With regards to Brent's hire at Texas A&M:

"It might take him a minute to get going like it did at Virginia Tech, but Buzz winning at Texas A&M is the surest thing. Do you know how much easier it is to get players and win at Texas A&M than it is to win and get players at Virginia Tech?"

"Buzz [was the best hire] because of the job he's done at two places. You could argue Marquette's a basketball school, but they've got expectations from the '70s -- and that's not what it is anymore. And Virginia Tech is a REALLY hard place to win. At A&M, it's similar situation as Virginia Tech, but he's going to have a big-time budget and big-time resources. ... He's going to have some of the best resources in the SEC."

Why is it easier to get players and win at Texas A&M than VT? Because they have more money? I'm not understanding the logic here.

And in the 2nd quote why is "Virginia Tech a REALLY hard place to win"? Based on history? Location? Conference? Resources?

I just don't get where these coaches are coming from with these quotes.