CSNbbs

Every time I hear 'Bronco Mendenhall', I think of the old Jewish cowboy joke that Steven Wright used to tell.

But I digress. Bucky Goldstein said something interesting post-game: "Will over skill". He allowed that FSU had the better players (I think I saw that FSU had 30+ 4 or 5 stars to one at UVa, and he is a freshman), but that the desire to win by his team overrode those stats.

And it's also how VPISU carved out a niche and became the most dominant program in the state for the last quarter-century: taking the players that others weren't interested and getting them to play above their ability.

We can do that. We HAVE done that. We'll have to do it again next week. Just like Maverick Goldenblatt said.

(09-15-2019 02:19 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]Every time I hear 'Bronco Mendenhall', I think of the old Jewish cowboy joke that Steven Wright used to tell.

But I digress. Bucky Goldstein said something interesting post-game: "Will over skill". He allowed that FSU had the better players (I think I saw that FSU had 30+ 4 or 5 stars to one at UVa, and he is a freshman), but that the desire to win by his team overrode those stats.

And it's also how VPISU carved out a niche and became the most dominant program in the state for the last quarter-century: taking the players that others weren't interested and getting them to play above their ability.

We can do that. We HAVE done that. We'll have to do it again next week. Just like Maverick Goldenblatt said.

No.
VT has NOT carved it's niche in Virginia by taking castoffs.
Since 1999 the VT national recruiting rank has been top 1 (1999) to top 35 nationally, with two anomalous years, (2002-43) (2016-42). Otherwise they generally hang around 25.

FSU is second only to Clemson recently in the ACC as to recruiting, as high as 1, sometimes top 5, and generally top 10 in the last few years.
Yes it has athletes that are bigger, stronger and faster than the majority of other programs. The disarray of the past two years has been a real head-scratcher, and is totally on the coaches.

(09-15-2019 02:54 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:19 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]Every time I hear 'Bronco Mendenhall', I think of the old Jewish cowboy joke that Steven Wright used to tell.

But I digress. Bucky Goldstein said something interesting post-game: "Will over skill". He allowed that FSU had the better players (I think I saw that FSU had 30+ 4 or 5 stars to one at UVa, and he is a freshman), but that the desire to win by his team overrode those stats.

And it's also how VPISU carved out a niche and became the most dominant program in the state for the last quarter-century: taking the players that others weren't interested and getting them to play above their ability.

We can do that. We HAVE done that. We'll have to do it again next week. Just like Maverick Goldenblatt said.

No.
VT has NOT carved it's niche by taking castoffs.
Since 1999 the VT national recruiting rank has been top 1 (1999) to top 35 nationally, with two anomalous years, (2003-43) (2016-42). Otherwise they generally hang around 25.

FSU is second only to Clemson in the ACC as to recruiting.
Yes it has athletes that are bigger, stronger and faster than the majority of other programs. The disarray of the past two years has been a real head-scratcher, and is totally on the coaches.

bull****. I can't stand VT, but props where they are due. That's where the blue-collar, lunch pail, 'we'll worker harder' mentality began.

Beamer's first classes were mostly 2 and 3 stars. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 90's --10 years into his tenure-- that they started consistently attracting higher talent.

I'm looking at the recruiting classes, but you do the homework, sporto. Compare and contrast 1987-present VT recruiting classes against their contemporaries in the Big East and the ACC and demonstrate to the board how they were attracting the top talent the entire time. #78ResearchProjects

I'll hang up and listen.

(09-15-2019 03:29 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:54 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:19 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]Every time I hear 'Bronco Mendenhall', I think of the old Jewish cowboy joke that Steven Wright used to tell.

But I digress. Bucky Goldstein said something interesting post-game: "Will over skill". He allowed that FSU had the better players (I think I saw that FSU had 30+ 4 or 5 stars to one at UVa, and he is a freshman), but that the desire to win by his team overrode those stats.

And it's also how VPISU carved out a niche and became the most dominant program in the state for the last quarter-century: taking the players that others weren't interested and getting them to play above their ability.

We can do that. We HAVE done that. We'll have to do it again next week. Just like Maverick Goldenblatt said.

No.
VT has NOT carved it's niche by taking castoffs.
Since 1999 the VT national recruiting rank has been top 1 (1999) to top 35 nationally, with two anomalous years, (2003-43) (2016-42). Otherwise they generally hang around 25.

FSU is second only to Clemson in the ACC as to recruiting.
Yes it has athletes that are bigger, stronger and faster than the majority of other programs. The disarray of the past two years has been a real head-scratcher, and is totally on the coaches.

bull****. I can't stand VT, but props where they are due. That's where the blue-collar, lunch pail, 'we'll worker harder' mentality began.

Beamer's first classes were mostly 2 and 3 stars. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 90's --10 years into his tenure-- that they started consistently attracting higher talent.

I'm looking at the recruiting classes, but you do the homework, sporto. Compare and contrast 1987-present VT recruiting classes against their contemporaries in the Big East and the ACC and demonstrate to the board how they were attracting the top talent the entire time. #78ResearchProjects

I'll hang up and listen.

You original premise was "past quarter century", that is 25 years, which goes back to 1994 and which correlates to your admitted mid 1990s escalation of recruiting talent.
Since 247 and ESPN only go back to 1999, I can only offer this source from which to extrapolate prior to 1999..
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/college/v...21c30.html
That would indicate that VT was attracting top level talent even before 1994.

Your lunch pale statement is little more than marketing hype, and you have contradicted yourself as to your own timeline, "sporto"

(09-15-2019 03:46 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:29 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:54 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:19 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]Every time I hear 'Bronco Mendenhall', I think of the old Jewish cowboy joke that Steven Wright used to tell.

But I digress. Bucky Goldstein said something interesting post-game: "Will over skill". He allowed that FSU had the better players (I think I saw that FSU had 30+ 4 or 5 stars to one at UVa, and he is a freshman), but that the desire to win by his team overrode those stats.

And it's also how VPISU carved out a niche and became the most dominant program in the state for the last quarter-century: taking the players that others weren't interested and getting them to play above their ability.

We can do that. We HAVE done that. We'll have to do it again next week. Just like Maverick Goldenblatt said.

No.
VT has NOT carved it's niche by taking castoffs.
Since 1999 the VT national recruiting rank has been top 1 (1999) to top 35 nationally, with two anomalous years, (2003-43) (2016-42). Otherwise they generally hang around 25.

FSU is second only to Clemson in the ACC as to recruiting.
Yes it has athletes that are bigger, stronger and faster than the majority of other programs. The disarray of the past two years has been a real head-scratcher, and is totally on the coaches.

bull****. I can't stand VT, but props where they are due. That's where the blue-collar, lunch pail, 'we'll worker harder' mentality began.

Beamer's first classes were mostly 2 and 3 stars. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 90's --10 years into his tenure-- that they started consistently attracting higher talent.

I'm looking at the recruiting classes, but you do the homework, sporto. Compare and contrast 1987-present VT recruiting classes against their contemporaries in the Big East and the ACC and demonstrate to the board how they were attracting the top talent the entire time. #78ResearchProjects

I'll hang up and listen.

You original premise was "past quarter century", that is 25 years, which goes back to 1994 and which correlates to your admitted mid 1990s escalation of recruiting talent.
Since 247 and ESPN only go back to 1999, I can only offer this source from which to extrapolate prior to 1999..
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/college/v...21c30.html
That would indicate that VT was attracting top level talent even before 1994.

Your lunch pale statement is little more than marketing hype, and you have contradicted yourself as to your own timeline, "sporto"

Sporto!?!?!?!??

(09-15-2019 05:30 PM)AimHigh Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:46 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:29 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:54 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:19 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]Every time I hear 'Bronco Mendenhall', I think of the old Jewish cowboy joke that Steven Wright used to tell.

But I digress. Bucky Goldstein said something interesting post-game: "Will over skill". He allowed that FSU had the better players (I think I saw that FSU had 30+ 4 or 5 stars to one at UVa, and he is a freshman), but that the desire to win by his team overrode those stats.

And it's also how VPISU carved out a niche and became the most dominant program in the state for the last quarter-century: taking the players that others weren't interested and getting them to play above their ability.

We can do that. We HAVE done that. We'll have to do it again next week. Just like Maverick Goldenblatt said.

No.
VT has NOT carved it's niche by taking castoffs.
Since 1999 the VT national recruiting rank has been top 1 (1999) to top 35 nationally, with two anomalous years, (2003-43) (2016-42). Otherwise they generally hang around 25.

FSU is second only to Clemson in the ACC as to recruiting.
Yes it has athletes that are bigger, stronger and faster than the majority of other programs. The disarray of the past two years has been a real head-scratcher, and is totally on the coaches.

bull****. I can't stand VT, but props where they are due. That's where the blue-collar, lunch pail, 'we'll worker harder' mentality began.

Beamer's first classes were mostly 2 and 3 stars. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 90's --10 years into his tenure-- that they started consistently attracting higher talent.

I'm looking at the recruiting classes, but you do the homework, sporto. Compare and contrast 1987-present VT recruiting classes against their contemporaries in the Big East and the ACC and demonstrate to the board how they were attracting the top talent the entire time. #78ResearchProjects

I'll hang up and listen.

You original premise was "past quarter century", that is 25 years, which goes back to 1994 and which correlates to your admitted mid 1990s escalation of recruiting talent.
Since 247 and ESPN only go back to 1999, I can only offer this source from which to extrapolate prior to 1999..
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/college/v...21c30.html
That would indicate that VT was attracting top level talent even before 1994.

Your lunch pale statement is little more than marketing hype, and you have contradicted yourself as to your own timeline, "sporto"

Sporto!?!?!?!??

(09-15-2019 03:46 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:29 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:54 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:19 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]Every time I hear 'Bronco Mendenhall', I think of the old Jewish cowboy joke that Steven Wright used to tell.

But I digress. Bucky Goldstein said something interesting post-game: "Will over skill". He allowed that FSU had the better players (I think I saw that FSU had 30+ 4 or 5 stars to one at UVa, and he is a freshman), but that the desire to win by his team overrode those stats.

And it's also how VPISU carved out a niche and became the most dominant program in the state for the last quarter-century: taking the players that others weren't interested and getting them to play above their ability.

We can do that. We HAVE done that. We'll have to do it again next week. Just like Maverick Goldenblatt said.

No.
VT has NOT carved it's niche by taking castoffs.
Since 1999 the VT national recruiting rank has been top 1 (1999) to top 35 nationally, with two anomalous years, (2003-43) (2016-42). Otherwise they generally hang around 25.

FSU is second only to Clemson in the ACC as to recruiting.
Yes it has athletes that are bigger, stronger and faster than the majority of other programs. The disarray of the past two years has been a real head-scratcher, and is totally on the coaches.

bull****. I can't stand VT, but props where they are due. That's where the blue-collar, lunch pail, 'we'll worker harder' mentality began.

Beamer's first classes were mostly 2 and 3 stars. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 90's --10 years into his tenure-- that they started consistently attracting higher talent.

I'm looking at the recruiting classes, but you do the homework, sporto. Compare and contrast 1987-present VT recruiting classes against their contemporaries in the Big East and the ACC and demonstrate to the board how they were attracting the top talent the entire time. #78ResearchProjects

I'll hang up and listen.

You original premise was "past quarter century", that is 25 years, which goes back to 1994 and which correlates to your admitted mid 1990s escalation of recruiting talent.
Since 247 and ESPN only go back to 1999, I can only offer this source from which to extrapolate prior to 1999..
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/college/v...21c30.html
That would indicate that VT was attracting top level talent even before 1994.

Your lunch pale statement is little more than marketing hype, and you have contradicted yourself as to your own timeline, "sporto"

Ah, so a quarter-century is literal for me, but figurative for you. Makes sense, and awfully convenient.

Google helps when you're searching for something on the internet. With ease, on page one, I found a source listing all the classes back through the 80's. It shows exactly what I posted: classes filled with mostly two and three stars through 1994 or so. If you don't want to do the work, say so.

Your lunch may pale in comparison to mine, this is true. But WRT to lunch pail hype, THEY believed (and many still do) they owned the working class football mentality, and it lead more or less directly to Enter Sandman etc.

Tomorrow I'll show why Miami is responsible for VT being in the ACC and dominant in VA for the past quarter-century* and not in the Sun Belt or C-USA with us.

*times approximate

(09-15-2019 05:30 PM)AimHigh Wrote: [ -> ]Sporto!?!?!?!??

Dude.

And also, the important part of that post was 'will over skill', not the damn Hokies.

(09-15-2019 06:18 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:46 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:29 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:54 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:19 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]Every time I hear 'Bronco Mendenhall', I think of the old Jewish cowboy joke that Steven Wright used to tell.

But I digress. Bucky Goldstein said something interesting post-game: "Will over skill". He allowed that FSU had the better players (I think I saw that FSU had 30+ 4 or 5 stars to one at UVa, and he is a freshman), but that the desire to win by his team overrode those stats.

And it's also how VPISU carved out a niche and became the most dominant program in the state for the last quarter-century: taking the players that others weren't interested and getting them to play above their ability.

We can do that. We HAVE done that. We'll have to do it again next week. Just like Maverick Goldenblatt said.

No.
VT has NOT carved it's niche by taking castoffs.
Since 1999 the VT national recruiting rank has been top 1 (1999) to top 35 nationally, with two anomalous years, (2003-43) (2016-42). Otherwise they generally hang around 25.

FSU is second only to Clemson in the ACC as to recruiting.
Yes it has athletes that are bigger, stronger and faster than the majority of other programs. The disarray of the past two years has been a real head-scratcher, and is totally on the coaches.

bull****. I can't stand VT, but props where they are due. That's where the blue-collar, lunch pail, 'we'll worker harder' mentality began.

Beamer's first classes were mostly 2 and 3 stars. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 90's --10 years into his tenure-- that they started consistently attracting higher talent.

I'm looking at the recruiting classes, but you do the homework, sporto. Compare and contrast 1987-present VT recruiting classes against their contemporaries in the Big East and the ACC and demonstrate to the board how they were attracting the top talent the entire time. #78ResearchProjects

I'll hang up and listen.

You original premise was "past quarter century", that is 25 years, which goes back to 1994 and which correlates to your admitted mid 1990s escalation of recruiting talent.
Since 247 and ESPN only go back to 1999, I can only offer this source from which to extrapolate prior to 1999..
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/college/v...21c30.html
That would indicate that VT was attracting top level talent even before 1994.

Your lunch pale statement is little more than marketing hype, and you have contradicted yourself as to your own timeline, "sporto"

Ah, so a quarter-century is literal for me, but figurative for you. Makes sense, and awfully convenient.

Google helps when you're searching for something on the internet. With ease, on page one, I found a source listing all the classes back through the 80's. It shows exactly what I posted: classes filled with mostly two and three stars through 1994 or so. If you don't want to do the work, say so.

Your lunch may pale in comparison to mine, this is true. But WRT to lunch pail hype, THEY believed (and many still do) they owned the working class football mentality, and it lead more or less directly to Enter Sandman etc.

Tomorrow I'll show why Miami is responsible for VT being in the ACC and dominant in VA for the past quarter-century* and not in the Sun Belt or C-USA with us.

*times approximate

Actually, you have that backwards, I accepted your "Quarter Century" as literal; in that a quarter of a century (100 yrs) is indeed 25 years.
Why would or even should I assume you really didn't mean a quarter century literally when that is what you said? What is really convenient is to communicate with language using accepted definitions and meanings as a means to facilitate mutual understanding.
That you said "quarter century" but retreated from that to an after-the-fact figurative interpretation is a convenient way to mask a lost debate.

It is also very convenient that you have alleged a source(s) without disclosing it (them).
I had already done the "homework" and noted my sources at the first reply. Below are the links if you need them.
247, going back to 1999,
https://247sports.com/college/virginia-t...l/Commits/

ESPN, going back to 2006
http://www.espn.com/college-sports/footb...class/2018


I am well familiar with the VT from the BE to the ACC situation, including the objection by UVA and VT subsequently getting support from the Virginia legislature forcing UVA to eventually accept VT.



EDIT: I DID find this on this on VT Sports war. According to this, by today's standards, VT had at least 7 3/4 star recruits even then.
https://virginiatech.sportswar.com/artic...past-1985/

(09-15-2019 06:51 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 06:18 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:46 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:29 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 02:54 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]No.
VT has NOT carved it's niche by taking castoffs.
Since 1999 the VT national recruiting rank has been top 1 (1999) to top 35 nationally, with two anomalous years, (2003-43) (2016-42). Otherwise they generally hang around 25.

FSU is second only to Clemson in the ACC as to recruiting.
Yes it has athletes that are bigger, stronger and faster than the majority of other programs. The disarray of the past two years has been a real head-scratcher, and is totally on the coaches.

bull****. I can't stand VT, but props where they are due. That's where the blue-collar, lunch pail, 'we'll worker harder' mentality began.

Beamer's first classes were mostly 2 and 3 stars. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 90's --10 years into his tenure-- that they started consistently attracting higher talent.

I'm looking at the recruiting classes, but you do the homework, sporto. Compare and contrast 1987-present VT recruiting classes against their contemporaries in the Big East and the ACC and demonstrate to the board how they were attracting the top talent the entire time. #78ResearchProjects

I'll hang up and listen.

You original premise was "past quarter century", that is 25 years, which goes back to 1994 and which correlates to your admitted mid 1990s escalation of recruiting talent.
Since 247 and ESPN only go back to 1999, I can only offer this source from which to extrapolate prior to 1999..
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/college/v...21c30.html
That would indicate that VT was attracting top level talent even before 1994.

Your lunch pale statement is little more than marketing hype, and you have contradicted yourself as to your own timeline, "sporto"

Ah, so a quarter-century is literal for me, but figurative for you. Makes sense, and awfully convenient.

Google helps when you're searching for something on the internet. With ease, on page one, I found a source listing all the classes back through the 80's. It shows exactly what I posted: classes filled with mostly two and three stars through 1994 or so. If you don't want to do the work, say so.

Your lunch may pale in comparison to mine, this is true. But WRT to lunch pail hype, THEY believed (and many still do) they owned the working class football mentality, and it lead more or less directly to Enter Sandman etc.

Tomorrow I'll show why Miami is responsible for VT being in the ACC and dominant in VA for the past quarter-century* and not in the Sun Belt or C-USA with us.

*times approximate

Actually, you have that backwards, I accepted your "Quarter Century" as literal; in that a quarter of a century (100 yrs) is indeed 25 years.
Why would or even should I assume you really didn't mean a quarter century literally when that is what you said? What is really convenient is to communicate with language using accepted definitions and meanings as a means to facilitate mutual understanding.
That you said "quarter century" but retreated from that to an after-the-fact figurative interpretation is a convenient way to mask a lost debate.

It is also very convenient that you have alleged a source(s) without disclosing it (them).
I had already done the "homework" and noted my sources at the first reply. Below are the links if you need them.
247, going back to 1999,
https://247sports.com/college/virginia-t...l/Commits/

ESPN, going back to 2006
http://www.espn.com/college-sports/footb...class/2018


I am well familiar with the VT from the BE to the ACC situation, including the objection by UVA and VT subsequently getting support from the Virginia legislature forcing UVA to eventually accept VT.



EDIT: I DID find this on this on VT Sports war. According to this, by today's standards, VT had at least 7 3/4 star recruits even then.
https://virginiatech.sportswar.com/artic...past-1985/

Actually, it goes back to Miami's Pell Grant scandal back in the early 90s. Miami was stripped of roughly 30% of their football scholarships. It was enough to cause their talent to drop tremendously. That gave VT enough of an opening to become dominant in the Big East and start their rise to national prominence. The ACC raided the Big East in 2005. UVa knew they would lose the home state recruiting battle to VT which is why UVa balked at VT coming to the ACC. The ACC was not known for their football, so bringing in powerhouses from the Big East helped raise the ACC's football prowess.

And there I was thinking I had an original thought.

0-2 VT beat a depleted Miami and goes on the run to the Sugar Bowl, yadda yadda yadda they're in the ACC. Had that not happened, they never make the jump up to the next leveland when the Big East implodes who know where they end up, but it ain't the ACC

It’s quite simple. VT recruiting, and as a result, their profile, jumped when they joined the Big East. It took another leap after Vick attended and took another when they joined the ACC.

(09-15-2019 09:01 PM)GotLabradors Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 06:51 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 06:18 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:46 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:29 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]bull****. I can't stand VT, but props where they are due. That's where the blue-collar, lunch pail, 'we'll worker harder' mentality began.

Beamer's first classes were mostly 2 and 3 stars. It wasn't until the mid-to-late 90's --10 years into his tenure-- that they started consistently attracting higher talent.

I'm looking at the recruiting classes, but you do the homework, sporto. Compare and contrast 1987-present VT recruiting classes against their contemporaries in the Big East and the ACC and demonstrate to the board how they were attracting the top talent the entire time. #78ResearchProjects

I'll hang up and listen.

You original premise was "past quarter century", that is 25 years, which goes back to 1994 and which correlates to your admitted mid 1990s escalation of recruiting talent.
Since 247 and ESPN only go back to 1999, I can only offer this source from which to extrapolate prior to 1999..
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/college/v...21c30.html
That would indicate that VT was attracting top level talent even before 1994.

Your lunch pale statement is little more than marketing hype, and you have contradicted yourself as to your own timeline, "sporto"

Ah, so a quarter-century is literal for me, but figurative for you. Makes sense, and awfully convenient.

Google helps when you're searching for something on the internet. With ease, on page one, I found a source listing all the classes back through the 80's. It shows exactly what I posted: classes filled with mostly two and three stars through 1994 or so. If you don't want to do the work, say so.

Your lunch may pale in comparison to mine, this is true. But WRT to lunch pail hype, THEY believed (and many still do) they owned the working class football mentality, and it lead more or less directly to Enter Sandman etc.

Tomorrow I'll show why Miami is responsible for VT being in the ACC and dominant in VA for the past quarter-century* and not in the Sun Belt or C-USA with us.

*times approximate

Actually, you have that backwards, I accepted your "Quarter Century" as literal; in that a quarter of a century (100 yrs) is indeed 25 years.
Why would or even should I assume you really didn't mean a quarter century literally when that is what you said? What is really convenient is to communicate with language using accepted definitions and meanings as a means to facilitate mutual understanding.
That you said "quarter century" but retreated from that to an after-the-fact figurative interpretation is a convenient way to mask a lost debate.

It is also very convenient that you have alleged a source(s) without disclosing it (them).
I had already done the "homework" and noted my sources at the first reply. Below are the links if you need them.
247, going back to 1999,
https://247sports.com/college/virginia-t...l/Commits/

ESPN, going back to 2006
http://www.espn.com/college-sports/footb...class/2018


I am well familiar with the VT from the BE to the ACC situation, including the objection by UVA and VT subsequently getting support from the Virginia legislature forcing UVA to eventually accept VT.



EDIT: I DID find this on this on VT Sports war. According to this, by today's standards, VT had at least 7 3/4 star recruits even then.
https://virginiatech.sportswar.com/artic...past-1985/

Actually, it goes back to Miami's Pell Grant scandal back in the early 90s. Miami was stripped of roughly 30% of their football scholarships. It was enough to cause their talent to drop tremendously. That gave VT enough of an opening to become dominant in the Big East and start their rise to national prominence. The ACC raided the Big East in 2005. UVa knew they would lose the home state recruiting battle to VT which is why UVa balked at VT coming to the ACC. The ACC was not known for their football, so bringing in powerhouses from the Big East helped raise the ACC's football prowess.

Yes and no. While that AND the pay for play scandal certainly hurt Miami due to the 31 scholarship reduction from 1996 to 1996 and 1 year post season ban, Virginia Tech had already risen to prominence the year before those penalties were levied.
In 1995 it shared the conference title with Miami and was the Big East BCS representative.
In 1996 VT co shared the BE title with Miami and Syracuse.
Syracuse then won the BE in 1997 and 1998.
VT won it's only outright Big East title in 1999 with the famous 11-0 Michael Vick team that lost to Fla St Nat championship game.
Miami returned to Big East prominence from 2000 until both went to the ACC in 2003.

Since VT ha shared the Big East title BEFORE the NCAA sanctions on Miami, and Syracuse, not VT, assumed the title of Big East champions for a couple of years AFTER the Miami debacle, I submit that it was really the Michael Vick led team that transformed VT regularly into the national conversation. VT was already recruiting at a high level by 1993 with Cornell Brown, Kerwin Hairston, Steve Tate, Bryan Jennings, Brandon Semones, and Jim Baron.
Miami was more of a factor with Syracuse than it was for VT.

(09-15-2019 09:52 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 09:01 PM)GotLabradors Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 06:51 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 06:18 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 03:46 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]You original premise was "past quarter century", that is 25 years, which goes back to 1994 and which correlates to your admitted mid 1990s escalation of recruiting talent.
Since 247 and ESPN only go back to 1999, I can only offer this source from which to extrapolate prior to 1999..
https://www.roanoke.com/sports/college/v...21c30.html
That would indicate that VT was attracting top level talent even before 1994.

Your lunch pale statement is little more than marketing hype, and you have contradicted yourself as to your own timeline, "sporto"

Ah, so a quarter-century is literal for me, but figurative for you. Makes sense, and awfully convenient.

Google helps when you're searching for something on the internet. With ease, on page one, I found a source listing all the classes back through the 80's. It shows exactly what I posted: classes filled with mostly two and three stars through 1994 or so. If you don't want to do the work, say so.

Your lunch may pale in comparison to mine, this is true. But WRT to lunch pail hype, THEY believed (and many still do) they owned the working class football mentality, and it lead more or less directly to Enter Sandman etc.

Tomorrow I'll show why Miami is responsible for VT being in the ACC and dominant in VA for the past quarter-century* and not in the Sun Belt or C-USA with us.

*times approximate

Actually, you have that backwards, I accepted your "Quarter Century" as literal; in that a quarter of a century (100 yrs) is indeed 25 years.
Why would or even should I assume you really didn't mean a quarter century literally when that is what you said? What is really convenient is to communicate with language using accepted definitions and meanings as a means to facilitate mutual understanding.
That you said "quarter century" but retreated from that to an after-the-fact figurative interpretation is a convenient way to mask a lost debate.

It is also very convenient that you have alleged a source(s) without disclosing it (them).
I had already done the "homework" and noted my sources at the first reply. Below are the links if you need them.
247, going back to 1999,
https://247sports.com/college/virginia-t...l/Commits/

ESPN, going back to 2006
http://www.espn.com/college-sports/footb...class/2018


I am well familiar with the VT from the BE to the ACC situation, including the objection by UVA and VT subsequently getting support from the Virginia legislature forcing UVA to eventually accept VT.



EDIT: I DID find this on this on VT Sports war. According to this, by today's standards, VT had at least 7 3/4 star recruits even then.
https://virginiatech.sportswar.com/artic...past-1985/

Actually, it goes back to Miami's Pell Grant scandal back in the early 90s. Miami was stripped of roughly 30% of their football scholarships. It was enough to cause their talent to drop tremendously. That gave VT enough of an opening to become dominant in the Big East and start their rise to national prominence. The ACC raided the Big East in 2005. UVa knew they would lose the home state recruiting battle to VT which is why UVa balked at VT coming to the ACC. The ACC was not known for their football, so bringing in powerhouses from the Big East helped raise the ACC's football prowess.

Yes and no. While that AND the pay for play scandal certainly hurt Miami due to the 31 scholarship reduction from 1996 to 1996 and 1 year post season ban, Virginia Tech had already risen to prominence the year before those penalties were levied.
In 1995 it shared the conference title with Miami and was the Big East BCS representative.
In 1996 VT co shared the BE title with Miami and Syracuse.
Syracuse then won the BE in 1997 and 1998.
VT won it's only outright Big East title in 1999 with the famous 11-0 Michael Vick team that lost to Fla St Nat championship game.
Miami returned to Big East prominence from 2000 until both went to the ACC in 2003.

Since VT ha shared the Big East title BEFORE the NCAA sanctions on Miami, and Syracuse, not VT, assumed the title of Big East champions AFTER the Miami debacle, I submit that it was really the Michael Vick led team that was transformed VT regularly into the national conversation.
Miami was more of a factor with Syracuse than it was for VT.

Well, good thing Vick's cousin played on the Oline there from 94-99 or else VT would never have gotten MV to commit. So I guess all the credit for VT being in the ACC goes to Dwight.

(09-15-2019 10:00 PM)GotLabradors Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 09:52 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 09:01 PM)GotLabradors Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 06:51 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-15-2019 06:18 PM)Grommet Wrote: [ -> ]Ah, so a quarter-century is literal for me, but figurative for you. Makes sense, and awfully convenient.

Google helps when you're searching for something on the internet. With ease, on page one, I found a source listing all the classes back through the 80's. It shows exactly what I posted: classes filled with mostly two and three stars through 1994 or so. If you don't want to do the work, say so.

Your lunch may pale in comparison to mine, this is true. But WRT to lunch pail hype, THEY believed (and many still do) they owned the working class football mentality, and it lead more or less directly to Enter Sandman etc.

Tomorrow I'll show why Miami is responsible for VT being in the ACC and dominant in VA for the past quarter-century* and not in the Sun Belt or C-USA with us.

*times approximate

Actually, you have that backwards, I accepted your "Quarter Century" as literal; in that a quarter of a century (100 yrs) is indeed 25 years.
Why would or even should I assume you really didn't mean a quarter century literally when that is what you said? What is really convenient is to communicate with language using accepted definitions and meanings as a means to facilitate mutual understanding.
That you said "quarter century" but retreated from that to an after-the-fact figurative interpretation is a convenient way to mask a lost debate.

It is also very convenient that you have alleged a source(s) without disclosing it (them).
I had already done the "homework" and noted my sources at the first reply. Below are the links if you need them.
247, going back to 1999,
https://247sports.com/college/virginia-t...l/Commits/

ESPN, going back to 2006
http://www.espn.com/college-sports/footb...class/2018


I am well familiar with the VT from the BE to the ACC situation, including the objection by UVA and VT subsequently getting support from the Virginia legislature forcing UVA to eventually accept VT.



EDIT: I DID find this on this on VT Sports war. According to this, by today's standards, VT had at least 7 3/4 star recruits even then.
https://virginiatech.sportswar.com/artic...past-1985/

Actually, it goes back to Miami's Pell Grant scandal back in the early 90s. Miami was stripped of roughly 30% of their football scholarships. It was enough to cause their talent to drop tremendously. That gave VT enough of an opening to become dominant in the Big East and start their rise to national prominence. The ACC raided the Big East in 2005. UVa knew they would lose the home state recruiting battle to VT which is why UVa balked at VT coming to the ACC. The ACC was not known for their football, so bringing in powerhouses from the Big East helped raise the ACC's football prowess.

Yes and no. While that AND the pay for play scandal certainly hurt Miami due to the 31 scholarship reduction from 1996 to 1996 and 1 year post season ban, Virginia Tech had already risen to prominence the year before those penalties were levied.
In 1995 it shared the conference title with Miami and was the Big East BCS representative.
In 1996 VT co shared the BE title with Miami and Syracuse.
Syracuse then won the BE in 1997 and 1998.
VT won it's only outright Big East title in 1999 with the famous 11-0 Michael Vick team that lost to Fla St Nat championship game.
Miami returned to Big East prominence from 2000 until both went to the ACC in 2003.

Since VT ha shared the Big East title BEFORE the NCAA sanctions on Miami, and Syracuse, not VT, assumed the title of Big East champions AFTER the Miami debacle, I submit that it was really the Michael Vick led team that was transformed VT regularly into the national conversation.
Miami was more of a factor with Syracuse than it was for VT.

Well, good thing Vick's cousin played on the Oline there from 94-99 or else VT would never have gotten MV to commit. So I guess all the credit for VT being in the ACC goes to Dwight.

VT was already recruiting at a high level by 1993 and shared the BE title in 1995. VT and Miami went to the ACC when it came calling.
However, you never know. W/O Vick VT might not have had the success it had in the Vick era, and Syracuse could have become target #2 for the ACC. I certainly have no way of knowing that, do you?

(09-15-2019 09:23 PM)monarx Wrote: [ -> ]It’s quite simple. VT recruiting, and as a result, their profile, jumped when they joined the Big East. It took another leap after Vick attended and took another when they joined the ACC.

Another installment of "Derailment Theater" brought to you by Lux Soap

The name of this thread makes me want to puke!

Even with all of the above that has contributed to the "rise", we beat them in year two of the series. They have been frauds for years and have benefited from years of easy scheduling and luck of conference affiliations. They could have easily ended up out of the P5.