"The only thing I can say is that one of the schools involved - in this case Virginia - did some unethical things, as far as seeing a kid and not making us aware of it."

-- Deep Creek (Chesapeake) High Coach David Cox, discussing the recruitment of defensive lineman Richard Rodgers

On Thursday, the news broke that Richard Rodgers, a defensive lineman from Deep Creek High School who had verbally committed to the Hokies in November, will back out of that commitment and sign with Virginia instead.  The Roanoke Times ran it under the quaint headline "Tech-UVa renew recruiting rivalry."  That's an interesting euphemism for "UVa steals another Tech recruit."

This is the second time in two years that this has happened.  Last year, Yubrenal Isabelle, a high school All-American from West Virginia, earned his place in Hokie football lore with his reversal of field from Tech to UVa.  But in Isabelle's case, there was a lot of misinformation floating around, and there are many questions as to whether he ever committed to Tech in the first place.  The real truth is only known by a few, and the rest of us are left to speculate.

In the case of Richard Rodgers, however, there is no doubt that he committed to Tech.   The story was widely reported in state newspapers in early November, including quotes from Rodgers himself (Isabelle, by contrast, was never quoted in his "commitment" story).

And there is also no doubt, based on the comments of Deep Creek Coach David Cox, that UVa, though not guilty of a recruiting violation, is guilty of some ethically questionable recruiting moves.

The sequence of events is as follows (all information is from The Roanoke Times and The Richmond Times-Dispatch, so if any information is wrong, blame them):

• November 4:  Rodgers commits verbally to Virginia Tech.
• December 12-14:  Rodgers goes on an official recruiting visit to UVa.
• Thursday, January 15:  George Welsh and at least one assistant meet Rodgers at his home without notifying Cox or former Deep Creek coach Jerry Carter, who is Rodgers' recruiting coordinator.
• Friday, January 16 - Sunday, January 18:  Rodgers visits Virginia Tech.
• January 18 - Rodgers informs Tech via phone of his decision to switch to UVa.
• Wednesday, January 21 - Rodgers informs Cox of his decision to renege on his commitment to Tech.

What David Cox is angry about is what happened on Thursday, January 15th, when the UVa coaches just decided to "pop in" on Rodgers without telling Cox or Carter.   To visit a recruit in his home without notifying his coach is a slap in the face to that coach, and frankly, it makes me wonder what UVa was trying to hide.  Why would they sneak in for a visit without letting the Deep Creek coaches know?

Cox also had these comments:

"I talked with the Tech coaches on a regular basis, but the last time I talked to a Virginia coach was in early December.  That was before I called them the other day.   I got an answer (as to why they visited without notifying me), but I'm still not pleased with what went on.  They know where I stand.  I'm not pleased with the way they went about their business.  Sure, I'm upset."

It sounds as if Cox wasn't even aware that UVa was continuing to recruit Rodgers, and then when they showed up in Rodgers's living room without him (Cox) knowing, and then Rodgers backed out of his Tech commitment and committed to UVa ... well, you can understand Cox's anger at being backdoored.  He is a first year coach at Deep Creek, and as such, you have to figure that he doesn't like George Welsh and his boys walking in like they own the place, and recruiting his players without even telling him.

So those are the facts, along with a little HokieCentral speculation at times.   Here are some thoughts that I have on the whole mess:

What UVa did wasn't wrong ... up to a point.  Sure, Rodgers had committed to Tech, but he still scheduled a visit to UVa and went there.  When a recruit does this, in my opinion, it sends a clear signal that his commitment is by no means firm, and the race for his services is wide open.  As such, UVa did what I would expect any college football coaching staff to do.  They kept recruiting him.

However, it is obvious that UVa did a lot of recruiting of Rodgers without Cox's knowledge.  A lot.  Cox didn't speak with UVa a single time after early December, right around the time of Rodgers' visit to UVa.  And then Rodgers walks into the coach's office on January 21st - at least five weeks later - and says he's going to UVa?  "And by the way, Coach, they visited me last week at my house."

Yeah, I'd be ticked if I was Cox.  Add in the fact that Cox was a football letterman for Tech from 1983-1985, and I'll bet he's ready to spit nails about this sequence of events.

David Cox is the only person here who seems to know what the word commitment means.  After Rodgers had verballed to Tech, he went to Cox and said that he wanted to look at some other schools.  Cox said, "I told him, 'Don't you understand that you're committed?'"

To a recruit, a verbal commitment these days serves one purpose and one purpose only:   it expresses your interest in a school and gets the press and most other schools (unlike UVa) off your back.  The actual dictionary definition of the word - a pledge or promise; an obligation - doesn't apply anymore.

And we won't even talk about the value of the word "commitment" to the UVa coaching staff.

Next time you hear a recruit "commit" and he's still going to go on visits, including one to UVa....  say to yourself, "Oh, that's nice.   He might go to Tech."

UVa now has a solid reputation as slimeballs when it comes to recruiting.   The next time a UVa graduate or fan starts to talk to you about how "honorable" they are, and about "being a gentleman," try your hardest not to laugh in their face.  Although UVa fans still cling to those quaint notions, those terms obviously don't mean much to the UVa coaching staff anymore.

In the last two years, UVa has managed to persuade three players who verbally committed to other schools to back out of their commitments:  Isabelle, Rodgers, and Antwoine Womack, who originally "committed" to Penn State.  You can argue over facts and details all you want, but the simple fact is, an honorable gentleman doesn't ask someone to back out of a "commitment."

And now the Wahoos have been ripped in the press by a high school coach, who openly used the word "unethical" when describing UVa's recruiting tactics.

Whether UVa fans and alumni like it or not, and regardless of whether any actual "recruiting violations" have occurred (they haven't), the actions of their coaching staff in the last two years have a sleazy undertone to them.  Reputations are built through repeated actions, and UVa's starting to develop a reputation as a program that can't keep its hands off of other team's verbal commitments.

What angers me the most is not that UVa did this ... but that they can.   Isn't this comment really at the core of it all?  As Hokie fans, doesn't it enrage us that a kid can back out of a commitment to Tech and commit to that school?

I can understand why a recruit might look at both schools and then choose UVa over Tech.  Some players like UVa better, some like Tech better.  That's the way it goes.

But when a recruit feels good enough about Tech to verbally commit, and then that recruit takes a look at UVa and decides to switch ... well, yes, it hurts our Hokie pride.   I won't pull punches on that.  It's never fun to have someone evaluate you and your arch-rival, and then not just choose your arch-rival, but pick you first and then switch.

Ouch!  I don't get get it, but then I don't have to.  I've been a diehard Hokie so long that there's no way I could ever understand it.

A few last words.  I have absolutely no problem with the fact that Richard Rodgers would rather go to UVa than Tech.  UVa can have all of the Yubrenal Isabelles and Richard Rodgers that they want, because to succeed in football at Tech requires total commitment (and even then, winning is tough at times).  There's no room in Lane Stadium for wafflers or guys who would rather be in Charlottesville.

What I do have a problem with is the way UVa angered a high school coach enough that he took them to task in the press.  I also have a problem with the way that UVa is developing a pattern of actively recruiting other school's verbal commitments and pressuring them to switch.

As far as I'm concerned, Charlottesville has always had a bad smell to it, and with this latest episode, the smell just got a little worse.

TSL News and Notes Archives