Birth of the Hokie Nation 12_5_2015 Cover Image Included

Birth of the
Hokie Nation

Virginia Tech’s Path to the
1999 National Championship

Game

by Roddy Hall



Copyright 2015 by Roderick A. Hall



Table of Contents

Dedication ........................................................................... i

Acknowledgements .......................................................... iii

Preface.................................................................................v

Forward - Best in the Country?..................................... vii

COMPUTER POLLS 1993 - 2011.................................. viii
COMPUTER POLLS 1999 - 2011.................................... ix
THE AP POLL 1993 - 2011.............................................x

The National Championship Game..................................1

National Championship Game: Freak Play Halts
Deep Tech Drive .........................................................7

1992: Hard Luck .............................................................11

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ............................................11
EAST CAROLINA ..........................................................13
UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE ........................................14
NO. 21 NORTH CAROLINA STATE ................................15
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY .................................................16
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI.......................18
SUMMARY OF TECH’S HEARTBREAKING GAMES

IN 1992 ...................................................................19

1992 Season Results .........................................................20

National Championship Game: Hokies Hold
Momentum ................................................................21

1993: The Streak Begins..................................................23

INDEPENDENCE BOWL – NO. 21 INDIANA
UNIVERSITY ............................................................23

PITTSBURGH’S SUCCESS AS INDEPENDENT ..................25
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH .......................................27
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND ........................................28
NO. 25 WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY ...........................28
BOSTON COLLEGE .......................................................29
BEAMER’S FIRST BOWL BID ........................................29
NO. 23 UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ................................30

1993 Season Results .........................................................32

National Championship Game: FSU Strikes
Twice ..........................................................................33

1994: Big East Runner-Up .............................................35

WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY.......................................35
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY ...............................................38
NO. 6 UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI.......................................39
TENNESSEE’S FOOTBALL PROMINENCE .......................40
GATOR BOWL - UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE................41

1994 Season Results .........................................................43

National Championship Game: Hokies Finally
Get on the Board.......................................................45

1995: Big East Champions .............................................47

BOSTON COLLEGE .......................................................47
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI ........................................48
INDEPENDENTS MIAMI AND VT TAKE

DIVERGENT PATHS..................................................49
NO. 17 UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI.....................................51
NO. 20 SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY ...................................53
BACKGROUND ON THE BOWL ALLIANCE .....................55
1995 BOWL ALLIANCE BREAKDOWN ..........................57
NO. 13 UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ................................58
SUGAR BOWL – NO. 9 UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS .............62

1995 Season Results .........................................................67

National Championship Game: FSU Speed leads
to 14 Quick Points.....................................................69

1996: Two Top Tier Bowls in a Row ..............................71

THREE WINS TO OPEN SEASON....................................71
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY ...............................................72
NO. 18 UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI.....................................75
NO. 23 WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY ...........................76
DISTRACTIONS AND BOWL POLITICS ...........................77
NO. 20 UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ................................79
NEBRASKA’S NATIONAL POWERHOUSE .......................80
ORANGE BOWL – NO. 6 UNIVERSITY OF

NEBRASKA ..............................................................81

1996 Season Results .........................................................85

National Championship Game: Failed Fake
Field Goal Leaves Margin at 21 ..............................87

1997: Recruiting Win Brightens Disappointing
Season ........................................................................89

MIAMI UNIVERSITY (OHIO) .........................................89
NO. 21 WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY ...........................91
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI (FLORIDA)...............................92
THE BATTLE OFF THE FIELD: RECRUITING

MICHAEL VICK .......................................................95
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH .......................................97
GATOR BOWL – NO. 6 UNIVERSITY OF NORTH

CAROLINA...............................................................99
THE “CONSOLATION PRIZE” ........................................99

1997 Season Results .......................................................101

National Championship Game: Vick Twists way
to Late First Half TD..............................................103

1998: Close Losses and a Bowl Win Over a Very
Special Team ...........................................................105

CLEMSON UNIVERSITY ..............................................105
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI ..............................................106
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH .....................................108
BOSTON COLLEGE .....................................................109
TEMPLE UNIVERSITY .................................................110
NO. 21 WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY .........................114
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY .............................................117
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ..........................................122

GENEALOGY OF TECH FOOTBALL SUCCESS –
ALABAMA .............................................................124

MUSIC CITY BOWL – UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA.......125

1998 Season Results .......................................................128

National Championship Game: Tech scores two
TDs to take the lead................................................129

1999: A New Day in Blacksburg ...................................131

JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY ...................................132
CLEMSON UNIVERSITY ..............................................134
NO. 24 UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ..............................135
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY ...............................................136
NO. 16 UNIVERSITY OF SYRACUSE ............................138
FIRST BCS POLL........................................................142
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH .....................................143
WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY.....................................143
BCS WATCH – TENNESSEE MOVES UP......................147
NO. 19 UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI...................................148
TEMPLE UNIVERSITY .................................................150

BCS WATCH – NEBRASKA KNOCKS ON THE
DOOR ....................................................................152

NO. 22 BOSTON COLLEGE..........................................152
BCS WATCH AT LANE STADIUM ...............................155

1999 Season Results .......................................................157

National Championship Game: The Clock
Strikes Midnight .....................................................159

Mr. Electric, Lee Corso, and Enter Sandman.............163
Epilogue: The Play That Broke Hokie Hearts ............167

WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN ........................................169



Dedication

To my father, Bill Hall, who introduced me to Vir-
ginia Tech football; to my mother, Priscilla Hall who sat
with me at my first Virginia Tech games, typed my first
attempts at writing football stories after Friday night high
school games, and helped edit this book; and to Dave
Smith, Tech’s long-time SID, who gave me the opportunity
to experience the game from an insider’s perspective for 27
years.

i

ii

Acknowledgements

I could not have written this book without the ex-
traordinary work of my friend Damian Salas, who has been
the statistical recorder and archiver since we reached the
digital age of computerized football statistics. He has made
HokieSports.com a fantastic repository of play-by-play and
statistics for every Hokie football game since the Beamer
coaching stint began in 1987. The information on every
play either came from, or was checked with, that source.

Another friend, John Shaffer was instrumental in
making these statistics accurate and timely during the
games. Frank Shirk, then Carolyn Shockley, were my part-
ners for years in keeping the offensive statistics until my
son Michael Hall came along and helped me learn to enjoy
the games from the stands again.

For background information on the time periods
surrounding the games, I relied heavily on new stories from
all over the country, but especially those written by Jack
Bogaczyk, Scott Blanchard, Randy King, and Mark Ber-
man of the Roanoke Times; and David Teel, Mike
Holtzclaw, Angie Watts, Skip Miller, Dave Johnson, and
Dave Fairbanks, of the Newport News Daily Press.

Extremely helpful websites were: Sagarin.com;
Sports-Reference.com; CollegeFootballPoll.com; and
VTPhreak4evr.wordpress.com.

Special thanks go to Dr. David Hamilton who sug-
gested that I spend my spare time on this specific topic.

iii

iv

Preface

Virginia Tech hired Frank Beamer in December
1986 to take over a football program rocked with scandal
and on NCAA probation. After the 1992 season, many as-
sumed the university administration would fire him when
the Hokies finished the year with a 2-8-1 record. The ad-
ministration was patient. Starting in 1993, the Virginia
Tech football team set upon a path that would lead to the
National Championship game of 1999 played on January 4,
2000, at the Sugar Bowl. This is the story of the games
played between 1992 and that January night when, for a
few minutes, Virginia Tech reached the pinnacle of the col-
lege football world. While Frank Beamer never won a na-
tional championship as coach, this book is about the teams
that put Beamer and the Hokies in the stratosphere where
dreams became goals, and the quest for those goals
changed a university.

v

vi

Forward - Best in the Country?

Frank Beamer has changed the landscape at Virgin-
ia Tech. That is undisputed. You can find documentation of
the long winning streak and bowl streak in most any Tech
football publication. The long list of other accomplishments
is impressive and I encourage you to go to Hokiesports.com
to read about those accomplishments. Beamer’s place
among the top 10 winningest coaches of all-time is extraor-
dinary. Many analysts doubt there will ever be another man
who serves a single university in the capacity of football
coach for as long as he did.

While he stood on the verge of hoisting the BCS
National Championship trophy on January 4, 2000, and this
book is about the magical seasons that led to that moment,
the Hokies never returned to the championship game under
his tenure. The rhetorical question is: would Hokie Nation
rather have had a national championship, or a team that was
the best in the country over a sustained period.

The experience of being ranked (read that relevant)
is exciting for current fans, grows new fans, and creates an
atmosphere that is missing when a team is not in the polls
for a few years. Being in the Top 25 keeps you on the tick-
ers at the bottom of the screen so that people all over the
country see how you are doing. Arguably, the consistency
of the Virginia Tech teams in the Beamer era is much more
important than any one season.

How consistent was Virginia Tech? Many have cit-
ed the consistency, and Beamer touts consistency as his

vii

legacy. It has not widely been reported in a quantitative
way.

Computer Polls 1993 - 2011

Congrove Computer Rankings has compiled a list
of all teams from 1993 to the present (coincidentally the
beginning of the winning season and bowl streak for Vir-
ginia Tech). Each team in the list receives a point for its
position in the polls – the lower the score the better. Any
computer poll could be used to derive the long-term rank-
ings, but Congrove is the one that has compiled its own
rankings for a long period in one place.

The following is a list of the top five teams in the
Congrove rankings in the glory years of the Beamer Era
between 1993 and 2011, the last year of Tech’s 10-win
streak:

1 – Ohio State: Average Rank = 14.58
2 – Florida: 14.58
3 – Virginia Tech: 14.79
4 – Florida State: 17.79
5 – Texas: 20.16

These poll numbers do not include wins that are va-
cated due to sanctions imposed by the NCAA. Among the
top three, neither Florida, Virginia Tech, nor Texas has
been punished for infractions during this period. Ohio State
and Florida State each had 12 wins vacated due to NCAA
probation.1

Rounding to the nearest whole number, Florida and
Virginia Tech tied for the top-ranked team in the country

1 Due to NCAA sanctions, Ohio State had to vacate 12 wins in the
2010 season. Florida State had to vacate five wins in 2006 and seven wins in
2007.

viii

during this, admittedly, contrived period of time when Tech
was at its peak – 19 years.

Continuing with the computer polls, the Massey
rankings are also available back to 1993, and I have com-
piled the ratings by hand. The following teams made up the
top five:

1 – Florida: Average Rank = 10.42
2 – FloridaState: 12.79
3 – Ohio State: 15.05
4 – USC: 16.73
5 – Virginia Tech: 18.94

Florida clearly wins out over Tech in the Massey
computer poll. USC replaces Texas in this top five, but it
also had to vacate wins during the 19-year period for
NCAA infractions.2

Computer Polls 1999 - 2011

The best known computer poll, generated by Jeff
Sagarin for USA Today since 1985, does not have archives
available online further back than 1998.3

Starting with the 1999 National Championship
game, using all three polls for the 1999-2011 period yield
the following results:

Sagarin:

1- Oklahoma: Average Rank - 8.38
2- Texas - 13.84
3- Florida - 13.92

2 USC vacated two wins in its National championship season of 2005
and 12 more wins in its 2005 season.

3 At this time, microfiche copies of the paper between 1993-1997 to
compare the Sagarin rankings for the full 19-year period have not been located.

ix

4- Virginia Tech -14.76
5- USC (15.15)

Massey:
1 – Oklahoma: Average Rank - 10.08;
2 – Florida - 13.76
3 – Virginia Tech 15.00;
4 – USC 15.23
5 – Georgia 15.46
6 – Texas 16.46 (used for composite)

Congrove:
1 – Oklahoma: Average Rank - 8.62
2 – Virginia Tech 14.07
3 – Texas 15.54
4 – Ohio State 18.38
5 – Florida 19.39
7– USC (used for composite)

Composite of Three for 19 years:
1 – Oklahoma: Average Rank - 1.00
2 – Virginia Tech - 3.00
3 – Florida - 3.33
4 – Texas - 3.67
5 – USC - 5.33

The AP Poll 1993 - 2011

The human polls do not rank teams that do not re-
ceive votes in their polls, so it is nearly impossible to
measure long-term success in the same way as you can with
computer polls. It is nearly impossible to average in the
team’s strength in down years.

More qualitative measures are more appropriate.
For instance, the number of times a teams is ranked in the
polls during a year, or at the end of the year.

x

Years ranked at least once in AP Top 25 between
1993-2011:

 Virginia Tech: Every year (and 2012-2014)4
 Florida: Every year (not in 2014)
 Ohio State: Every year (and 2012-2015) 5
 Florida State: Every year (and 2012-2015)6
 Georgia, USC, Wisconsin, Texas, Michigan, and Au-

burn - 18 of 19

Years ranked in final AP Top 25, Top 10, and Top 5
between 1993-2011.

 Virginia Tech: 16 of 19 years (seven Top 10, one Top
5)

 Florida State: 16 of 19 years (eight Top 10, eight Top 5)
 Ohio State: 15 of 19 years (11 Top 10, nine Top 5)
 Florida: 15 of 19 years (11 Top 10, nine Top 5)
 Texas 15 of 19 years (seven Top 10, five top 5)

Tech has more top 25 finishes than any other school
when adjusting for the Florida State and Ohio State penal-
ties.

So why do I go into such great detail about these
measures that show how good Virginia Tech was during all
the glory years of the Beamer era when this book is about
just the early years of Tech’s significant triumphs? Because
The Birth of the Hokie Nation is just a volume in what

4 Tech was ranked 17th in the AP Poll after upsetting Ohio State in
Columbus in 2014. During the 1993-2011 period, Tech was rated in the top 25
by AP at least five weeks of every year

5 Ohio State was ranked only two weeks in 2011. As of 2015, its cur-
rent streak of being ranked in at least one poll per year dates back to 1968.

6 Florida State was ranked only five weeks in 2006 and one week in
2007 and 2009. Its current streak of being ranked in at least one poll per year
dates back to 1977.

xi

could be a series of books highlighting the unlikely story of
Virginia Tech’s football prominence under the legendary
Frank Beamer.

The most special stories are written about climbing
up steep peaks, not the time spent at the summit.

xii

The National Championship Game

First and goal from the seven, Michael Vick
takes the snap and hands to the deep back.
Andre Kendrick stutter steps right, lowers
his head and bulls toward the middle of the
Tech line. He drives his body into a Florida
State defender at the goal line. Vick’s arms
go into the air, signaling the touchdown.
Virginia Tech leads 29-28. The Hokies are
on top of the college football world!

It was played on the biggest stage, under the bright-
est lights. ABC Television in primetime. The Superdome.
New Orleans. The final game of the college football sea-
son. The BCS National Championship.

Days earlier, people all over the world had “partied
like it was 1999,” because it actually had been the last day
of the twentieth century.7 Despite the dreaded Y2K bug, the
clocks had not stopped, computers continued to function, as
did the lights and ATMs. There was no chaos. While the
world did not end, as some had feared, for the Hokie Na-
tion, the world had certainly changed.

This was the legendary story of Cinderella crashing
the ball, hoping to charm the prince before the stroke of

7 Kramer on Seinfeld was one of the first to point out that we do not
begin counting with year 0, but year 1, so the last day of the 2000th year of our
Gregorian calendar was December 31, 2000.

1

midnight. Virginia Tech was a team that had begun the first
four years of the ‘90s with a record of 22-22-1. It had won
exactly two-thirds of its games over the full decade. Yet its
confidence was strong based on a win over Texas in the
1995 Sugar Bowl and a steady performance in the 1996 Or-
ange Bowl against Nebraska. As evidence of this confi-
dence, Tech had built a case reserved solely for a crystal
football that was the Bowl Championship Series National
Championship trophy, and prominently displayed the emp-
ty glass display in front of windows overlooking the team’s
expansive practice fields. January 4, 2000 was the night
that it could take home the trophy to fill that case, a night to
solidify its place among the nation’s most elite football
programs, a night to prove that “it belonged.”

Playing the part of the wicked stepsister was Flori-
daState, who, in 1992, had been given the spot the Hokies
so coveted – membership in the Atlantic Coast Conference
(ACC). Florida State was undoubtedly the dominant team
of college football from 1987 through the 1999 season. It
had 13 consecutive seasons with 10 or more wins during a
time when college football regular seasons were limited to
11 games. FSU had either won, or tied for the ACC cham-
pionship from its first year as a conference member,
through the 1999 season. It won the National Champion-
ships in 1993. It finished no lower than fourth in the AP
poll during those 13 seasons and had an overall record of
140-17-1, a winning percentage of 89%.8 The previous
year, it had lost in the National Championship game to
then-perennial Southeast Conference powerhouse Tennes-
see.

Tech’s 1999 season was the story of two men from
backgrounds as far apart as the Seminoles and the Hokies.
Their paths crossed in 1999, enabling the Hokies to romp

8 Coincidentally, the Florida State dominance of college football
came in the same year as Frank Beamer’s tenure began at Virginia Tech. His
record over those same 13 seasons was 88-60-2, a winning percentage of 59%.

2

through the Big East conference to this championship
game. One was Frank Beamer, a Tech alumnus who had
come home to coach the team he had captained in the late
1960s. He hailed from a rural town in southwest Virginia
called Fancy Gap with a population of 260 according to the
2000 census. His hometown roots had likely given him an
extra chance to keep the reins of the Tech team after the
1992 season when the Hokies’ record dipped to 2-8-1. Six
years later, he was guiding his team on the field after an
undefeated season.

The other was Michael Vick, a red-shirt freshman
phenomenon who came from the inner city of sprawling
Hampton, VA. He had turned the college football world on
its head with his Houdini-like ability to escape pass rushers,
and his rocket arm. Beamer was the National Coach of the
Year, Vick finished third in the Heisman Trophy voting.

Vick was the nation’s most efficient passer, the first
time that a freshman had ever achieved that feat. His quar-
terback rating was 180.4, the second highest in NCAA his-
tory. He completed 90 of 152 attempts for 1,840 yards and
12 touchdowns. He had thrown only five interceptions.
However, he was best known for his running. Coming into
the game, he had carried the ball 108 times for 585 yards
and eight touchdowns. Since college stats include sacks as
running yardage as opposed to passing yardage as done in
the pros, it is notable that Vick had 782 yards on positive
rushing attempts.

Tech had faced only one daunting challenge during
its magical 11-win season. In an away game against bitter
interstate rival West Virginia, it was behind with 1:15 left
when Vick’s pinpoint accuracy and elusive running moved
the Hokies 58 yards, setting up a winning 44-yard field
goal by Shayne Graham.

Tech romped over the rest of the Big East. In the six
other conference games the Hokies outscored opponents
293-68. This included a 62-0 whipping of then number No.

3

16 Syracuse, and a 43-10 shellacking of 19th ranked Mi-
ami.

Defensively, Tech was the top-ranked team in the
country, allowing only 10.5 points per game. The Hokies
were led by the lunch-pail defense – blue collar, no-name
players working to maximize performance from the talent
they possessed. One player who had distinguished himself
above the no-name moniker was All-American Corey
Moore. He led the unit, racking up 17 sacks for 150 yards
of losses and 11 tackles for another 32 negative yards.

The biggest obstacle that Tech had to overcome in
getting to the championship game was its poor strength of
schedule. The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) used a
complex formula based on the human polls, computer polls,
strength of schedule, and number of losses. Tech’s schedule
was weak, which hurt it everywhere in the calculations ex-
cept in the loss column. It is very possible that the Hokies
could have gone undefeated and still been left out of the
championship game in favor of a team with one loss, nota-
bly Nebraska.

The Cornhuskers lost at Texas, 24-20, in October,
but avenged the loss with a 22-6 win in the Big 12 confer-
ence championship on the last day of the season. (In 1999,
neither the ACC, nor Big East had conference champion-
ships). The Cornhuskers, with 11 wins, argued, presumably
for the benefit of the human voters, that they were more
deserving of the national championship shot than the
Hokies. There was a risk that the rich history of Nebraska’s
program would help this argument prevail. Many yearned
for a match-up of Florida State and Nebraska. In the end, a
near loss to Colorado on the same day that the Hokies were
trouncing Boston College probably cost Nebraska the bid.

Now that the Hokies were here, they only had to
worry about the Seminoles, and their recent dominance of
the college game.

4

Virginia Tech’s president at the time was Dr. Paul
Torgersen, and the school extended his tenure four days so
he could be the leader for this special occasion. He told
Sports Illustrated that his school’s spot in the National
Championship game was a “perturbation” – a change in the
regular state of something. As an avid fan, and known to be
sly as a fox, Torgersen was likely playing a part in a moti-
vational strategy to assure that this team was truly treated
as the underdog. During the next decade, Torgersen en-
joyed the ride as President Emeritus on the sideline of al-
most every home game as the Hokies proved his words to
be wrong. Virginia Tech had become a consistent name
mentioned with the elite programs of college football and
winning seasons were no longer enough for rabid Hokie
fans - they wanted to go back to 1999.

5

6

National Championship Game:
Freak Play Halts Deep Tech Drive

New Orleans, LA January 4, 2000 - Game-time
finally arrived 39 days after the Hokies beat Boston Col-
lege to give the team its first perfect undefeated regular
season in its 108-year history. Spirited Tech fans, who
dominated the Superdome crowd, were raucous as their
chance at seeing the team reach the pinnacle of college
football glory began.

No doubt, jitters influenced the first play of the
game that led to a false start penalty on the left side of the
line. It would seem insignificant to note such a foul except
that tens of thousands of Hokie fans at the game and watch-
ing television in their homes felt a sharp pang in their
stomachs. Was this a harbinger of things to come? Then on
the next snap, an FSU lineman manhandled running back
Shyrone Stith in the backfield. Stith had lost only 28 yards
all year. Officials marked the loss as only a yard, but the
spot was generous. This time it felt like a kick in the stom-
ach. There was no denying that even this early, the cynics
were already poised to pounce on the system that had let
this lightweight team with the weak schedule into the elite
club of college football powers. Cameras switched to the
sideline and showed Beamer looking down with a forlorn
look on his face.

Then, on the game’s second play from scrimmage,
FSU knew that Vick must drop back to pass on second and
16. Within a blink of an eye, one of the speedy defensive

7

linemen from the Seminoles put a hand on the freshman
deep in the backfield at the five-yard line. The intended re-
ceiver was not open. However, as had happened so many
times throughout this special season, Vick sprinted away
from the outstretched arms of a 300-plus pound pursuer,
and sped through the secondary toward the 40-yard line.
The end of the play was textbook Vick. Almost ten yards
past the first down marker, he juked back toward the mid-
dle of the field, and opted not to go out of bounds. He in-
stead lowered his head and buried his shoulder into defen-
sive back Derrick Gibson.

Vick showed the country even more of his ability to
make something out of nothing on the Hokies’ third play.
He rolled to the left, pump-faked toward a covered receiv-
er, took three strides toward the line of scrimmage, and
then stopped in his tracks. He turned on a dime and ran the
other direction with at least eight Florida State defenders
pursuing him, this time out of bounds, just short of another
first down. The youngster had just picked up 32 yards on
two broken plays and changed the early momentum of the
game in less than a minute. In a blink of the eye, the cynics
had to begin wondering if they would have to eat crow.

On second and one, Stith took the handoff and ex-
ploded down the left hash mark by FSU’s linebackers and
defensive backs who were reduced to swatting at the ball as
he ran in front of them. If he had not run into his own man,
he would have likely scored, but Stith instead fell to the turf
at the Seminole 26, a pick-up of 26 yards. Vick then threw
to receiver André Davis, who had adorned the cover of
Sports Illustrated the month earlier. He juggled the ball
momentarily and went down at the Florida State 13 for an-
other first down.

Stith rushed three straight times, and came up just
short on third and two, leaving the Hokies inches away
from a first down at the Seminole four.

8

On fourth and one, the traditional wisdom, and the
typical Beamer philosophy, would have been to kick the
field goal and take the 3-0 lead against the highly favored
Seminoles. Three things likely factored into his decision to
go against the grain. First, his 19-year old quarterback had
the confidence to take just about any situation and make
something good happen. Second, the field position that
Florida State would inherit if the Hokies came up just short
would put the powerful Tech defense in a prime spot to
bottle-up FSU deep in its own territory. Finally, even
Beamer admits that he felt like he had to take some extra
risks to give Tech a chance against the country’s number
one team.

In what turned out to be one of the strangest plays
in any game, Vick made a mental error, turning the wrong
way on the designed option. The slight hesitation gave Gib-
son the opportunity to get into the backfield early and
wrapped up Vick as he was recovering from the blunder.
He spun the quarterback 360 degrees as the two wrestled
for the ball in the backfield. The ball popped loose and fell
to the ground, and then it rocketed liked a hockey puck off
Gibson’s foot. It bounced through the scrum at the line of
scrimmage toward the end zone. Florida State’s All-
American nose guard Corey Simon was standing at the five
yard-line. He took three steps and then dove toward the
ball. Tech’s diminutive Andre Kendrick, who had come
from the opposite side of pile, was on the ground in the end
zone with his left hand on the ball first, but was no match
as the giant defender fell on him and took possession with
no difficulty for a touchback.

Instead of either a first down inside the three, or a
Florida State possession beginning inside its own five, the
Seminoles took over on the 20. Undoubtedly, this was not
one of the potential possibilities Beamer considered when
making the decision to go for the first down. The Semi-

9

noles had escaped with the best possible outcome. 9:35 re-
maining first quarter: Virginia Tech 0 – Florida State 0.

10

1992: Hard Luck

University of Virginia

Blacksburg, VA, November 21, 1992 - Maurice
DeShazo threw it up for grabs toward the end zone as time
was ticking away. Intended receiver John Rivers tipped the
ball. Ray Crittenden dove for the deflection, nestling the
ball in his arms before it landed on the ground. The Hokies
had connected on a 24-yard miracle touchdown against
archrival UVA late in the fourth quarter.

After a two-point conversion brought the Hokies to
within three points, at 41-38, handshakes, small talk, and
hugs followed instead of an onside kick. Crittenden had
scored as the clock reached triple zeroes.

It was too little too late – a harmless touchdown that
came after the result of the game had already been decided
just a few short minutes earlier. The Hokies had staged a
fierce comeback after being down 38-17 late in the third
quarter, but a field goal by UVA with 1:07 had all but
sealed another defeat for the hard-luck Hokie football team.
Final: Virginia 41 – Virginia Tech 38.

There were so many opportunities to win big games
in 1992, but all the breaks went against the Hokies. It had
been over two months since Tech had won a game. Sep-
tember wins against James Madison and Temple were the
only victories on the ledger. The tie was 13-13 against then

11

21st ranked North Carolina State: 2-8-1. Many suspected
this was the final nail in the coffin that would end the still
nascent Beamer era at Virginia Tech.

It had been just a little under seven years since Tech
hired Beamer to “right the ship.” His record over the six
seasons of his leadership was 24-40-2. The new opportuni-
ties that had seemed so bright with the recent entry into the
Big East Conference seemed dimmer, as full conference
play would begin in 1993. Surely, it was time for change.

Seniors knew this was the last time they would walk
on the turf of Lane Stadium. Underclassmen wondered who
their coach would be the next year. No one on that field, in
those stands, or watching on television, could have
dreamed that that it would be another 20 years before a
Virginia Tech player would exit Lane Stadium at the end of
a season without a guaranteed winning record.9

The story goes that athletic director Dave Braine
went into then president James McComas’ office the Mon-
day following the Virginia game and was asked if a change
needed to be made in the football program. Braine an-
swered that the only change he would make would be to
provide more money to hire better assistant coaches. The
AD won the day for his coach.

Some say Beamer kept his job because of the schol-
arship penalty he faced when he came into the job six years
earlier. Some say it was because he was such a pleasant
man that he was given one more chance. Yet others say that
the benefit of the doubt went to the Tech alum.

Then there was the fact that former coach and ath-
letic director Bill Dooley had worked to strengthen the
Tech schedule before he departed in disgrace, leaving the
team with a 10 scholarship per year penalty over a two-year
period. Despite the subpar record during Beamer’s tenure,

9 Tech finished the 2013 season with a 6-6 record with a win over
UVA. It was the first time since 1992 that a winning season was not guaranteed
at the end of the last home game.

12

the team played 20 of its 66 games against top 25 oppo-
nents. Thirteen of these were against top 10 teams, seven
against top five opponents, and Tech played the No. 1 team
twice. Two victories came from those 20 games – a 12-10
win over West Virginia in Morgantown in 1989, and a 38-
13 whipping of Virginia in 1990 at Lane Stadium. It tied
N.C. State who wound up the season ranked No. 17 in ’92.
Therefore, the Beamer record against unranked opponents
was 22-27-1. This was nothing to write home about, but
more respectable than the ledger appeared.

Perhaps most importantly, though, was the way
Tech lost four games and tied one during 1992 season.

East Carolina

Greenville, NC, September 12, 1992 - After a
scary 14-14 first half against I-AA James Madison, Tech
put the throttle down to easily win out over the Dukes in
the home opener at Lane Stadium. Tech took its 1-0 record
to Greenville to face the East Carolina Pirates, which fin-
ished the 1991 season ranked No. 9 in the country with an
11-1 record, including a Peach Bowl victory over North
Carolina State.

Late in the third quarter, Tyrone Drakeford took an
intercepted pass back 40 yards for a touchdown to give the
Hokies a 17-10 lead. East Carolina bounced back with a
touchdown to bring the score within an extra point, 17-16.
The Pirates failed to earn the tie as Bernard Basham
blocked the kick.

Just as East Carolina moved into Tech territory with
a chance to take the lead, Drakeford intercepted another
pass and returned it 26 yards to set up Tech at the ECU 25.
With a little over eight minutes left, the Hokies took an
eight-point lead with a Tony Kennedy touchdown. ECU
would need a touchdown and two-point conversion just to
tie the Hokies.

13

It only took two minutes for the Pirates to get the
touchdown they needed, but the Tech defense stood tight
on the two-point conversion attempt that left the home team
behind.

VT’s defense gave the team another chance to seal
the victory with a third interception, this one by Stacy Hen-
ley inside the Pirate 20-yard-line. However, the offense
failed to take full advantage and had to settle for a field
goal, giving Tech a 27-22 lead with 3:26 left to play, and
forcing ECU to score a touchdown rather than field goal to
win.

Three quick strikes for first down from East Caroli-
na’s quarterback Michael Anderson gave the Pirates the
ball at the Tech 29. With just 42 seconds left, he threw a
21-yard slant pattern through the Tech defense to Michael
Anderson. Final: East Carolina 30 – Virginia Tech 27.

The Hokies were 1-1, but 42 seconds from a perfect
2-0 record.

University of Louisville

Louisville, KY, October 10, 1992 - Tech faced off
against a team it knew well when they were both members
of the defunct, basketball only, Metro Conference.10 Lead-
ing 7-0 at halftime, the Hokies were still up 7-3 when
BeamerBall took on a new dimension. Kennedy notched
the first kickoff return for touchdown in the Beamer era on
a 91-yard return, giving Tech back the momentum and an
11-point lead.

The Cards closed the lead to eight on the next pos-
session with another field goal. Kennedy put Tech in posi-
tion to punish Louisville with a 24-yard run inside the Lou-

10 In scheduling during the 1980s for games being played in the ‘90s,
efforts had been made to create football rivalries between the Metro schools
that did play on the gridiron, Cincinnati, Tulane, Southern Miss, and Florida
State). The obvious hope was that a football conference would have evolved.
Florida State’s defection to the ACC stymied that goal.

14

isville 10. The Hokies could not get in the end zone, but
matched the Cardinals’ field goal as the third quarter ended.

On the first play from scrimmage in the fourth quar-
ter, Tech seemed to take total control as P. J. Preston came
up with an interception on the Louisville 31. Four rushes by
Kennedy moved the ball to the Cards’ 14. It was 17-6, in
the fourth quarter with an easy field goal attempt upcom-
ing. However, this would be the end of the Hokies’ domi-
nance. Ryan Williams’ kick sailed wide right with 12
minutes left in the game.

Louisville went to an offensive style that was rela-
tively unheard of in the early 1990s, putting its hurry-up,
no-huddle strategy in play well before the last minutes of
the game. “That hurt us a lot when they went to the no-
huddle,'' Preston said. “ The main problem was we hadn't
practiced against it all week.''

A 48-yard pass from Jeff Brohm to Ralph Dawkins
that he fumbled on the Tech two, but recovered himself,
was the big play of Louisville’s first touchdown drive.
Quarterback Brohm sneaked it in from the one, cutting the
Tech lead to 17-13 with 9:09 left in the game.

Just two series later, Louisville took the lead with
another Brohm touchdown run, this time on a six-yard
scramble. There was 3:07 left on the clock. The Hokies had
two more tries, but the game ended with three long DeS-
hazo incompletions. Final: Louisville 21 – Virginia Tech
17.

“It’s probably the toughest loss I’ve been associated
with,” said Beamer following the heartbreaker.

No. 21 North Carolina State

Blacksburg, VA – October 17, 1992 – At Lane
Stadium, in front of a hopeful homecoming crowd, the
Hokies took on No. 21 North Carolina State of the much-
revered ACC. N.C. State was sporting a 5-1 record, having
lost only to Georgia Tech. The teams were tied 10-10 when

15

VT drove deep into Wolfpack territory with time waning in
the game. Tech placekicker Williams appeared to seal the
huge upset when he drilled a 30-yard kick to give the
Hokies a 13-10 lead with only 1:21 left.

The Pack drove quickly into Tech territory and
called its final timeout with two seconds left on the clock.
Steve Videtich kicked a low line drive from the 37 yard
line that was tipped by Kirk Alexander at the line of
scrimmage. The kick wobbled toward the end zone, barely
crossed over, and through the goalposts as time ran out. Fi-
nal: Virginia Tech 13 – North Carolina State 13.

“I watched it in slow motion, just like in the mov-
ies,'' Tech linebacker Melendez Byrd said. ``It was like
someone just shot-putted the ball up there.''

It was 13-13, but it was in the era before ties were
broken in college football.11 The win eluded the Hokies
again. In this case, the tie was definitely a boost to the
Pack, and a blow to the Hokies, who desperately needed a
victory. N.C. State went on to finish the season 9-3-1 and
ranked No. 17 by AP after a Gator Bowl loss to Florida.
Tech was 2-3-1, 3:49 away from a 5-1 season.

Rutgers University

New Brunswick, NJ, October 31, 1992 - After
trailing at home by as much as 40-3 to No. 1 Miami,12 Tech
went to Rutgers on a Halloween Day that would haunt the
Hokies for the remainder of the season.

Tech held a 35-23 halftime lead as DeShazo threw a
48-yard pass to Bo Campbell in the final minute of the sec-
ond period. VT took a 19-point lead early in the third quar-
ter as DeShazo connected on a 49-yard bomb to Antonio

11 Overtime rules were put into force in 1996.
12 Miami would go on to win the Big East title, but lose its undefeat-
ed season with a 34-13 loss to Alabama in the Sugar Bowl.

16

Freeman. However, Rutgers pulled within five at 42-37
with just over nine minutes remaining in the game.

Tech responded with an 80-yard drive highlighted
by 44 yards on four carries by Kennedy, and a five-yard
score by Mark Poindexter. Poindexter had carried for a 31-
yard gain earlier in the six-play drive that took only 1:14.
The Hokies were up 49-37 with 7:50 left in the game.

Rutgers gained confidence as it pounded the Tech
“D” for an 11-play, 93-yard drive that took 3:31 of the re-
maining time. This brought the margin to five points at 49-
44.

The running game that had just one drive earlier
shredded the RU defense, stalled. Kennedy was stopped on
a third and one. Poindexter couldn’t get a yard on fourth
and one when Beamer gambled and tried to put the game
away.

However, things looked bright for Tech again when
two plays later Kirk Alexander picked off his second pass
of the game, and Tech had yet another attempt to ward off
the Halloween demons. There were less than three minutes
left and a first down would likely have ended the Hokie
losing streak. Instead, Kennedy rushed three times for sev-
en yards and Tech punted to the Rutgers 22 with 1:32 left.

Rutgers faced third and four, and Tech looked to
have an RU receiver stopped well behind the yard of
scrimmage. He escaped several tacklers to take the ball up
field for a first down with 48 seconds to go. Tech had an-
other chance to stop the assault when Bryan Fortay’s pass
was tipped by one Tech defender, and then into and out of
the hands of second Tech player, before it fell to the
ground.

With 14 seconds left, and 60 yards to pay dirt,
Fortay threw a Hail Mary into a crowd of three Tech defen-
sive backs, but Mario Henry rose above the fray to haul in
the 46-yard bomb. The clock stopped with seven seconds

17

left as the chain gang was given time to catch up with the
play. Fortay spiked the ball to stop the clock.

On the 14, Rutgers still had to get the ball into the
end zone – a field goal would not suffice.

Three Rutgers receivers went to the right. Fortay
tossed it over Chris Brantley’s shoulder deep in the corner
of the Rutgers end zone exactly as the clock struck 0:00.
Pandemonium ensued after Brantley dragged one foot in
bounds and Rutgers pulled off the implausible victory. It
was the receiver’s fourth touchdown catch of the day. Fi-
nal: Rutgers 50 – Virginia Tech 49.

``It was just an unbelievable finish,” said Beamer.
“I feel for our players. I think it's going to be tough times
for us, sure. It will probably be the toughest character test
any of us has ever faced.''

University of Southern Mississippi

Blacksburg, VA, November 12, 1992 - Against
Southern Miss, Tech held a 12-3 lead with under three
minutes to go in the third quarter, but it almost seemed in-
evitable that the Hokies would bow to its run of late-game
collapses. The lead was cut to 12-10 just before the fourth
quarter started, and the Golden Eagles took the ball at mid-
field with 6:00 to play. USM drove the ball to the Tech five
with 1:34 left and kicked a 22-yard field goal to put the nail
in the coffin for the Hokies – 13-12. Final Southern Miss
13 – Virginia Tech 12.

Five fourth quarter leads, 5:25 from five wins; in-
stead, four losses and a tie. The Hokies were snake-bitten.

18

Summary of Tech’s heartbreaking games in 1992

 East Carolina (5-6 season record), Tech led 24-16 with
8:42 in fourth quarter; lost lead with 42 seconds left in
fourth quarter; final ECU 30 – Virginia Tech 27

 Louisville (5-6 season record), Tech led 17-6 with five
seconds left in third quarter; lost lead at 3:42 in fourth
quarter; final Louisville 21 – Virginia Tech 17

 North Carolina State (9-3-1 season record, AP #17 final
ranking); Tech led 13-10 with 1:21 in fourth quarter,
lost lead 0:00 in fourth quarter; final NC. State 13 –
Virginia Tech 13

 Rutgers (7-4 season record), Tech led 42-30 with 4:36
left in the third quarter; lost lead with 0:00 in fourth
quarter; final Rutgers 50 – Virginia Tech 49

 Southern Miss (7-4 season record; Tech led 12-3 with
2:56 left in the third quarter; lost lead with 1:34 left in
the fourth quarter; final Southern Miss 13 – Virginia
Tech 12

19

1992 Season Results

1992 – Virginia Tech 2-8-1

Final AP Poll: Not Rated

James Madison W 49-20

@ East Carolina L 27-30

@ Temple W 26- 7

West Virginia L 7-16

@ Louisville L 17-21

#21 N.C. State T 13-13

#1 Miami L 23-43

@ Rutgers L 49-50

@ #10 Syracuse L 9-28

Southern Miss L 12-13

Virginia L 38-41

20

National Championship Game:
Hokies Hold Momentum

Having held Tech scoreless on its first possession
from near the goal line, FSU took the ball at its own 20.
The Seminoles couldn’t capitalize on third and short from
the 28 when Bowden went for the big play, calling for a
deep pass to All-America receiver Peter Warrick. Anthony
Midget leapt high to knock the ball away from the receiver
at the Tech 40.

The Hokies took the ball at their 31 and again chal-
lenged the Florida State defense. They picked up a first
down on two runs by Stith, and another on a 12-yard pick
up by Emmett Johnson. On a third and 17, Vick connected
with Davis on the sideline for a first down at the Seminole
29, into field goal range for Tech placekicker Shayne Gra-
ham. FSU threw an all-out blitz at Vick on third and long,
taking away the field goal opportunity from the Hokies.
Kibble’s punt landed inside the 10, but took an unlucky
bounce into the end zone.

With 11 minutes elapsed in the game, Virginia Tech
had gained 84 yards compared to eight yards for Florida
State. It, however, had no points. The momentum was go-
ing Tech’s way, but the Seminoles had escaped the on-
slaught unscathed. 3:54 remaining in first quarter: Vir-
ginia Tech 0 – Florida State 0.

21

22

1993: The Streak Begins

Independence Bowl – No. 21 Indiana University

Shreveport, LA, December 31, 1993 - Much of the
story of Tech’s prominence in the Beamer area passes
through the state of Louisiana. Shreveport lies just four
hours from its big sister, New Orleans. It is, however, radi-
cally different in terms of its appeal as a tourist destination
– read that as popular place to hold a bowl game. While a
perpetual Mardi Gras atmosphere, and the vaunted Sugar
Bowl takes place in the Big Easy, the third largest city in
the state is the annual host to the Independence Bowl that
was first played as the Bicentennial Bowl in honor of the
nation’s 200th birthday in 1976.

However, in an ironic precursor to the huge games
that would follow “down on the Bayou,” it was to the north
in Shreveport that Virginia Tech played perhaps the most
important 35 seconds of football in its history.

After 1992’s season of despair, the 1993 Virginia
Tech Hokies were a team of distinction, one of 38 teams
that earned a trip to a postseason game. (That is fewer than
half the number of teams that played in bowl games in
2014). An 8-3 record and a 22nd place national ranking
gained the Hokies a spot in what that year was called the
Poulan Weedeater Independence Bowl. The game was na-
tionally televised on ESPN on New Year’s Eve. What a
difference a year made.

23

With the half winding down, Big Ten opponent,
21st ranked Indiana was down 14-13 and driving with a
first and ten at the Tech 49 yard-line. Just minutes earlier
Tech had repelled a Hoosier assault with a diving intercep-
tion in the end zone by Tyrone Drakeford.

IU quarterback John Paci took the snap from shot-
gun, set and stepped up out of the grasp of blitzing De-
Wayne Knight, who just barely missed bringing the QB
down by the foot. Paci moved into the pocket and was bear-
hugged by George Del Ricco. Instead of taking the sack, he
tried to get the pass away, but as he cocked his arm, the ball
sailed backward into Indiana territory. J. C. Price tried to
pick up the ball, dribbling it to the artificial surface where
an Indiana player batted it further toward the Hoosier goal
line. The ball bounced off the turf perfectly to Lawrence
Lewis, who was at a full sprint. Twenty yards later pande-
monium ensued as Lewis raced into the end zone. The
Hokies led the Hoosiers 21-13 with 23 seconds to play in
the half.

Tech pooched the ensuing kickoff to the IU 20, and
as often happens, a slight bobble by the receiver threw off
the Tech kick coverage unit. Kenyetta Williams raced up
the middle 38 yards to the Tech 42. Only 12 seconds re-
mained and Indiana now had the opportunity to get the
score it needed to regain the momentum.

Paci looked deep, but dropped the ball off to his
secondary receiver Edward Baety on the right side. Baety
was reined in after going nine yards just before he reached
out toward the sideline. The line judge signaled that the
quarterback had not gotten out of bounds and wound his
hand, indicating that the clock should continue running
with two seconds remaining. However, Hoosier coach Bill
Mallory was able to reach a referee and call a timeout with
one second left. He wanted to go for the 51-yard field goal.
Beamer lividly expressed his rage, as he had already begun

24

leading his team off the field, thinking that the clock had
run out on the half.

Bill Manolopoulos, who was already two-for-two
on the day, hitting from 26 and 40 yards, eyed the goal
posts and flinched slightly as two Tech defenders jockeyed
for their position at the line of scrimmage. The kick took a
low trajectory, and Jeff Holland tipped the ball as it rose
over the defensive line. Antonio Banks caught the wobbler
over his shoulder at the Tech 20 as if it were a punt, and
took off for a desperate attempt to convert the failed kick.
He turned to the right and saw a wall of crimson jerseys,
and then reversed field toward the left sidelines. A block by
Torrian Gray at the IU 30 left Banks untouched on his way
to the 80-yard score. Bedlam resulted in the end zone for
the second time in 35 seconds.

Tech rode the sails of the momentum of the 28-13
halftime lead to a 25-point victory. Final: Virginia Tech
45 – Indiana 20.

The 8-3 regular season record that earned Tech the
bowl invitation was as impressive as the bowl game itself,
and marked the beginning of two decades of Tech’s spot on
the national football stage.

Pittsburgh’s Success as Independent13

After an easy season opener against Bowling Green,
Tech travelled to fellow-charter member of the Big East
Football Conference, Pittsburgh. Pitt was one of the prem-
ier teams from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s. The Panthers
featured future Pro Football Hall of Famers Tony Dorsett
and Dan Marino, and had won the 1976 National Champi-
onship.

13 Information about the success of prestigious programs is included
in this book as “sidebars.” They represent measuring sticks for Tech’s success
and provide insight into small segments of the college football story prior to
Beamer’s legacy years.

25

Pitt’s rise to national prominence as a non-
conference independent served as a model for what Tech
coaches and fans dreamed to achieve. From 1966-1972,
before the arrival of a coach named Johnny Majors, Pitt had
won 16 games in 7 years. In the ten years between 1974
and 1983 when Marino finished his career:
 Pitt averaged over nine wins per year in 10 years

during a period when an 11-game season (plus a
bowl game if justified) was the norm.
 It won almost 80% of its games, going 94-23-2.
 It went to nine straight bowl games, winning six,
including two Sugar Bowl victories and one Fiesta
win.
 It finished in the AP top 10 six times.

Pitt had come down to earth after Marino’s exit.
The team went to two bowl games between 1984 and 1992.
It had three winning seasons and finished 1992 with a 3-9
record. At the end of that year, Pitt fired Paul Hackett, who
had been at the helm since 1990, and Pittsburgh looked to
the past in an attempt to return to its glory years.

Majors was the head coach who had taken the Pan-
thers to the National Championship in 1976, buoyed by the
Heisman Trophy campaign of Tony Dorsett. Majors ironi-
cally took the route followed by Frank Beamer the year af-
ter that championship season and went back to his alma
mater, the University of Tennessee.

Majors restored the Volunteers to national promi-
nence, taking the team to 12 bowl games in 16 years in-
cluding a 35-7 win in the 1986 Sugar Bowl that kept the
second ranked Miami Hurricanes from winning the Nation-
al Championship. In the 1992 season when Tech struggled
with a 2-8-1 record, but kept its native son at the helm of
the struggling program, Tennessee forced its former player
to resign prior to a Hall of Fame Bowl victory despite the
team’s 8-3 regular season record. Johnny Majors needed a

26