
This is not true at all. Chadwell's offense is not about misdirection at all; it's an RPO based offense that aims to (1) find ways to put talented running backs in easy match ups (2) run a wide variety of plays out of limited sets.
Here's a more extensive read on the scheme and it's philosophy.
As opposed to Cornelson.
Run a limited number of plays out of a wide variety of sets.
I read this and shuddered.
This was supposed to be a feature of Fuente's offenses, too. And we saw how well that worked out.
You could say that for any coach that was successful at school 1 but failed at school 2. Just because Chadwell is an offensive innovator, it does mean that he does (or does not) have some of the same issues as Fuente.
I'd take what connelly says with some salt, hes in the media and not sure he has VT's best interest in mind. Chadwell at VT would be fun for them as it would be fun to cover in the media, if it works great story and if not I imagine it would be a story as well as Chadwell doesnt seem the type who would fall from grace with ease or dignity, kind of a mike leach feel if that makes sense.
Interested to hear basis for this? He seems like a very positive, high energy, no excuses guy.
I'm wondering if JC Price might at least get an interview. And hopefully we get good results to close out the season
I'm going to be honest.
We need someone that has a proven track record of winning with discovered talent.
Keep the talent in state and snag one or two from NC.
VT is just not a destination school.
And while Blacksburg is a great town. That's all it has.
The types of recruits that come to schools like this are kids who didn't get offers from the big boys of college football.
The new coaching staff needs to find rough cut gems that they can turn into semi precious stones.
Develop working relationships with in state HS coaches and really use that.
It is going to be ugly for a few years even with a great hire.
But kids these days don't want to live in the middle of no where Virginia. They want night life and things to do.
The transfer portal has made it real easy for recruits to accept their dream offer and then look around if it does not pan out.
Add to the fact of student athletes getting paid and it makes very little sense for any recruit to settle for a ok football team.
I just hope we can find a coach that is consistent and has a vision for what their team will be.
It will most likely need to be someone that just changes everything from the ground up and redefine Hokie football in that image.
But looking around college football, it's tough to find any coach or staff that sticks around longer than a few years.
This will end up being an underrated take, and I couldn't agree more.
Huh- you talking students or others? This area has phenomenal outdoor opportunities. As one who grew up in the DC suburbs, every time I return from a visit, and go on a Mtn bike ride, hike, fishing, etc I'm incredibly thankful for where I live.
Yes, and while many (myself included!) love the outdoors, that's not everyone's cup of tea.
It's not inaccurate to suggest that there's not a lot going on in Blacksburg / the NRV in general.
To second your statement there is nothing about "the country" that interests me. Not hiking, hunting, fishing, picnicking. Nothing. My wife says that simply driving through rural areas depresses her........lol
Ever been to Clemson?
Be careful, Chris will be here shortly to try to convince you that Clemson is part of a greater metropolitan area and has plenty going for it.
A HC who can establish an Identity, stick with it and develop it.
Fuente's program was full of shifting priorities (#NC2VT, #TX2VT)--then, when those fizzled we stated our goal was to be the "best developmental program," without a coaching staff with a track Record to support that.
Add in the constant shroud of secrecy around the Program and it was never really clear what our goals were.
Let's be honest, no one is a sure thing, but without fan engagement or a clear Program identity, the job is a hell of a lot harder.
I can't add anything that everyone has already said....soooo how bout this:
Can we get the Spring Game back? Maybe?
I'm all for aiming high......How much is Saban's buyout?...../s
$36.8 million
The GDP of Alabama
Napier fits the description of pretty much everything I want. I'd love to get him but I doubt we will considering how hot a commodity he is. At the very least, I want to see a story or tidbit that we pursued him hard and he rejected the offer. If we ate a bigger buyout to immediately lock in on Dave Clawson, I'm gonna be pretty disappointed.
Clawson's got a high floor at 7 or 8 wins. But his ceiling is 7 to 8 wins and once every 8 to 10 years will compete for a conference title when the rest of the conference sucks. By all measures he knows football, but lacks basically everything else that a head coach needs to get a program knocking on the playoff door. And that's what I think our target should be, a team in the mix for the playoffs every 3 to 4 years, which is doable once the playoff expands (it will soon). Basically, shoot to consistently be a Top 20 program every year. Napier and a few other assistants out there (like Dan Lanning) have more potential in that area.
I forgot what I said last time but I remember thinking we got that with Fuente. So ... the opposite of that?
1. Player Development -
If the coaches and staff can turn 3* into 4 * and 5* then recruiting will follow. Let's not lie to ourselves that recruiting is an automatic in year one. Georgia now has a walk on who is their starting QB. Give me more of that!. Build depth. Beamer did that.
2. Recruiting -
Someone who knows how to win recruit battles or build a team that can land some of the talent we've lost over the years. Solid VA and local connections
3. Solid Coordinators and Staff
DC and OC who know how to coach the talent they have and know how to gameplan.
4. Develop a new football culture of toughness akin to Beamer Ball and Lunchpail.
I want teams think of Lane as the Terrordome again.
From watching the Vick 757 podcast, (pre-firing) it sounds like there was very little engagement with former players. When you have alumni who are coaches in the state, there should be a good amount of pipelines built
1A*never Freeze
1B Napier
2 Freemen
3 Gattis
At this point you either get the easy top option or you say let's be the change needed in college football and promote a young successful black coach and let him show the college football world what he can do. Stop hiring tired old retreads like everyone else is doing. Bring a late 30's early 40's up and comer and profit.
I am a big fan of the latter suggestion. I think it's time.
You realize we attempted to do this with Fuente. He was 38 or 39 when we hired him.
Does that mean that all young coaches will struggle at Tech? Both Freeman and Gattis are younger 35 and 37 have never been a HC and it's time to start looking at young black successful coaches and giving them a shot at the head whistle, why not at Tech? A place that isn't and never will be a blue blood? But look around football how many new hires the last 10 years have been of retreads?
No, but your comment implied we hadn't done that by referencing hiring an old retread.
Whit's criteria is going to be successful experience in some capacity at a P5 level and some HC experience. Hiring a kid in coaching terms and an under represented minority just because is not what our program should do if we want to compete for ACC Championships. Sure it might work out, but it also might turn into a JJ type hire and set our program back even further.
The most successful team in the ACC the last decade hired a 38 year with no HC experience. Now granted it was as interim but they took a chance and it's time to step outside the "normal". Both Freemen and Gattis have been successful P5 coordinators, they can both recruit and they both played in the NFL.
The only things those two coaches have in common with Dabo is that they're both young and had no HC experience. Dabo was already a part of Clemson's staff and understood the Clemson culture.
After looking at their backgrounds, they are less of a gamble from a P5 exposure standpoint, but they are both Midwesterners and may not be able to recruit here. Of course that depends on the staff but most of their network is also from the Midwest. They will still have to learn to run a program, which is a concern.
Also, I would expect either of them to move on in 3 years if they are successful here. That's OK, but we as a fan base need to be prepared for it.
Gattis is from NC, played at Wake, GA at UNC coached at both Vandy and Bama.
Of the two, Gattis is a bit more appealing because of his ties to the area. He also was a recruiting coordinator at a couple of stops, too.
the last point is good. it is why i would stay away from bill o'brien. he's already coached at the pinnacle of the profession, to him...the NFL. and at a (most would call) blue-blood program in penn st...how motivated would he be at this point in his career to recruit at a level we need? we need a young, hungry, energetic coach. i would question BOB's motivation and enthusiasm at this point.
Agree with many of the comments above. One additional ask will be for the new coach to embrace the "Family" mindset starting first with a family reunion, by engaging with former players. Besides, who better to help sell the program than those that have poured blood, sweat and tears into it. Leverage that in all aspects.
The way I see it, there are 5 tiers of programs.
Tier 1 - Regular national title contenders - They get big name coaches on the way up/at the peak
Tier 2 - Regular playoff contenders - Their coaches are head coaches from lower P5 schools <-- We can legitimately be here
Tier 3 - Regular conference contenders - Their coaches are head coaches from G5 schools or P5 coordinators <-- This is reasonable for us
Tier 4 - Regular division contenders - They have coaches that are on the rebound or get G5 coordinators <-- We are here
Tier 5 - Everyone else - They get whatever is left
I do not think we can be be regular playoff contenders.
I don't see how we could legitimately be in #2. Maybe NY6 contender but we have what two seasons ever we would have gone to the playoffs if they existed. That's with a top 5 winningest D1 coach.
1) Create an identity by being great at one thing, then build on it. I like defense-first, but not sure I will get my wish.
2) Evangelize Virginia Tech football. Sell why it is great, and produce a product that lines up with the vision. Be part of getting more resources, be the face.
3) Recruiting footpring of PA-Ohio-Jersey down to Georgia, with some feeder schools in Florida. Productivity first, scheme fit second, then measureables. Work harder and smarter.
To add to point 3, we should also work on being tougher
So Hard Smart Tough should be the mantra? Except maybe we actually follow it this time?
Literally all I care about: don't make our program a national fucking embarrassment (like we are now) thanks.
Our program is not a national fucking embarrassment, as you put it.
We haven't won less than 5 games in over 30 years. Even if we finish 5-7 this year there are no scandals and we put players in the NFL consistently.
There are a lot of other programs that are a whole lot worse off than we are.
I live on the west coast and get a LOT of "what the fuck happened to you guys" whenever I wear my VT gear around, so I'm gonna have to disagree with you here.
Yep just like that candid video of Chris Fowler and Herbie.
Well, there's embarrassment "scandal", and there's embarrassment "not winning enough".
VT isn't in embarrassment "scandal" territory, but are absolutely in embarrassment "not winning enough". Our football program has gone from "terrordome" to "weak teams have a decent chance" territory.
A football program can recover from either of these afflictions, as we've seen from other schools, but we do have to admit we have a problem. I think we have admitted that, and are hopefully working on a fix.
I agree we are not winning enough, but there are programs that have won far less over the last 3 years than we have. If we were only winning 2 or 3 games a year, I would agree that we are national embarrassment.
Sure, but we actually used to win games.
Remember? We used to win 10 games in a season. It seems foggy now, like a distant memory. Yeah, that's a bit embarrassing. We used to claim to have a football program. We'll be needing to be a bigger threat in football to continue to claim that.
I guess I have a different definition of embarrassing. Embarrassing would make me think twice about wearing my Hokie gear during the season.
I would classify the drop from 10 wins every year to where we are now (0.500 team) as disappointing.
I like to be in the discussion of real college football teams.
We certainly can't claim that right now. We've lost to teams we should NEVER lose to.
Wake Forest may win the ACC this year. If we were where we should be, that would not be possible.
That question is legit but it doesn't mean our program is an embarrassment.
Do you wear Hokie gear during football season? If you do, you can't be too embarrassed and if you don't than it's an EPHokie embarrassment.
We're not even in the top 40 of embarrassing programs over the last year, 3 or 6 years (take your pick).
We're gonna have to agree to disagree. If our program's become bad enough that WAZZU fans feel like it's open season to dunk on us... that's all I'm gonna say.
The Art Briles/Hugh Freeze/Paterno stuff is where I'd draw the line at being embarrassed of my school. And that is very separate from winning or losing games
I never said I was embarrassed by my school - I said I was embarrassed by our football program. There is a slight distinction there.
What am I looking for in a new coach?
Lots and lots of Ws.
I am seeing a lot of discussion about this earlier in the thread, and instead of replying to each I'll just say this...
I think Virginia Tech football is in a similar state to VT basketball when we got rid of James Johnson. We're ripe to explode if you get the right coach here. Too many good recruits in this area with a rabid fanbase that gives you a legitimate home field advantage in a winnable division and conference (hell, very winnable after seeing what happened to Clemson this year). And you are no longer following in the footsteps of a legend, and will be allowed to establish the team and staff you want going into the winter.
Its a good job. Might not have the prestige of LSU, USC, etc but get the right coach here and you can have every bit the success here that you can elsewhere.
I would like a coach who considers passing the ball downfield on 3rd and 30, rather than our last coach who would instead elect to call an RB Dive for a gain of 1 yard in that situation.
Really everything else is just a bonus at this point.
I don't get why people get so worked up about this in particular. Obviously game situation pending a 3rd and >15yd play call is almost always a safe play because no team has a high percentage 30yard play just sitting there so you take what yards you can and play field position. This is like coaching 001 not even 101.
Deleted
My thoughts on the names being bandied about.
Clawson and Bill O'Brien both feel like "safe" hires. They are respectable guys and good people, but they aren't going to excite everybody. They are going to come in and improve the floor while running clean programs. We should develop in to a bowl game every year again and every 3-4 challenge hard for the conference championship. Both are going to be relatively high budget HC's.
The Chadwick/Napier/Dykes/Fickell class. These are more high risk hires. Are they going to be able recreate the magic that is making them special right now. Will they be able to step up to the P5 platform and still make the program grow. These guys are more outgoing, personable, etc. They are pushing a brand and more high energy football. Some of those might be as high budget (Fickell) especially. They are more boom or bust hire and after Fuente I am not sure Whit is willing to take that chance.
For the sake of bringing excitement back to Lane, I would be more willing to try one of the Boom or Bust. I can give them 4 years to try. I have a long life ahead and have lived through Fuente. If they at least make Football fun again, I can stand losing even if it means the last streak might die. That just means we can start it anew...
If we have a legit shot with Napier, in my opinion we should sell out to get him. It very well could blow up in our faces, but I really like the things I hear about how he sets up his coaching staffs. I think he would put us in the best position to make some fundamental changes to our football philosophy that would take us to a modern coaching staff with proper emphasis on recruiting that would position us to having an opportunity to be where we want to be.
I just get the impression that he better understands the current generation of college football and what it takes to compete at the top level than any other name being tossed around.
this is also why I expect him to go to USC or LSU when this is all said and done.
Agreed, giving him Fuente's old salary of 4 million and another 3.5-4 million for assistants and recruiting would give us a great staff. But I would also like to see at least a 1 year buyout if he leaves of us getting back at least 4.
Looks like LSU has contacted Mark Stoops now, so likely Napier is not being considered or has already said no.
https://www.on3.com/teams/kentucky-wildcats/news/lsu-contacts-mark-stoop...
I keep seeing everyone mention that they'd like a football Mike Young, and after watching the presser with JC and seeing all of the comments and how happy everyone seems to be with him, what are the chances that he could be the football Mike Young? He obviously loves VT and wants to win. He's never been a HC but has a lot of coaching/coordinator experience and was named recruiter of the year for both (I believe) Marshall and JMU. If he'd be able to pull in some slam dunk coordinators, it could potentially work.
For the record, I don't know how I feel about it and am pretty indifferent at the moment I think, just posing a question to the masses.
He's not the football Mike Young because he doesn't have the experience. I want him on staff, but he has a lot to figure out to run a program.
I want someone to believe in.
How do you feel about Santa Claus?
His aerial game is strong, but don't look for much on the ground. Team will be prepared for cold weather.
Sack game is strong though