Q&A With Doug, Part II -- Doug's Revenge

You might remember my good friend Doug from such hits as Q&A With Doug, Wahooze Pix -- Lucky Week 13, and Wahooze Weekly Picks -- FINAL STANDINGS!

Well, the guy has an insatiable appetite for all things Wahooze, and he's bringing his Virginia Tech gurudom to roost on our lovely blog for one more hard-hitting Q&A.  But first, the same intro I gave four months ago when we did this the first time...




I want to take a few seconds to tell you about my friend Doug.  He's a truly great guy.  Loyal to a fault (I know this, because he's a fellow life-long Bungles fan).  The kind of guy who would give you the shirt off of his back.  The thing about Doug... brace yourselves... is that he's a Virginia Tech fan.  One of the biggest I know, actually.

But that hasn't stunted our friendship at all.  Quite the contrary.  I think it's made us better friends. Mostly because I needed to know a decently reasonable VT fan so I could come down off of this misconception that all Virginia Tech fans are total redneck scumbags.

Doug isn't a scumbag at all.  Like I said, he's a great guy.  And he probably knows more about football, and has the most even-keeled opinions about football of anyone I've ever known.  I respect him and his opinions a lot.  A helluva lot.

His wife is a Virginia alum and season ticket holder.  When he's not down in Blacksburg for a game (he's a Tech season ticket holder, himself), he's out there tailgating and taking in games in Scott Stadium.  He knows the Virginia Tech program from top to bottom, but he also knows a hell of a lot about the UVA program.  So he brings a lot of knowledge and a lot of unique, interesting perspective to the table.

That's exactly the reason why I wanted to do a blowout Wahooze-style Q&A with the man, coming from the angle of breaking down Tech's success over the last 15+ years, and digging down into how it will continue long term, and how UVA of the 2010's might be able to mirror the 1990's rise of the Hokie program.

As much as we Virginia fans might deny it, it is Virginia Tech's gridiron success that we aspire to.  That's the God's honest truth.  So I thought Doug was the perfect person to give us a little gospel on the subject.  As you read through these questions and his extremely well-conceived and thoughtfully-constructed responses, try to keep that in mind.  Where Virginia Tech is right now is exactly where we want the Virginia program to eventually ascend.

On to the Q&A.  My questions to Doug are in black.  His responses are in blue.  My reactions to his responses are in red.  Let's do this thing.

Question #1) Do you think Bud Foster would or will ever leave to become a head coach somewhere?  Give us some examples of schools you think he might be willing to leave Tech to go coach.  If he leaves, what happens to Virginia Tech?

Honestly, I am not sure. I think that there are a couple of things working against him at this point. He has always stated that he wanted to hold out a for a BCS level position, and avoid “coach killing” jobs such as Vanderbilt, Indiana, etc. The other thing that I think is now hurting him is that he is a defensive guy. Take a look at all the recent hires and hotshot up-and-coming coaches. They are almost all offensive minds. I really think that is working against him. Of course it might be possible that he just gives a bad interview as well… damned if I know. The Clemson job he was rumored to be a finalist for when Swinney ultimately got it may have been his last real good chance at a real good job.

The type of schools I could see him getting an opportunity would be a Big Ten type school (Illinois, Minnesota) or possibly a Big East school (UConn, Rutgers.) Honestly though, I believe if he ultimately wants to be a head coach he is going to have to consider other possibilities such as a MAC school to get started.

The effect on VT depends on which coaches would follow him. If VT can hang on to Charley Wiles and Torrian Gray, I think they could pick up where Foster left off. I think that there might be a slight step back, but as long as Beamer is coaching VT, the defense will be a point of emphasis.

Kendall sez: I personally think the guy is just comfortable being a top assistant, and doesn't really have that fire in his belly to be a head coach and run his own program.  That's cool, I'm the same way in my job, really. There is something to be said for not being the guy who has to twist in the wind when things go wrong.  That said, I really think Foster could be a good head coach somewhere, but he has to start small (Gus Malzahn at Arkansas State) and then build up to the BCS level.  ECU, Marshall, Memphis... those feel like the right kind of jobs for Bud Foster.

I hate it when he calls this play.

2) Look 15 years into the future... who is Virginia Tech's head football coach?

If you said five years, I would say Frank Beamer, but I think that will be about it. If we look 15 years ahead you may be talking about a 2^nd, 3^rd or God forbid 4^th coach. Let’s assume that whoever replaces Beamer will have enough success that they will still be coaching after 8-10 years. I think this is doable based on my answers regarding the program in Part 1 of the Q&A.

There are two schools of thought on which direction a school will go in replacing a long time head coach -- in house or completely outside the family. I actually think if the school decided to go in house it will be Bryan Stinespring. The guy has taken his lumps as the OC for the past few years, but I actually think he might have what it takes to be a head coach. There are some that think Shane Beamer would be the guy. I think he has the potential to be a good coach but see no way he would follow in his father’s footsteps. I also think that Torrian Gray could be a real darkhorse for the job.

I think VT can attract a good head coach. We are not talking about a tier 1 guy (i.e. Saban/Miles/Urban Meyer type) but I do think the program would be attractive to a tier 2 head coach or good up-and-coming assistant. Obviously I can’t project out 15 years but if the job were open now I would like to think that VT would be attractive to guys like Gus Malzahn, or Kevin Sumlin. If there was one guy I could pick right now to take over the program it would be Gary Patterson. I would say look for a head coach from a non BCS school that has some Mid Atlantic and SE connections that has had success on the field.

Kendall sez: What about Bud Foster?  I always thought he was hanging around so that he could slide right in behind Beamer when he retires.  Is that not the case?  That shocks me, actually.  It seems like such an obvious succession plan.

Retirement looms...

3) Pick three football coaches on the Virginia staff to replace members of the Virginia Tech staff.  Who do you choose to hire from UVA, and who are they replacing on the Tech staff?  (No demotions!)

Well I will start out by stating that I am fairly pleased with all the VT coaches after the season this year, especially the defensive coaches. That being said I am very impressed with UVa’s offense this year so #1 on my list would be Bill Lazor. The guy seems to really be a hell of an X and O guy and I think he could really help our offense. Not sure what kind of recruiter he is but he is the guy I am most impressed by on UVA’s staff. Technically, Mike O’Cain was the playcaller so I am going to replace O’Cain with Lazor (tough to give up Stinespring’s recruiting.) If you are forcing me to trade out Stinespring, then I would need to know Lazor will be around for at least five years.

VT’s offensive line continues to be an unmitigated disaster year after year and Curt Newsome is certainly not the recruiting force we thought he would be. By the same token, UVA’s offensive line was downright nasty this year. I’ll make the trade -- Scott Wachenheim for Newsome.

VT’s wideouts had a lot of talent but disappeared in big games. Watch… they can’t ever get open against really good defense. Kevin Sherman hasn’t done a lot in terms of recruiting either. That being said, I don’t think that UVA’s WR situation is anything to to really get excited about, but I do think Shawn Moore has some recruiting potential, so I would make that change right now.

I thought about Poindexter, and let me say straight up front, I think he is one of the best football players UVA has ever had… and wish like hell he had come to VT. But frankly, I am not really a big fan of his sideline demeanor. That, and we already have someone to screw up our special teams (for all of you folks that watched the Sugar Bowl.)


Kendall sez: No Chip West?  Ninja was named ACC Recruiter of the Year and was a finalist for National Recruiter of the Year, and he's not a bad defensive backs coach.  I know Torrian Gray is a stud and you wouldn't want to replace him... but Chip West is recruiting wunderkind.  (Mostly, I just wanted to use this opportunity to mention Chip West, who does yeoman's work for us in recruiting the 757.)


I understand this was a tough question to answer, because you feel a certain loyalty to a coaching staff that has shown so much loyalty to Virginia Tech.  Therefore, I really appreciate your candid response on this one, Doug.

Torrian Gray: a real up-and-comer on the VT staff.

4) Tough question...  Since joining the ACC, Virginia Tech has now gone 1-4 in BCS bowl games.  What do the Hokies need to do differently to reverse that record and go 4-1 in their next five BCS appearances?

Play Cincinnati four times. Well, not quite, but before I answer this lets look at the history a little here. I like to include the old Bowl Coalition and Bowl Alliance bowls as well, as they were the same level as the current BCS.

1) 1995 Sugar Bowl -- Beat Texas, 28-10

2) 1996 Orange Bowl -- Lost to Nebraska, 41-21

3) 1999 Sugar Bowl -- Lost to FSU, 46-29

4) 2004 Sugar Bowl -- Lost to Auburn, 16-13

5) 2007 Orange Bowl -- Lost to Kansas, 24-21

6) 2008 Orange Bowl -- Beat Cincinnati, 20-7

7) 2010 Orange Bowl -- Lost to Stanford, 40-12

8) 2011 Sugar Bowl -- Lost to Michigan, 23-20

In analyzing the losses, I think you can make the statement that we were frankly only expected to win one or maybe two of those games. Yes, we pissed away Michigan this year. Even though we were actually not favored, I feel that should have been a win. The 2007 Orange bowl is the one that bugs me. This was the best Kansas team in school history (The team was ranked #1 going into its last game of the year) but we should have won that game going away. Losing to eventual national champion FSU, an Auburn team that should have been in the championship game, and a Nebraska team that was in the middle of winning 3 out of 4 is not really shameful, and we played reasonably well in all three games. We did get embarrassed by the best Stanford team in history, which is bothersome but we were clearly overmatched.

I do know Beamer has changed things around from bowl to bowl and it still seems to be the same issue. The bottom line is that overall the ACC needs to play better football to prepare the champion for these games. Clearly it is not just VT that is struggling, as Clemson, UVA, UNC, and GT all laid eggs this year and Miami got throttled last year. I wish I had the answer to this question because trust me I would bottle it and sell it to all the ACC programs.

Kendall sez: I think it boils down to this -- a team built on defense and the running game but lacking SEC-level talent in the trenches is going to struggle in BCS games.  You can win those games with explosive passing ability, or with elite talent along both lines.  Virginia Tech seldom has either.  So while they are clearly the class of the ACC, they need to become more relevant in national-level recruiting... or change the whole program's identity.  Lunch pail beats rebuilding Miami and decade-cursed UVA, but lunch pail gets crushed by NFL talent in BCS games.


I get your point about iron sharpening iron, and I'm one of those people who believes that Florida State is actually on its way back, so hopefully that helps.  (Clemson needs to find a new head coach, Swinney is egregious.  And who the hell knows what's going to happen with Miami.)  I do know the ACC needs to start winning some BCS games, and more of its bowl games in general.  I think Virginia is on its way to being able to pitch in a little bit in that regard.

Painful sight for Hokie fans.

5) Rank the 12 ACC football coaches from best to worst overall.  Explain your choices.

This is a perfect follow-up to the last question. My rationale for my rankings is as follows: 1) Winning recently (what have you done for me lately?), 2) Winning over time (historical trends),  3) Recruiting,  4) Results on field based on #3, 5) Performance in big games, and 6) Performance in conference. Keep in mind that this is how I rank them currently, not forecasting out a few years.

1) Frank Beamer -- Hard to argue this one in reality despite his shortcoming in big games. Whatever is lost in recruiting is made up for in on-field results with these lesser-rated recruits.

2) Jim Grobe -- I think this is a strong #2. Anybody that can win at Ohio U and Wake Forest is a good coach.

3) Al Golden -- Kendall disagrees with me here, but he did pretty well in the hornets' nest that was Miami this year and was able to win at Temple. The guy can flat out recruit. I will be interested to see what happens with Coach Golden.

4) Tom O’Brien -- Kind of hard to put this guy any higher or any lower. You can count on 7-8 wins every year and that is about it. Really, this is an indictment on just how bad the ACC has been the last few years.

5) Paul Johnson -- I can’t stand this guy, but his system has won over a long period of time (obviously bowl games and SEC games excepted.) Only ranked higher than #6 based on criterion #2, above.

6) Mike London -- A couple of years from now I think he will be higher on this list. He still makes a few head-scratching decisions though.

7) Larry Fedora -- Great year at Southern Miss. The guy is a good, innovative coach (as UVA found out.) I have a feeling he will be moving up this list, much to VT and UVA’s chagrin.

8) Jimbo Fisher -- Dabo Swinney Junior. Not a big fan of this guy. Everyone bangs on VT, but yet FSU has been getting a pass the last decade. If this team doesn’t win 10 games next year with the talent they have then perhaps there should be an investigation.

9) David Cutcliffe -- The guy has done alright at Duke. His teams play hard and always play teams close, unlike previous Duke squads.

10) Dabo Swinney -- I’m sorry, but this guy just can’t coach. He can recruit his ass off, but he should be last on this list considering the amount of talent he has pissed away the last three years. That being said, beating VT twice this year gets him a two spot jump.

11) Randy Edsall -- Anybody that calls Maryland a dream job deserve to be ranked about here. I’ll be interested to see what happens with the Terps next year. This program is a dumpster fire.

12) Frank Spazziani -- Sorry, this guy is terrible and I am not sure how he is still around.

I think you can take coaches 3 thru 9 and put them in a hat and pull them out. I think there are some good but not great coaches in the ACC. I would call Frank Beamer historically great but I think he is starting to trend down.

(By the way, I would put Syracuse's Doug Marrone and Pitt's Paul Chrsyt probably around the 8-ish area.)

Kendall sez: Good list, Douglas.  Hard to argue with any of that.  I think we currently have five tiers of coaches in the ACC.  Beamer is alone on the top tier.  Tier two is Grobe, O'Brien, and Johnson -- proven to be consistent winners but nothing really special, or somehow otherwise flawed.  Tier three is the relatively unknown but exciting up-and-comers -- Golden (who really knows how good of a HC he is, winning at Temple isn't the miracle some try to make it out to be), London, Fedora, Marrone, and Chryst.  Tier four is the over-hyped underachievers -- Fisher and Swinney.  Tier five is the crap -- Edsall and Spaz.  Cutcliffe stands alone, tierless.  I honestly have no idea how good or bad he is.  He did well at Ole Miss, considering the difficulty the Rebs have had since.  It feels like he's doing well at Duke... but he's 15-33 in four seasons with zero winning seasons and zero bowl appearances.  They play better than they had at any point during the prior decade-plus, but he's still not winning, and they're still losing to FCS teams.  So I'd probably put Cutcliffe on tier four, but inching toward tier five.  I'm not a big fan of the guy, I think he's a bit of a dildo.

Sorry, still not sold.

6) Assuming no large-scale playoff, how would you fix the college bowl system?

I could go on for pages and pages about this. What is the main problem with the bowl system? There are too many, the same teams go to the same bowls and half of them are two 6-6 teams. Very simple fix… Cut the number of bowls to 15, eliminate conference tie-ins, and put them into three tiers (five games each) that pick each of their their 10 teams from a pool. Increase the number of wins required to be bowl eligible to 8 and get rid of the FCS component… If you play an FCS team you better win 9.  Any bowl that is played above the Mason Dixon Line or in a baseball stadium need not apply. Additionally all the traditional names will be coming back. After all the bowls are complete, have a +1 game to determine the national champion.

Tier 1 Bowls: Rose, Sugar, Peach, Cotton, Fiesta. (Sorry Orange bowl… you suck and until you play somewhere not twenty miles away from everywhere you are dropped down a tier.)

Tier 2 Bowls: Orange, Citrus, Hall of Fame, Sun, Holiday.

Tier 3 Bowls: Gator (even though it sucks),  Music City (one of my favorite bowls), Liberty, Alamo, Insight (just for additional western exposure).

Frankly, after Tier 2 does anyone really care?  For those of you saying "But Doug, my crappy 6-6 team deserves to get a chance to beat another crappy 6-6 team!" Hey no problem… These are supposed to be exhibitions, so feel free to schedule pre-season games at these locations. It is already happening (see Fed Ex, Dallas, and Atlanta.) If there ever is a playoff, you can look for these bowls to move to beginning of the season. It is the colleges' way of having their cake and eating it too.


Kendall sez: But Doug, my crappy 6-6 team deserves a chance to beat another 6-6 team!


All joking aside, riffing off of what you said and looking at it like this: In the NFL, 12 of the 32 teams go to the playoffs.  That's 38%.  College football should mirror that percentage and invite 46 of the FBS-level teams to the bowl system.  That means 23 bowl games (24 if you include the +1), spread across five tiers, with each tier's teams drafted to play the games in a rotating system of draft order.  That gives you new matchups every year, and gives the bowls the ability to select teams that would be regional draws.  The same drafting occurs at each tier, with a selection committee placing teams in the pool for each tier's games to draft.


I'm not sure if any of that made sense, but imagine if on Selection Sunday, 8-4 Virginia had been chosen by the selection committee to play in Tier Three (boo, hiss, we deserved Tier Two this season!)  It's the Belk Bowl's turn to make the first pick in that tier in 2011, so knowing they stand a good chance of drawing a big crowd to Charlotte for the game, they choose Virginia vs. Vanderbilt for their game.  The Holiday Bowl has the second pick in Tier Three, and they choose California vs. San Diego State... et cetera.  


This system combines America's love for the NCAA Tournament selection process with America's love for the NFL draft.  Imagine the spectacle.  And it allows bowl games to establish better regional games on a more regular basis, which improves attendance and increases bowl game reputations.  It's not a playoff, but in some ways it is better.  The bowl games are left intact, but there's no more same-ol', same-ol' recycled matchups, and conceivably no more empty stadiums and no more astronomical travel budgets.  The schools might actually be able to make money on their bowl games!  How novel!


Ah, screw it.  Let's do a 16-team playoff.

But this, of course, is the dream.

7) Is Seth Greenberg the right coach to lead Virginia Tech basketball for the next decade-plus?  Explain.

This is one of those look in the mirror type questions. Here we are sitting at 1-5 in the ACC and on the outside looking in at the NCAA Tournament again this year. On the surface it would seem the answer to this question is a NO, Greenberg is not the right coach. That being said, lets dive into the VT basketball program and be honest about where expectations should be set for this program.

Virginia Tech doesn’t have the rich basketball history of many of the other ACC programs. This is a program that has to fight for every piece of news in light of big brother, the football program. This is a campus that despite its size is in rural SW Virginia and 40 miles away from what could be considered an urban environment. While this can work in football, it is definitely a hindrance to the basketball program. This is a program that just updated its facilities, but still has one of the older arenas in the conference. Looking at all this, I would say the BCS conference basketball programs it is most comparable to would be programs such as Nebraska, Penn State, and Clemson. Not exactly murderers row in basketball.

As a VT fan, the sooner you can put your expectations in line with reality, the sooner you can answer this question. There is no doubt this team is not what it was supposed to be when it was put together last spring. Allen Chaney, who was considered an NBA talent, has never played a second for VT, and poor J.T. Thompson has now missed his second season with an ACL tear. Erick Green - our best player - has missed a couple of games, one of which was BC. (Win that game and you can still consider yourself in the tournament discussion), and Dorenzo Hudson has been hobbled all season as well. This is a team of mostly freshmen so it should not come as a surprise that we have struggled.

Seth Greenburg is a great recruiter. I can see that his coaching style can wear on the players, but winning games cures all that. I feel he has done a tremendous job in getting VT where they are today. You can usually count on some surprise losses (BC) and surprise wins (UVA) every year. Greenberg may not be able to take us to the next level, but he at least deserves the shot. Honestly though, I don’t see him staying much longer… the fans are have too much of a “football mentality”. One loss and the fans turn on their own. I would like to see him stick around, but my guess is he will move on to a Northeastern school within the next three years. Then I think VT fans will see just how difficult this VT job is. So yes I think he can be the right coach, but I don’t think he will end up being it.


Kendall sez: I know Greenberg is a New York guy, and in that way it seems like a weird fit in the southern part of Virginia.  But you're right, the guy has had surprising success being able to recruit players to Virginia Tech.  That said, the proof is in the pudding, and the pudding tastes like one tournament appearance in nine seasons.  Despite however you might feel about the recent tournament snubs, that's not enough trips to the Big Dance.  Bottom line.  If I were a Virginia Tech basketball fan, I'd be ready to move on.  Old gym, wishy-washy fans, whatever, Virginia Tech is still an ACC job, and that carries enough sway to get an up-and-comer with the potential to do a little bit better.


Meanwhile, you mentioned Dex's sideline demeanor in one of the questions above, so I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Greenberg's courtside demeanor here.  I am absolutely not an unbiased observer, but the guy is an embarrassment to your school and to the conference on a far-too-regular basis.  And that includes his interviews on Selection Sunday.  I think VT can do better than that, Doug.  I really do.  You have to be getting tired of the "be sure Greenberg is miked up on Selection Sunday!" jokes.  Beamer is a classy guy, a southern gentleman, and Greenberg just doesn't fit that same mold.  If I were a Virginia Tech fan, I'd be glad to bid him adieu to St. John's or wherever he's going up there.  To me, Greenberg is like a more successful version of Dave Leitao... just not the right fit at a Virginia school that aspires to relevance within the storied ACC.

Good enough for Virginia Tech? Maybe, maybe not...

8) Virginia Tech has become the poster child for sitting on the bubble and being snubbed by the NCAA Tournament selection committee.  In your opinion, what do the Hokies need to do to avoid that fate in the future?  How can Virginia dodge that situation?

Well it seems that every year there is a new criteria that VT just didn’t meet. One year it is number of wins, then it is last 10 games, then it is top 100 opponents. I don’t think we need to worry about this year. Although we are playing better right now, there is no way VT is in that discussion this year.  The ACC going to the 18 game schedule (when Syracuse and Pitt join) helps. I think that will be a nice RPI boost for all the teams. Play some out-of-state mid-majors on the road and try to get in one of the holiday tournaments every year. I would avoid playing the instate mid-majors as they treat it like it is the GD superbowl. Finally,  for God sakes, stop playing RPI 300+ teams. You are better off playing a Division 2 team that doesn’t get factored in the RPI. Additionally it would be nice to get someone on the NCAA committee that actually tried to help out the conference for a change. Just like football, though, this will improve when the ACC starts playing better basketball. Right now there is UNC, Duke, UVA, FSU and NC State playing decent basketball. The rest of the conference needs to step up.


Kendall sez: I definitely agree with you there.  Georgia Tech, Wake Forest, and Maryland need to step up.  FSU and UVA need to stay solid.  Miami needs to stabilize as a .500 team in conference.  Pitt and Syracuse will help a lot.  The ACC needs to get back to the days when 9 conference wins guarantees a tournament bid.

STEP IT UP, slackjawed Yellow Jackets.

9) The word on the street is that conference expansion will eventually lead us not to 16 teams per conference, but 18 (EIGHTEEN!?!)  Pretend you are John Swofford, and hand-pick the four schools that would receive invitations to join the ACC (and please -- realistic choices only!)  Explain your choices.

Ugh… It was hard enough to pick two additional teams that meet the ACC’s requirements. So let’s see obviously any new team has to bring something to the table in terms of football and basketball (FBS/D-1A level on both), while at the same time being in at least the eastern most two time zones and at least requiring a pulse to get into the school. Additionally, I won’t consider any school that just changed or is in the process of changing conferences (i.e. WVU, TCU.) Kendall says keep it realistic, so I need to set aside my Florida, Georgia, etc. thoughts and come down to reality. Keep in mind these are not my choices, but what I would see as the most likely targets.

1) First and foremost, any expansion to that level will have to require Notre Dame, otherwise it makes no sense to me. I don’t think it is as unrealistic as others may think. If you get ND, then you can go ahead and fill the rest up with Big East spare parts.

2) Rutgers would appear to be the next most likely although I am not really sure they bring a lot to the table athletically.

3) Connecticut -- Obviously the basketball programs are top notch and then there is the ESPN proximity, never a bad thing to have in your corner.

I have to admit after much thought I am struggling with who #4 (#18) would be. You could make arguments for and against South Florida, East Carolina, Cincinnati, Louisville, and Southern Miss, none of which make a huge smile come to my face. My guess is it would be one of the first two -- USF or ECU.

Just for fun if I had to go try to turn a school to the ACC from another non-Big East conference, I would in order go:

Penn State – With ND and any two crap schools, it will work for me.

Kentucky – Awesome basketball.

Keep in mind as a VT fan I have no interest in going to 18 as I am keenly aware that puts us right back in the Big East and not playing our new-found ACC conference mates. Honestly I don’t see how going to 18 really is beneficial and I could see the setup lasting one TV contract before falling apart.


Kendall sez: Doug, I know you're not a realignmageddon geek like I am, so I apologize for hitting you with this question.  My personal picks to go to 18 are as follows: Notre Dame, which I honestly think is a fairly realistic pull.  After ND joins the ACC, Penn State becomes viable... especially after all of this recent controversy (the B1G could easily go in a different direction.)  PSU still has a lot of value for the ACC because of football cred.  My pick for #17 is Temple.  Good school, good hoops, and the infrastructure to be the college football school in Philly.  Not sure if PSU would try to block Temple's inclusion, but I'd love to see the Owls in the ACC.  #18 is tough.  I think Miami and FSU would block USF/UCF from inclusion, and Rutgers doesn't move the needle for me at all.  UConn is probably the best choice, but don't sleep on Memphis.  It would be good to gain an ACC toehold in the state of Tennessee, and in a big media market like Memphis.  Plus, Memphis basketball.  I think Memphis Tigers football is a bit of a sleeping giant, as well.  Okay, final answer: ND, PSU, Temple, and UConn, with Memphis being a backup option.  All of that being said, I think 14 has as much chance of being the next 16 as 18 has.  (If you have no idea what that sentence meant, you need to read Wahooze more often.)  Notre Dame and Penn State or bust!

Dream of a day when this is an ACC game.  It could happen!

10) You are chosen to replace Craig Littlepage as Virginia's Athletic Director.  What are the three items atop your to-do list?

1) Indoor practice facility – This appears to have been addressed. No excuse for a BCS level team to practice on a concrete floor when the rain comes. Pathetic.

2) Survey the football fan base – I actually went to a few games this year. This season was by all accounts a success, yet the GT, USM and Duke games were terrible in terms of attendance. Figure out what to do to get the fans back. Bottom line is this, UVA fans, and you may not like hearing this… If you don’t show up next year, then you frankly don’t deserve to have a good football program. Stop blaming Al Groh for everything that is wrong in the world and get back to the games.

3) Beef up the men’s basketball schedule. Let’s face it, the non-conference schedule was weak this year. Losing to VT did not help the situation. UVA needs to win 11 ACC games to assure themselves of an NCAA bid. 10 ACC wins no longer guarantees anything, as VT so unfortunately showed in 2009.


Kendall sez: #1 is on its way, #2 is the most confounding thing ever, and #3 could be argued but I do tend to agree.  Good list.

It's coming, Doug.  BACK OFF!

BONUS: Flip the script.  You are chosen to replace Jim Weaver as Virginia Tech's Athletic Director.  What are the three items atop your to-do list?

1) Increase recruiting budgets for football and both basketball programs.  I would like to see us cast a little wider net.

2) Figure out a way to move men’s lacrosse to varsity level. VT is very close to prime recruiting area and I think that we could have a good program very quickly.

3) Increase the money spent on men’s baseball in terms of scholarships and facilities.


Kendall sez: It would be great to see Tech's lacrosse come up and baseball solidify -- there's no good reason why both of those programs couldn't quickly become assets to the ACC.  Especially VT baseball.  It's in a region of strong high school baseball, and in a conference of fantastic college baseball.  As for the wider recruiting net... I'm all for it if it means you'll back off the in-state recruits a little bit, ha ha.

Step 1: Never wear these uniforms again.  Ever.

And that's it.  I really want to thank Doug again for his time and effort in answering these questions.  I think it gives us Virginia fans a lot of good perspective on things.  Thanks Doug!