Clemson up to #4 in the 24/7 rankings after the commitment of 5 star DB Andrew Booth out of Lawrenceville, Ga. Auburn was the primary competition.

(07-30-2018 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Clemson up to #4 in the 24/7 rankings after the commitment of 5 star DB Andrew Booth out of Lawrenceville, Ga. Auburn was the primary competition.

It's getting REAL hard to keep up with Clemson in football. That said, I can take some small solace in knowing that the Tigers are taking players out of Georgia... and away from SEC teams.

Fuente & company MUST do better recruiting for VT (not that they're doing a bad job, it's just the level of competition keeps going UP).

(07-30-2018 04:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Clemson up to #4 in the 24/7 rankings after the commitment of 5 star DB Andrew Booth out of Lawrenceville, Ga. Auburn was the primary competition.

It's getting REAL hard to keep up with Clemson in football. That said, I can take some small solace in knowing that the Tigers are taking players out of Georgia... and away from SEC teams.

Fuente & company MUST do better recruiting for VT (not that they're doing a bad job, it's just the level of competition keeps going UP).

I think that almost everyone would agree that Fuente is a good coach. But I strongly believe that being a GREAT recruiter is the number one, most important aspect of a head coach (and maybe every coach other than coordinators). And I don't think it's particularly close to the next most important. As much as I mock the hiring of Muschamp at USC, truthfully, his strength as a recruiter is probably more of an advantage than any X and O guy's brains would be among anyone they could get.

Mullen will be a most interesting test case. He's universally considered a top 5-10 head football coach, and isn't coming from some small sun belt school. But he's only an ok recruiter, and he's currently getting his brains beat by UGA, FSU and even Miami in recruiting. UGA is a big one, as a divisional (and emotional) rival, and the gap is truly astounding. They may end up worse vis a vis this new UGA than they would have been under a Zook or Muschamp.

(Of course, goes without saying that a great recruiter isn't guaranteed to be elite on the field. But a poor recruiter is guaranteed not to be. There's a reason why Gene Chizek and Larry Coker have titles, and Bill Snyder and David Cutcliff do not).

(07-30-2018 04:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Clemson up to #4 in the 24/7 rankings after the commitment of 5 star DB Andrew Booth out of Lawrenceville, Ga. Auburn was the primary competition.

It's getting REAL hard to keep up with Clemson in football. That said, I can take some small solace in knowing that the Tigers are taking players out of Georgia... and away from SEC teams.

Fuente & company MUST do better recruiting for VT (not that they're doing a bad job, it's just the level of competition keeps going UP).

Also, I've always thought that VT had the potential to be a much better recruiting school. Lot's of talent around, football first mentality, electric night atmosphere, solid academics, and a historically weak in-state rival.

Yes, it's kind of remote getting to, and yes, there's a lot of competition. But they should be able to whip much of their most local competition like Maryland, UVA, the Carolinas, etc.

Others think the ceiling is lower I guess, but I feel like the right guy should be able to sell the hell out of that, and be bringing in more classes in the 10-15 range, instead of 25-30. I think Fuente will recruit better than they did in the last years of Beamer, but I don't think he's maxed out the potential yet.

You're a realistic guy...what do you think?

(08-01-2018 12:04 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 04:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Clemson up to #4 in the 24/7 rankings after the commitment of 5 star DB Andrew Booth out of Lawrenceville, Ga. Auburn was the primary competition.

It's getting REAL hard to keep up with Clemson in football. That said, I can take some small solace in knowing that the Tigers are taking players out of Georgia... and away from SEC teams.

Fuente & company MUST do better recruiting for VT (not that they're doing a bad job, it's just the level of competition keeps going UP).

Also, I've always thought that VT had the potential to be a much better recruiting school. Lot's of talent around, football first mentality, electric night atmosphere, solid academics, and a historically weak in-state rival.

Yes, it's kind of remote getting to, and yes, there's a lot of competition. But they should be able to whip much of their most local competition like Maryland, UVA, the Carolinas, etc.

Others think the ceiling is lower I guess, but I feel like the right guy should be able to sell the hell out of that, and be bringing in more classes in the 10-15 range, instead of 25-30. I think Fuente will recruit better than they did in the last years of Beamer, but I don't think he's maxed out the potential yet.

You're a realistic guy...what do you think?

I like Fuente's enthusiasm - I think that helps recruiting (e.g. Dabo Swinney). I also like the way he has focused on in-state first, then neighboring states, then more remote locations - it's a proven formula.

However, VT lost several good-recruiting assistants around the time Fuente was hired and I don't think their replacements have been a net gain if you know what I mean. If the Hokies want to get back to the national championship game I think they need to find some great recruiters for assistant coaches. JMO though - maybe some other Hokies can chime in?

When the rules changed and VT could no longer fly kids into Blacksburg I think that began to hit recruiting. It's a long way from the Tidewater to Blacksburg. The Clemson SC area seems less rural to me than Blacksburg/Christiansburg/Radford/Roanoke area. That was not the case 25 years ago and this is despite the Appalachian Regional Commission pushing highway development with Corridor Q. Rural and mountainous can be an acquired taste.


As an example, it's 6-7 hours to get from the Tidewater to VT. It's 6 hours to get to DC. It's only 5 hours from Fayetteville NC, and just 2 hours from Winston-Salem. VT is somewhat spatially isolated in the State of Virginia itself. It would be akin to UNC or NC State being located in Asheville or Waynesville NC.

(08-01-2018 11:58 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 04:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Clemson up to #4 in the 24/7 rankings after the commitment of 5 star DB Andrew Booth out of Lawrenceville, Ga. Auburn was the primary competition.

It's getting REAL hard to keep up with Clemson in football. That said, I can take some small solace in knowing that the Tigers are taking players out of Georgia... and away from SEC teams.

Fuente & company MUST do better recruiting for VT (not that they're doing a bad job, it's just the level of competition keeps going UP).

I think that almost everyone would agree that Fuente is a good coach. But I strongly believe that being a GREAT recruiter is the number one, most important aspect of a head coach (and maybe every coach other than coordinators). And I don't think it's particularly close to the next most important. As much as I mock the hiring of Muschamp at USC, truthfully, his strength as a recruiter is probably more of an advantage than any X and O guy's brains would be among anyone they could get.

Mullen will be a most interesting test case. He's universally considered a top 5-10 head football coach, and isn't coming from some small sun belt school. But he's only an ok recruiter, and he's currently getting his brains beat by UGA, FSU and even Miami in recruiting. UGA is a big one, as a divisional (and emotional) rival, and the gap is truly astounding. They may end up worse vis a vis this new UGA than they would have been under a Zook or Muschamp.

(Of course, goes without saying that a great recruiter isn't guaranteed to be elite on the field. But a poor recruiter is guaranteed not to be. There's a reason why Gene Chizek and Larry Coker have titles, and Bill Snyder and David Cutcliff do not).

You don't think Snyder or Cutliffe would have a title if they coached at Auburn or Miami...? Snyder almost got one at KState! This is a terrible take sir. Snyder and Cutcliffe have recruited and performed extremely well in relation to the expectations at their respective programs. I'm actually shocked to see someone post something like this so confidently. What a joke

(08-01-2018 03:26 PM)orange_in_VA Wrote:  

(08-01-2018 11:58 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 04:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Clemson up to #4 in the 24/7 rankings after the commitment of 5 star DB Andrew Booth out of Lawrenceville, Ga. Auburn was the primary competition.

It's getting REAL hard to keep up with Clemson in football. That said, I can take some small solace in knowing that the Tigers are taking players out of Georgia... and away from SEC teams.

Fuente & company MUST do better recruiting for VT (not that they're doing a bad job, it's just the level of competition keeps going UP).

I think that almost everyone would agree that Fuente is a good coach. But I strongly believe that being a GREAT recruiter is the number one, most important aspect of a head coach (and maybe every coach other than coordinators). And I don't think it's particularly close to the next most important. As much as I mock the hiring of Muschamp at USC, truthfully, his strength as a recruiter is probably more of an advantage than any X and O guy's brains would be among anyone they could get.

Mullen will be a most interesting test case. He's universally considered a top 5-10 head football coach, and isn't coming from some small sun belt school. But he's only an ok recruiter, and he's currently getting his brains beat by UGA, FSU and even Miami in recruiting. UGA is a big one, as a divisional (and emotional) rival, and the gap is truly astounding. They may end up worse vis a vis this new UGA than they would have been under a Zook or Muschamp.

(Of course, goes without saying that a great recruiter isn't guaranteed to be elite on the field. But a poor recruiter is guaranteed not to be. There's a reason why Gene Chizek and Larry Coker have titles, and Bill Snyder and David Cutcliff do not).

You don't think Snyder or Cutliffe would have a title if they coached at Auburn or Miami...? Snyder almost got one at KState! This is a terrible take sir. Snyder and Cutcliffe have recruited and performed extremely well in relation to the expectations at their respective programs. I'm actually shocked to see someone post something like this so confidently. What a joke

Nope, I absolutely don't assume they would. All the elite schools that haven't hired them over the years agree.

Recruiting is a huge part of the job as a college football coach, in my opinion the largest part. I see no reason to extrapolate that guys like that would automatically become ace recruiters at an elite program.

Thought experiment:
1. Who's the better X & O coach: Dabo Swinney or Paul Johnson?
2. Who's the better recruiter?
3. Which one has played for the national championship 3 years in a row, and which one has never played for it?
4. Substitute David Cutcliff for Paul Johnson and repeat. For that matter, substitute former Clemson coach Tommy Bowden - compare him to Dabo!
Draw your own conclusions.

(08-02-2018 11:50 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(08-01-2018 03:26 PM)orange_in_VA Wrote:  

(08-01-2018 11:58 AM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 04:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(07-30-2018 03:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Clemson up to #4 in the 24/7 rankings after the commitment of 5 star DB Andrew Booth out of Lawrenceville, Ga. Auburn was the primary competition.

It's getting REAL hard to keep up with Clemson in football. That said, I can take some small solace in knowing that the Tigers are taking players out of Georgia... and away from SEC teams.

Fuente & company MUST do better recruiting for VT (not that they're doing a bad job, it's just the level of competition keeps going UP).

I think that almost everyone would agree that Fuente is a good coach. But I strongly believe that being a GREAT recruiter is the number one, most important aspect of a head coach (and maybe every coach other than coordinators). And I don't think it's particularly close to the next most important. As much as I mock the hiring of Muschamp at USC, truthfully, his strength as a recruiter is probably more of an advantage than any X and O guy's brains would be among anyone they could get.

Mullen will be a most interesting test case. He's universally considered a top 5-10 head football coach, and isn't coming from some small sun belt school. But he's only an ok recruiter, and he's currently getting his brains beat by UGA, FSU and even Miami in recruiting. UGA is a big one, as a divisional (and emotional) rival, and the gap is truly astounding. They may end up worse vis a vis this new UGA than they would have been under a Zook or Muschamp.

(Of course, goes without saying that a great recruiter isn't guaranteed to be elite on the field. But a poor recruiter is guaranteed not to be. There's a reason why Gene Chizek and Larry Coker have titles, and Bill Snyder and David Cutcliff do not).

You don't think Snyder or Cutliffe would have a title if they coached at Auburn or Miami...? Snyder almost got one at KState! This is a terrible take sir. Snyder and Cutcliffe have recruited and performed extremely well in relation to the expectations at their respective programs. I'm actually shocked to see someone post something like this so confidently. What a joke

Nope, I absolutely don't assume they would. All the elite schools that haven't hired them over the years agree.

Recruiting is a huge part of the job as a college football coach, in my opinion the largest part. I see no reason to extrapolate that guys like that would automatically become ace recruiters at an elite program.

I agree. IMO, the operative words in orange's post are "in relation to expectations at their respective programs". While Cutcliffe may do well at recruiting kids who can cut it academically at Duke, that doesn't translate to being able to close the deal with the five-stars who can't. And I don't remember K State "almost getting a title".

(08-02-2018 12:57 PM)ken d Wrote:  ...I don't remember K State "almost getting a title".

How quickly they forget!

https://www.si.com/college-football/2012...le-shot-ap

"Kansas State is so close. With two more wins, the Wildcats almost certainly will be headed to Miami for the BCS championship game and a shot at their first national title."

Of course, the very next week the Wildcats lost to Baylor 52-24 and that ended that.

see also: https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2012/...ek-12.html

I for one welcome our new CTE overlords. Maybe then players will care about the academics more than they care about the rock climbing wall.

The venue that one is recruiting to matters.

A strike against if you are recruiting to a STEM intensive U.
A strike against you if the girls on campus generally look like dogs.
A strike against you if the campus is considered a girls campus or a basketball campus.
A point in your favor if you near the beach.
A point in your favor if you have a plethora of good looking girls.
A point in your favor if your system leads to the NFL.

etc., etc., it all matters.

(08-02-2018 04:12 PM)Statefan Wrote:  The venue that one is recruiting to matters.

A strike against if you are recruiting to a STEM intensive U.
A strike against you if the girls on campus generally look like dogs.
A strike against you if the campus is considered a girls campus or a basketball campus.
A point in your favor if you near the beach.
A point in your favor if you have a plethora of good looking girls.
A point in your favor if your system leads to the NFL.

etc., etc., it all matters.

You're being way too diplomatic here. For a very large subset of recruits, and perhaps the majority of elite ones, all that matters is free p*ssy, free A's, lots of parties, some free drugs perhaps, some free money if you can get away with it, and an invite to the NFL combine.

Rather tragically, what should matter is will you see the field, how quickly will you see the field, can the coaches develop talent, will you get a real education in a valuable area so that you have LIFETIME earnings potential, and will you be trained to deal with the gold digging whores and thieves that are pervasive in the NFL should you make it there?

Maybe this is why we see so many former SEC players on ESPN. It might legitimately be their only career path of value if their degree is in intramural studies or magazines (one of my favorite ACTUAL 4 year degree paths at U[sic]GA).

(08-02-2018 04:17 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-02-2018 04:12 PM)Statefan Wrote:  The venue that one is recruiting to matters.

A strike against if you are recruiting to a STEM intensive U.
A strike against you if the girls on campus generally look like dogs.
A strike against you if the campus is considered a girls campus or a basketball campus.
A point in your favor if you near the beach.
A point in your favor if you have a plethora of good looking girls.
A point in your favor if your system leads to the NFL.

etc., etc., it all matters.

You're being way too diplomatic here. For a very large subset of recruits, and perhaps the majority of elite ones, all that matters is free p*ssy, free A's, lots of parties, some free drugs perhaps, some free money if you can get away with it, and an invite to the NFL combine.

Rather tragically, what should matter is will you see the field, how quickly will you see the field, can the coaches develop talent, will you get a real education in a valuable area so that you have LIFETIME earnings potential, and will you be trained to deal with the gold digging whores and thieves that are pervasive in the NFL should you make it there?

Maybe this is why we see so many former SEC players on ESPN. It might legitimately be their only career path of value if their degree is in intramural studies or magazines (one of my favorite ACTUAL 4 year degree paths at U[sic]GA).

I had heard that the coloring books at UGA had all burned up in a library fire...