"stay in state to play?" In some cases that sales pitch can't compete with the opportunity to play for a blue blood, compete for a national title, play in another conference (i.e. Big Ten or SEC), play in a "better" location, or pursue a certain degree.

The reason I mention the last one is because approximately 10 years ago VT was heavily pursuing a LB recruit from Salem, VA (last name was London or Lunden...I forget the exact spelling). His 2 finalists were VT and UCLA. He picked UCLA and he may have even got to play against VT in the Sun Bowl as a SR or r-SR. The public reason he gave for picking UCLA over VT is that he wanted to get into the film industry after college and UCLA gave him the best opportunity to achieve that goal.

My point is that sometimes the "stay in state to play" sales pitch just can't compete with other factors no matter how much the coaches and/or the fans would like the reality to be different. If a VA recruit happens to pick Alabama, Florida, Notre Dame, Penn State, UCLA, Tennessee, or even Air Force over VT, then it is possible there is nothing the VT coaches could have done differently to change the outcome.

Then again, I try to focus less on the recruits that got away and focus more on the recruits that enroll at VT because it is possible some of those recruits end up being "better" than the recruits that got away. Now that isn't to say I wouldn't like to see recruiting improve because I do want see it improve. I just don't put too much focus on the recruiting being from VA because I want VT to have the "best" players from wherever. if I did have a say on where VT puts its focus, then I would pick the "Big Three" (CA, FL, and TX) and the Gulf Coast Region because they are probably the most fertile states within the US, HS football is played at a whole different level compared to the rest of the country, and the recruits seem to be more DI-FBS ready than the rest of the country.