ADVERTISEMENT

To those who think BigTime college football is nothing but the money:

BigDaddyHokie

All-American
Gold Member
Oct 24, 2007
4,367
188
63
From the Richmond paper a week or so ago:

Andre Davis, who played catch with Michael Vick and then went to the pros a while said this after making a financial gift to The VA Tech Leadership Institute which has a program available to all varsity athletes.

"The leadership abilities that I have learned through the football program and VA Tech athletics have been an asset to me ever since I left Blacksburg. I have learned how to be accountable, responsible, and to live a life of integrity."

Thanks again coach Beamer.
 
It was definitely a nice tribute, but I'm still pretty sure the NCAA or ESPN or whomever doesn't give a rat's ass about whether Davis learned some integrity while at VT or not. For these guys, it's all about the money.
 
From the Richmond paper a week or so ago:

Andre Davis, who played catch with Michael Vick and then went to the pros a while said this after making a financial gift to The VA Tech Leadership Institute which has a program available to all varsity athletes.

"The leadership abilities that I have learned through the football program and VA Tech athletics have been an asset to me ever since I left Blacksburg. I have learned how to be accountable, responsible, and to live a life of integrity."

Thanks again coach Beamer.
In all honesty BigDH, We were never Big Time Football at VT. We had a very brief flirtation with it that lasted a few years at most. Big Time Football is all about the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B1dee
In all honesty BigDH, We were never Big Time Football at VT. We had a very brief flirtation with it that lasted a few years at most. Big Time Football is all about the money.
I disagree. We were big time football in 1999; 2nd best team in the country.
 
And don't forget the #3 final ranking in 2007, when we got passed over by LSU for the MNC game. These were some pretty high rankings for a nobody.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SunnyBeachWave
In all honesty BigDH, We were never Big Time Football at VT. We had a very brief flirtation with it that lasted a few years at most. Big Time Football is all about the money.

11 of 13 seasons of 10+ wins including 8 in a row. I don't know what your definition of "Big Time" is, but damned if those stats don't fit the credentials of most folks I know...including myself.
 
1995 to 2009--- During the time you mentioned we were most certainly a very good football program. We were not elite. When we went up against the best we often stumbled. The Texas win in '95 was our introduction into being one of the better teams in the sport.
We lost a lot of bowl games to very good teams also. And yes we did have an excellent team the year we ended up no. 3.
We came into the ACC when it was down. FSU,Clem, UNC, Duke , Miami, Ga Tech were not able to handle us. This is not true today as for the most part they have built their programs up quite well.
During the years you mentioned I considered us to be in the top rung just under elite. If we had played in the Big or SEC, I don't believe that we would have faired nearly as well.
 
1995 to 2009--- During the time you mentioned we were most certainly a very good football program. We were not elite. When we went up against the best we often stumbled. The Texas win in '95 was our introduction into being one of the better teams in the sport.
We lost a lot of bowl games to very good teams also. And yes we did have an excellent team the year we ended up no. 3.
We came into the ACC when it was down. FSU,Clem, UNC, Duke , Miami, Ga Tech were not able to handle us. This is not true today as for the most part they have built their programs up quite well.
During the years you mentioned I considered us to be in the top rung just under elite. If we had played in the Big or SEC, I don't believe that we would have faired nearly as well.
Very good analysis....I knew if I had posted this it would not have gone over well. VT was certainly a very good program but the lack of big wins separates the elite and the very good programs. But it was one heck of a run.
 
During most years, the ACC will have one, maybe two schools that look really good nationally and will ranked in the top ten and possibly compete for a national title, but for the most part, the ACC is not a football conference like the SEC, Big 10, or Big 12. We are very much like the PAC 12. The two constants over the past years have been FSU and Clemson, occasionally Miami and VT will stick their heads in, but generally do not sustain year in and year out. It will be interesting to see what happens with teams in the ACC since there have been so many coaching changes. I believe the ACC will show a marked improvement nationally with some of the new coaches we have.
 
During most years, the ACC will have one, maybe two schools that look really good nationally and will ranked in the top ten and possibly compete for a national title, but for the most part, the ACC is not a football conference like the SEC, Big 10, or Big 12. We are very much like the PAC 12. The two constants over the past years have been FSU and Clemson, occasionally Miami and VT will stick their heads in, but generally do not sustain year in and year out. It will be interesting to see what happens with teams in the ACC since there have been so many coaching changes. I believe the ACC will show a marked improvement nationally with some of the new coaches we have.
Clemson over the last five years has averaged between 11-12 Nationally, sound familiar. Prior to that they were an absolute joke for 20 years with only nine winning seasons and zero 10 win seasons, and that's in the ACC. They were an embarrassment.

Miami from 1998 until 2005 averaged 10+ wins a year and had an average ranking of 8th nationally. During that period VT and Miami were 4-4 against each other. Not elite, give me a break.
 
Clemson over the last five years has averaged between 11-12 Nationally, sound familiar. Prior to that they were an absolute joke for 20 years with only nine winning seasons and zero 10 win seasons, and that's in the ACC. They were an embarrassment.

Miami from 1998 until 2005 averaged 10+ wins a year and had an average ranking of 8th nationally. During that period VT and Miami were 4-4 against each other. Not elite, give me a break.
You had a really nice run for sure......but if you ask someone to list their top 10 national powers do you really believe anyone outside of Blacksburg would list VT?
 
You had a really nice run for sure......but if you ask someone to list their top 10 national powers do you really believe anyone outside of Blacksburg would list VT?
No one has said they are a top ten power. The question is were they an elite program up until the last few years, and the answer is only in dispute if the elite club is around 10 teams which I believe it is not. Sporting news has ranked VT in it's top 15 since 2000 and that includes the last few years which have been very mediocre. I don't understand how you can dispute by just using the word "elite" and not facts.
 
No one has said they are a top ten power. The question is were they an elite program up until the last few years, and the answer is only in dispute if the elite club is around 10 teams which I believe it is not. Sporting news has ranked VT in it's top 15 since 2000 and that includes the last few years which have been very mediocre. I don't understand how you can dispute by just using the word "elite" and not facts.
I believe the facts have already been stated....VT didn't have the big wins under Beamer to be considered one of the Elite teams. What was Beamers record against the Top 10? What was his record against the Top 5? And someone correct me but I believe the avg lose to those Top ten teams was by 15 points or more.....again not elite.
 
I tend to agree with 19 on this one. Elite programs aren't defined by the numbers of wins they have against lesser competition...instead, they are defined by wins over other elite programs and, most importantly, titles.

VT's last-25-year history against college football in general is pretty good. I think it's top 10 good. However, VT's history against the elite programs over that same time frame is pretty poor. I don't consider VT to be an elite program, although I think they DID field a few elite quality teams ('95, '99, '04 for starters). If one of those teams had been able to close the deal and put a trophy on the shelf, then this becomes an entirely different discussion. But they didn't. I think VT got really close at one point to truly joining the elite ranks, and I think that having Stiney on the payroll prevented us from actually pulling it off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hokiezz
I tend to agree with 19 on this one. Elite programs aren't defined by the numbers of wins they have against lesser competition...instead, they are defined by wins over other elite programs and, most importantly, titles.

VT's last-25-year history against college football in general is pretty good. I think it's top 10 good. However, VT's history against the elite programs over that same time frame is pretty poor. I don't consider VT to be an elite program, although I think they DID field a few elite quality teams ('95, '99, '04 for starters). If one of those teams had been able to close the deal and put a trophy on the shelf, then this becomes an entirely different discussion. But they didn't. I think VT got really close at one point to truly joining the elite ranks, and I think that having Stiney on the payroll prevented us from actually pulling it off.
I hate to do this, but specifically name 10 or 15 teams that were better than VT overall during the period from 1995 to 2010. Not one year, or game, but consistently better during that period.
 
I agree, which is why I wrote that I thought we were top 10 good against college football in general during that time frame.

I don't have any numbers here in front of me, but it wouldn't surprise me if teams like Boise State or BYU or maybe even Fresno State had as many (or nearly as many) wins as VT did during those years, but I don't consider them to be elite, either. They didn't have many statement wins against top 10 teams (although BSU's OB win over Oklahoma was EPIC) and they didn't stock their trophy shelves. Really good programs, yes...but not elite. I think to be elite, you have to consistently be in the national title discussion and you have to consistently be proving your worth on the field against other top teams. By "consistently," I mean more years yes than no. VT had 2 years where they were square in the title hunt ('99 and '07), but I don't think twice in 15 years is good enough to be considered elite (not to mention that there wasn't a win against a top 10 opponent to be found in either season).

If VT had routinely beaten top notch opponents but never got a trophy, I would be much more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, but we didn't really do that, either. Instead, a severe lack of quality wins plus a severe lack of trophies just doesn't impress me all that much when you're talking about being elite. Those aren't very good qualifications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hokiezz
I hate to do this, but specifically name 10 or 15 teams that were better than VT overall during the period from 1995 to 2010. Not one year, or game, but consistently better during that period.
Strength of Schedule is a big factor in being considered elite. Having those top 10 wins are a qualification to be considered elite. If you are in a conference like the ACC or Pac12 you need big out of conference games and wins to be considered elite. Hokiemtc makes a great point about teams from smaller conferences totaling up a lot of wins but without any Top 10 quality wins you just can't be considered elite. Most of the teams you would consider elite would have an overall losing record against the top ten over a long stretch of time. But they would have more than a win or 2 against the top 10. At one time Beamer was 1-10 against Top 5 ranked power 5 conference teams and 4-12 against Top 25 ranked power 5 conference teams. I'm not sure where he finished but I feel sure it didn't change a lot. These numbers don't add up to an elite program.
 
Using end-of-year rankings, we had 2 wins (Miami '03 and WVU '05), but that's still not very good.
 
What makes a program elite? Winning a National Championship? Well Kentucky claims one under Paul Bryant and they sure as hell arent elite. What about the Ivy league schools that claim so many? Army? Illinois? Iowa? What about the regular powerhouse programs, are they still considered "elite" in the season (and in some cases multiple seasons) in which they struggle to get to 500? What about those so called "elite" programs that later forfeit wins because of cheating?
From 1995 to 2009, VT sustained excellence. Im not sure of any other "elite" program that sustained excellence for that long without having let down seasons. Bama...Texas...Florida...USC....Notre Dame...FSU all had slumping seasons. In the modern era of college football i would consider VT an elite or maybe just outside of elite status.
 
Using end-of-year rankings, we had 2 wins (Miami '03 and WVU '05), but that's still not very good.
I'm sure you have a poll that shows WV at no 5 but the one I am using (Hokiesports) shows that they were rated no 6 going into the game against us.
 
or maybe just outside of elite status.[/QUOTE]
You made a good post but I think I more agree with the end of it. Looking at the teams back then We were very very good but we seemed to lay an egg almost every time it really, really, mattered. I was so proud of our team when we beat Indiana in '92. I was in a Big ten sports bar surrounded by UM students,. They kept saying things like "who are these guys, I never heard of them". Also commenting on it not going to be much of a game. After that it was "What the hell was that" and "Can you believe this". Well,we beat the snot out of IU and when the game was over I asked as I passed their table if they ever figured out who those guys were. They picked up on my accent real quick and we all had a good laugh.
The very peak of my pride was not when we played for the NC but when we beat Texas. I got so sick of the announcers
pushing the wonders of TU and how we would really be pushed to play with them. It got much worse when they got off to a 10 -0 lead. What they didn't see was that VT had figured out that they could stop TU. They never scored another point. We scored 4 times for a 28-10 W. We had arrived and now the whole world of FB knew it.
 
We tend to focus too much on our losses and disregard our wins and our very own fans are the most critical. VT has the college football worlds respect. Perfect example...the year we lost to LSU by 40 plus points thats what the talking heads were talking about at seasons end, the big LSU win not the LSU losses to unranked Kentucky and Arkansas. Some of the matchups weve had, sure we lost but its a wonder we were even in the games at all (USC, Auburn, Bama, Ohio State, etc...). Then when we beat a Louisville, a Tennessee or Cincy...well its expected or we caught them on a down year.
 
What makes a program elite? Winning a National Championship?

I don't think it's required to win a title. Oregon doesn't have a trophy, but the last 5-10 years, they very much have been elite. They've been knee deep in the title discussions several seasons, played for two national titles, have an outrageous winning percentage and have an impressive list of quality wins over top tier competition. Looking at the big picture trend, last year's so-so campaign seems like a fluke.

Conversely, Auburn DOES have a recent title, but I don't consider them to be elite at all. They've had too many bad-to-mediocre seasons mixed in with their couple of really good seasons. Looking at the big picture trend, the Cam Newton title season seems like a fluke.

So, I think to be considered elite you need to be, 1) consistently good, 2) more often than not, a legit title contender, and 3) have a list of impressive quality wins over top tier competition to show off. Oh, and 4) having that trophy sure doesn't hurt the argument in any way, although it doesn't necessarily help it, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT/UK Rondo
I don't think it's required to win a title. Oregon doesn't have a trophy, but the last 5-10 years, they very much have been elite. They've been knee deep in the title discussions several seasons, played for two national titles, have an outrageous winning percentage and have an impressive list of quality wins over top tier competition. Looking at the big picture trend, last year's so-so campaign seems like a fluke.

Conversely, Auburn DOES have a recent title, but I don't consider them to be elite at all. They've had too many bad-to-mediocre seasons mixed in with their couple of really good seasons. Looking at the big picture trend, the Cam Newton title season seems like a fluke.

So, I think to be considered elite you need to be, 1) consistently good, 2) more often than not, a legit title contender, and 3) have a list of impressive quality wins over top tier competition to show off. Oh, and 4) having that trophy sure doesn't hurt the argument in any way, although it doesn't necessarily help it, either.
A good post
 
Was Michigan an elite program under Lloyd Carr depsite a 2-3 BCS bowl record? Did they officially become not elite under Rich Rod and his one winning season? How about Brady Hokes 5-7 season and his 1-2 bowl record with the only win being due to a horseshit call against us late in the game?

What about Notre Dame from 1995-2009 when they went 1-9 in bowls and wasnt even bowl eligable in 2009. When did they lose their "elite" status?

Look at Florida from 95-2009. Two National Championships surrounded by a string of bowl game losses and a year they didnt even reach bowl eligability in a era in which the SEC East was its most vulnerable. Did they lose their elite status the day Tebow left?

Point being, while VT has struggled in certain areas...so has the rest of college footballs so called "elites" some even more so than VT.
 
In order to make this a complete comparison why not go back through the entire history of FB and check us out from day one against these schools? Were we "King for a day"? A few years . A whole decade? How about a poll of non Va Tech sport fans nationwide?
I am a VaTech FB fan . Have been for one for 66 years. I would love to say and believe that we were elite but it just isn't so. We were damn good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B1dee and hokiezz
As I said in the beginning we are looking at the years 1995 to 2009, a 15 year period. Many of you say we were not elite during that time, I ask again, to please list 10-15 teams you would describe as elite for that period. Shouldn't be that difficult.
 
VT is an elite football program.

Elite means top ten recruiting classes and playing for national titles. VT has been solid since the mid 90's with a few legit top ten teams from that era til now, but 20 yrs of decent football out of over 100 does not make us elite. A lot of those years were racking up wins in the sub par Big East and then like the earlier poster said, FSU and Clemson were not great when we entered ACC and were top dog for a few years. They recovered and surpassed us fairly quickly and Duke and a few other teams built themselves from jokes to teams that compete and beat us regular.
To become a power in cfb VT has to win the recruiting battle in the state of Virginia and sadly we are not. While still optimistic about Fuente I am beginning to worry the way its trending. This is a really nice class out of Virginia for 2017 and we aren't going to get any of the states top players its seems. Maybe Jordan Williams will surprise us,but I hear Clem$on is his likely destination.
 
As I said in the beginning we are looking at the years 1995 to 2009, a 15 year period. Many of you say we were not elite during that time, I ask again, to please list 10-15 teams you would describe as elite for that period. Shouldn't be that difficult.
As most seem to understand VT had a couple of great years and many real good years.....but a lot of the wins where nothing to brag about, hardly any real big wins during those years. But there is nothing wrong with you thinking VT was elite, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
 
I have never seen a fan base try so hard to discredit an era of consistent winning football that most fans would be tickled to death with. FSU won a National Championship, Outstanding! I guess that makes up for a decade of losses including a bowl loss to a mediocre Kentucky team. I guess everybody has forgot about how they were struggling to fill their stadium for games?
And Clemson played in a title game. I guess thats enough to erase a decade of subpar football in which they too lost to Kentucky in a bowl game and lost to WVU in a bowl by 4 billion points only a few years ago? And Duke? Im sorry but I fail to see exactly why in the hell anybody thinks they are so damn good now. They beat us when we were down and got 1 or 2 recruits from the state. How many recruits have we took from their state? Envious I am not.
Im not going to pretend to know how recruiting will go under Fuentes but for once I think he is recruiting players to fit the offense he wants to implement. Weve done that on defense for years , why is it so hard to comprehend doing the same thing on offense? Recruiting will get easier once these kids see with their own eyes that VT is serious about offense.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT