Sponsored by The Fisher Law Firm: Virginia's DUI and Traffic Defense Firm! We serve the Blacksburg, Fairfax, Richmond areas as well as the rest of Virginia. For a free consultation call us any time, day or evening at 800.680.7031 or email us at [email protected].
1) Which non-conference opponent would you like to have an on-campus series with? - HokieGreyhound
Chris Coleman: Virginia Tech has already signed up all of the desirable Big Ten programs. I'm not a huge fan of traveling very far west to play games, especially since we rarely recruit west of the Appalachians.
I'll throw out teams such as Rutgers, West Virginia, Penn State, etc., as well as anyone else the Hokies already have a home-and-home series with. Travel, particularly travel to a different time zone, can put a major strain on teams, so I'm going to limit myself to choices that are reasonably close to Blacksburg.
South Carolina: Columbia is only 260 miles from Blacksburg, and the Hokies do recruit South Carolina. It would give Tech fans a chance to see a new place, and it would be against a competitive team. Also, it would be fun to see the Gamecocks in Lane Stadium.
Tennessee: Blacksburg and Knoxville are separated by just 230 miles. We've got the Battle at Bristol coming up, but a home and home would be really exciting. Still, Knoxville is a long way away from the VT season ticket base in Richmond, NOVA and the 757.
Georgia: Athens is just under six hours away from Blacksburg, and the Hokies do recruit Georgia and the Atlanta area. The Bulldogs would also be exciting for the fans in Lane Stadium.
Those are my top three. Auburn and Florida are close to being on my list, but the travel times wouldn't exactly be fan friendly.
Out of those three, I'd probably pick South Carolina. The Hokies and Gamecocks have the best two entrances in college football. Tech has Enter Sandman, while South Carolina's entrance would make Ric Flair proud. It would be awesome to be able to see both of those entrances live. Tech's is more intense. South Carolina's might be a little more majestic.
My second choice would be Tennessee, just so I could see Neyland Stadium.
2) Does the athletic department and/or admissions have a double standard when it comes to JUCO prospects? Buzz and basketball get JUCOs and transfers, yet Frank Beamer and football either can't get or don't accept JUCOs.
CC: What we've always heard is that Virginia Tech would not accept JUCOs unless they were originally qualifiers out of high school. So, let's look at the JUCOs Buzz Williams has taken…
Tyrone Outlaw: Outlaw qualified out of high school because he attended UNC-Greensboro as a freshman. That makes him an eligible JUCO by VT standards.
Johnny Hamilton: Hamilton is from Trinidad, and as a foreigner there is no way to know whether he would have been eligible out of high school or not. He didn't start playing basketball until he was 16, which means he wasn't recruited out of high school. He went to JUCO to have a chance to draw interest from bigger schools. It's likely that he was a qualifier out of high school.
Shane Henry: Henry had no interest from Division I programs coming out of high school, so he went the JUCO route. I can't tell whether or not he was a qualifier out of high school.
The football program pursued a JUCO prospect last fall: offensive tackle Jahair Jones. He eventually picked Miami after a last second visit from Al Golden. Since the Hokies offered and pursued Jones, I have to believe that the football program has the same opportunities to pursue JUCO athletes as the basketball team. It's up to the staff as to whether or not they choose to pursue those opportunities.
It will be interesting to see if the Hokies continue to pursue Eric Whitehead and Adonis Williamson. Those two players did not qualify and are going to play JUCO ball. If Tech does choose to pursue them, that means they are now choosing to go after JUCOs who did not originally qualify out of high school. That would represent a change in policy going forward.
For what it's worth, I'm in favor of that change. There is increased competition in the state of Virginia these days, and I believe it's worth it to open all potential avenues to talented players. As long as they are good guys who are good teammates, I don't have any issues with bringing them in.
3) There isn't a lot of talk about the Terrell Edmunds move to rover. What's your take on it? - hokiedanville2
CC: I love it. I think rover is his natural position. He was working at corner early in the spring, but that's normal. Torrian Gray has worked past defensive backs, such as Kam Chancellor, Dorian Porch, Kyshoen Jarrett and Detrick Bonner, at corner early in their careers so he can teach them coverage technique. Then he moved them to their natural positions later. As a result of their early experience learning coverage, they were better at it than most rovers and safeties would normally be.
At 6-2, 195, Edmunds has the size for rover. He's a good athlete for the position, though he would have had average to below average hips for the cornerback spot, in my opinion. Edmunds had a 37.5 inch vertical jump back in the spring, and apparently he's already "tied the record" this summer…
I'm going for the record in the vertical jump .. Tied it today next time Ima pass it
— Terrell Edmunds (@T_Babyy6) July 22, 2015
It's not clear if he means the school record or position, but either would be impressive. The school record is 44" by Marcus Davis. The position record is 43.5" by Pierson Prioleau. If he's already tied either one of those records as a r-freshman…wow. Not to mention that would mean an improvement of at least six inches since testing back in March.
I don't think Edmunds is going to be quite ready to contribute on defense this year, but he'll obviously help on special teams. He'll be a player to watch next spring as he enters his third year in the program. Right now I view him as a future starter, though we'll learn more about his actually on-field abilities during spring practice.
4) Knowing that hindsight is 20/20, how do you compare your confidence or lack thereof going into this year's opener vs. other big season openers, specifically the USC game from 2004 and the 2013 Alabama game? - mjfhokie
CC: I'm more confident about this one than I was the 2004 USC game and the 2013 Alabama game, mostly for two reasons…
1: The game is at home.
2: We've already beaten Ohio State once.
I wasn't confident going into the USC game. We were coming off a game in which we gave up 50 points to Cal, and now we had to face Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush? I didn't think we had much of a chance at all in that game, but we came out and played well.
I was confident our defense would play well against Alabama in 2013. In fact, I told an Alabama fan before the game "you're going to be really impressed with our defense. It's going to be the best you face all year. But we'll be lucky to score." That's pretty much what happened. I picked it 31-7 Alabama. Coincidentally, Will Stewart picked the score exactly…35-10.
Let's look at some other big early season games as well…
I didn't feel good about the LSU game in 2007. I picked the Tigers 16-3 in my preview because I didn't think we were going to be able to block their defensive line, though I thought our defense would play well. I was half right.
In 2009, back when I was young and exuberant, I picked Tech to beat Alabama 17-16. I was exactly correct…at the end of the third quarter. The Hokies led 17-16 at that point, but unfortunately the fourth quarter happened.
In 2010, I picked Tech to beat Boise State 27-20. I felt like the Hokies had better athletes and should have won the game. I still feel that way. Unfortunately they did not. There are only four times where I can remember being legitimately angry at the end of a VT game. Boise State was one of them. In case you're curious, here are the others…
1: The Kansas Orange Bowl. We should have won that game by 20…at least.
2: The 2008 FSU game, where we timidly punted down 10 points near the end of the game.
3: The 2011 Sugar Bowl against Michigan.
When Tech first signed the Ohio State series, I thought we would lose in Columbus and upset the Buckeyes at home. I might end up getting that backwards, though we can beat them again if things fall right. If I knew Andrew Motuapuaka was going to play well at mike, I'd be more confident. However, the last time I saw him he was getting shoved aside by Trey Edmunds in the spring game, so I can only imagine what Zeke Elliott can do to him if he finds him in the open field.
5) It is said in the book "Three and Out" that by the time a fifth-year senior graduates, Michigan has spent $580,000 on them. What is the comparable number on a Tech athlete?
CC: I remember reading that part of the book as well, and I was pretty blown away. I knew schools spent way more on student-athletes than most people realize, but that number still seemed high to me. I'm going to type word for word the few paragraphs you are referring to (pages 349 and 350)…
"Every day, half of the 120 Michigan football players get their ankles taped. The trainers tape 120 ankles a day, from early August to late November, plus 15 practices in December when Michigan's in a bowl game, plus 15 more practices during spring ball. That's about 18,000 rolls of tape, or 600 boxes - about $45,000 worth.
But that's a pittance compared to the team's budget for meals. During fall football practice, the training table meals served from Monday through Thursday cost more than $400,000. Tack on weekend hotel meals, the bowl game meals, and the spring ball meals, and the total passes $1 million (to say nothing of 12 nights in hotels for 70 people and support staff) - or about $10,000 a player per year.
If you divide the cost of salaries for football coaches and staffers by 120 players, it comes to $57,000 per player per year.
But the biggest cost is still tuition. Few fans or reporters realize it - even many of the players don't - but the university does not set aside 85 free passes each year for football players. The athletic department writes a check for every single scholarship athlete - some 500 at Michigan - paying the actual tuition for both in-state and out-of-stat students each semester, down to the penny. In 2010, that exceeded $15 million, of which roughly $4.2 million went to football players - or about $59,000 per scholarship player who attends school year round.
By the time a fifth-year scholarship player from out-of-state graduates from the University of Michigan, his school has spent over $580,000 on him, whether he's an All-American or a fourth-string long-snap center - and that does not include the Academic Center, strength and conditioning, facilities, administration, athletic trainers or tape."
Pretty enlightening, isn't it? I can't tell you exactly how much Virginia Tech spends on their athletes, but let me run some numbers by you. Let's take Houshun Gaines, a true freshman from North Carolina, as an example. Here's what it costs to educate Gaines each year…
Tuition and Fees: $28,048
Room: $4,834
Board: $3,436
Books: $800
Cost of Attendance: $3,620
Total: $40,738
Let's assume Gaines redshirts and stays in the program for five years. The total cost of his education, room and board, COA and books comes out to $203,690 at the minimum. In reality it will cost more than that, because tuition will rise during the course of those five years.
The book noted that Michigan spends about $10,000 per player per year on team meals. Let's assume that Virginia Tech spends the same. That would be $50,000 more for Gaines, which takes our total up to $253,690. We're fortunate that we're not Michigan…out-of-state tuition there is around $60,000 per year.
Of course, that $253,690 doesn't include Mike Gentry, the nutritionist, the doctors and surgeons, etc…Virginia Tech pays those employees to provide services to student athletes. It also doesn't count hotels for road games, flights, travel, etc. I'm guessing that in the end, VT spends $400,000 over five years for an out-of-state football player.
This leads me to another point with regards to in-state recruiting. An in-state football player costs 24,367 per year in tuition, room and board, COA and books, whereas an out-of-state player costs 40,738. Here's the total cost over five years…
In-state: $121,835
Out-of-State: $203,690
An in-state player is over $80,000 cheaper than an out-of-state player over the course of five seasons. That doesn't matter for teams who have more money than they know what to do with. Over the long haul, that's very important to a mid-market program like Virginia Tech.
When the Hokies lose an in-state prospect like Levonta Taylor or Josh Sweat, and then turn to an out-of-state prospect to replace him, here's what you need to remember: in that situation, Tech will end up paying more money for a prospect who isn't quite as good (by Tech coaches' standards, since they're going with a Plan B player) as someone they could have gotten for cheaper. That's not smart business for mid-market programs. That's another reason the coaching staff has always focused on in-state recruiting, though they haven't been as successful recently.
Ultimately Tech should bring in the best players they can get, regardless of where they are from. Having more success with their top in-state targets would make for a much more efficient use of their money, however. You should always strive to avoid going out-of-state and paying more money for a prospect that isn't as good as the in-state guy. The Hokies need to do a better job of that, or Hokie Club members need to find a way to open up the checkbook a little more.