drop 1 or 2 places in the next poll and using revisionist history won't change it. You assume I am using selection bias, but you forget listing every big win and big loss would be a lengthy task and maybe exceed character space (assuming TSL has one for its posts). Also, the WVU game is a conference game which has no impact on the OOC narrative is what people typically use when comparing 2 or more conferences against each other. If you truly believe that ESPN and other third parties are incorrect about their perception of VT football, then by all means prove them wrong. Show VT has won just as many big games as it has lost, VT has just as many impressive big wins as big losses, or whatever other criteria you want to use. Heck it doesn't even matter the starting point for your exercise because there is always the possibility the narrative began for VT before that point. I guess if you truly want to be safe, then you would use 1892 as your starting point because that was the first year VT played football. I don't believe I have anything else worthwhile to add to this conversation. I believe I have shown more than enough examples to respond to Big 12 guy's statement that VT being relatively new to the scene as being the main thing holding the program back. Heck I didn't even talk about how FSU has a similar history as VT given that the program really didn't "arrive" until Bobby Bowden became their HC in 1976. It really wasn't until 1987 season when the program really took off to become what it is perceived today. If you have something to say about the being new to the scene vs. big game record discussion, then I may (or may not) have something worthwhile to add to that discussion. If not, then I hope you enjoy the rest of your day and have a great weekend.