In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 564
Online now 184 Record: 3748 (12/16/2013)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
It appears to me the program that took the biggest step back belongs to the french....with pretty much a dysfunctional offense we still got the W.....our offense will get better.....I'm not so sure the same can be said for the hoos...London's inability to game-day coach will only get worse as frustration grows....next year could be his swan song.....
Don't buy that. We were playing with one hand tied behind our backs Saturday with arguably the worst offensive system in college ball. This was the most vulnerable VT team in 20 years, and they still couldn't get it done. If we had only a half way mediocre offense, we'd have won by 30. And regarding their recruiting, it ain't bad, but it still does not approach what Groh achieved in his first three years. Check it out. And London has to rely on street agents in 757 to boot. Groh wasn't a bad coach; he was just arrogant as hell and that finally poisoned the program. London on the other hand, is clueless and delusional - and relies totally on spin.
They really don't have much talent and less depth, and they RSed no one of significance. We have a ton of talent RSing this year....we will be much better off with or classes over theirs.
The answer is no.
There is no known anecdote for terrible coaching.
My honest opinion? That was not a very bright comment by wahoo30. I mean no disrespect but seriously. But I can understand why fans want to believe that. Heck we have fans like that as well. That's why I say no disrespect but unless they have an out of this world recruiting year I just don't see it. If there was ever a year they could have beat us this would have been it. You take away the fumble by Logan and their offense only scored 7 points on our D. We were just a horrible team this year.
It's funny because it's actually the recruiting classes from before London ever arrived that are hurting us right now. 2008 and 2009. Our classes the past 3 years have been significantly stronger. But I guess Hoos wouldn't understand how that works since they don't follow football that closely.
So apparently VT only recruits against UVA and vice versa?
Without pulling out stats, UVA has landed talented players before. We don't recruit top 15 any way, and teams like UNC have hurt us with snagging some players. London has gotten some talented kids and their recruiting has improved, but comparing VT vs UVA as a talent issue is totally missing out on the coaching aspect.
It's not science, the two basics are coaching and personnel. Keep on believing that wins and losses are simply because of personnel/talent. Both teams were marginal this year imo because of coaching short comings. Neither of us were going to go undefeated, but both teams could have had 8 wins in this dreadful conference.
I guess you can't get logical answers out of emotional responses, but I guess Duke has overtaken UVA on talent then since they always beat UVA? Do teams only win because of talent? Were people born yesterday? Walter Sobchak wants to know has the whole world gone crazy?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports