Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Freddyburg Hokie View Post
    I have no problem with good-natured heckling (81-North, 64-East, that's pretty awesome right there). I guess I'm just an old fogey because I draw the line on "good-natured heckling" somewhere south of "You suck!".
    Actually, I heard the Electric Zoo (JMU's student fan base) use the 81-South, 64-East for games against Richmond, ODU, William & Mary, and VCU when I was going to JMU home basketball games as a young child. Personally, I do not believe there is a "right" or "wrong" answer because each person is entitled to have his/her view on the issue. The interesting thing about this discussion is there may be conflicting views between the groups (students vs. alumni) and maybe even conflicting views within a group (young alumni vs. middle aged alumni vs. elderly alumni). If there are 2 groups on opposite side of the fence, then how does the athletic department appease both groups without sacrificing the intent of the campaign? The beauty of college athletics (compared to the pros) is the energy the students bring to the crowds at the game. However, on the flipside it is the "adults" (aka alumni) that attend the games are the primary source to fund the programs (generally speaking). I may be wrong, but it appears that Weaver's decisions may have be more in favor of the alumni instead of trying to find a point where both sides were willing to compromise.

    Is it possible that a driving factor for Weaver's decision was a goal to distance VT's image from association with WVU? The perceived association could be coming from either within the ACC or the entire NCAA. I pose that question because Blacksburg is located in SW VA. Also, I don't believe it is that much of a stretch that people could view SW VA as a "hilbilly region." If people believe that VT is located in a "hillbilly region" and WVU is perceived to be a "hillbilly school" or "hillbilly state," then it isn't that difficult to see how people could view VT and WVU in the same light. If Weaver came to a similar conclusion of how people view VT, then I could see how he would go to the other extreme to ensure that wasn't the case going forward. Heck an alumni could have made a statement to him that could have triggered the connection. For example, an alumni could have made the following statement:

    The VT fans at (pick any home opponent) game are starting to behave more like WVU fans with the "Stick It In" Cheer, the vulger things yelled during the game, and the amount of alcohol the people are sneaking into the stadium. VT administration should be ashamed of itself for allowing things to get this bad because the school should be held to a higher standard than at WVU. As a VT alum, I am ashamed when our fans cheering "stick it in" because there is no place for that in college football. I am even more ashamed when the games are televised on TV (especially national TV) because that portrays VT, its students, and its fan base as not maintaining the high standards that is assocated with being a member of a superior conference (the ACC).

    I realize it is a bit over the top, but you get the idea. It is also possible that no one made any of those suggestions and he just came to that conclusion on his own.

  2. #12
    Senior Member NCHokie83's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 02, 2012
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,857
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    Actually, I heard the Electric Zoo (JMU's student fan base) use the 81-South, 64-East for games against Richmond, ODU, William & Mary, and VCU when I was going to JMU home basketball games as a young child. Personally, I do not believe there is a "right" or "wrong" answer because each person is entitled to have his/her view on the issue. The interesting thing about this discussion is there may be conflicting views between the groups (students vs. alumni) and maybe even conflicting views within a group (young alumni vs. middle aged alumni vs. elderly alumni). If there are 2 groups on opposite side of the fence, then how does the athletic department appease both groups without sacrificing the intent of the campaign? The beauty of college athletics (compared to the pros) is the energy the students bring to the crowds at the game. However, on the flipside it is the "adults" (aka alumni) that attend the games are the primary source to fund the programs (generally speaking). I may be wrong, but it appears that Weaver's decisions may have be more in favor of the alumni instead of trying to find a point where both sides were willing to compromise.

    Is it possible that a driving factor for Weaver's decision was a goal to distance VT's image from association with WVU? The perceived association could be coming from either within the ACC or the entire NCAA. I pose that question because Blacksburg is located in SW VA. Also, I don't believe it is that much of a stretch that people could view SW VA as a "hilbilly region." If people believe that VT is located in a "hillbilly region" and WVU is perceived to be a "hillbilly school" or "hillbilly state," then it isn't that difficult to see how people could view VT and WVU in the same light. If Weaver came to a similar conclusion of how people view VT, then I could see how he would go to the other extreme to ensure that wasn't the case going forward. Heck an alumni could have made a statement to him that could have triggered the connection. For example, an alumni could have made the following statement:

    The VT fans at (pick any home opponent) game are starting to behave more like WVU fans with the "Stick It In" Cheer, the vulger things yelled during the game, and the amount of alcohol the people are sneaking into the stadium. VT administration should be ashamed of itself for allowing things to get this bad because the school should be held to a higher standard than at WVU. As a VT alum, I am ashamed when our fans cheering "stick it in" because there is no place for that in college football. I am even more ashamed when the games are televised on TV (especially national TV) because that portrays VT, its students, and its fan base as not maintaining the high standards that is assocated with being a member of a superior conference (the ACC).

    I realize it is a bit over the top, but you get the idea. It is also possible that no one made any of those suggestions and he just came to that conclusion on his own.
    I'm guessing a couple statements were made by some high dollar alumni at a function, and made sweeping changes to Hokies Respect based on it. His job in recent years seemed to be catering more and more towards the high dollar donors, while not really caring about anyone else. Thats nice if your only goal is to purely get the high dollar money, but if you're trying to grow and strengthen an alumni base to grow into a fundraising giant (that we really should be with our growing size) then its a pretty poor way to go about your business. Under Weaver, we were an Athletic Department built to appease the elite few. I hope whoever the new AD is comes in with a goal of trying to cater towards EVERYONE and not just the squeaky wheels.
    "I love it when you guys try to write off a Frank Beamer team -- no one is going to win this conference without Virginia Tech having some sort of say in it." - David Cutcliffe

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    The VT fans at (pick any home opponent) game are starting to behave more like WVU fans with the "Stick It In" Cheer, the vulger things yelled during the game, and the amount of alcohol the people are sneaking into the stadium. VT administration should be ashamed of itself for allowing things to get this bad because the school should be held to a higher standard than at WVU. As a VT alum, I am ashamed when our fans cheering "stick it in" because there is no place for that [s]in college football[/s] on my lawn. I am even more ashamed when the games are televised on TV (especially national TV) because that portrays VT, its students, and its fan base as not maintaining the high standards that is assocated with being a member of a superior conference (the ACC)...
    Fixed the statement for you.

    Edit: Oh, come on, @Will! Throw us loyal vBers a bone, and give us [s]strikethrough[/s]!
    No trees were harmed in the making of this post. However, billions of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by NCHokie83 View Post
    Under Weaver, we were an Athletic Department built to appease the elite few.
    Just like every other successful major athletic department (or any financial institution, for that matter).

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Freddyburg Hokie View Post
    Fixed the statement for you.

    Edit: Oh, come on, @Will! Throw us loyal vBers a bone, and give us [s]strikethrough[/s]!
    I am not following the logic behind the "on my lawn" addition. Could you please explain?

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    I am not following the logic behind the "on my lawn" addition. Could you please explain?
    He's comparing you to a crusty old man yelling at the neighborhood kids "Get off my lawn!!!"

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova Hokie 95 View Post
    He's comparing you to a crusty old man yelling at the neighborhood kids "Get off my lawn!!!"
    Ahhh.....well that would be an incorrect comparison since the views in my example do not reflect the views of the writer. The example was written as if I had taken a snippet from an email or letter (written by an alum who has that view) to Weaver. Heck the alum could have said it in a conversation. Hence my disclaimer that the example was over the top since it is possible that 1 alum did not express all those opinions at 1 time. The alum could have expressed those views at different times or it could have been multiple alumni expressing those opinions at 1 time/various times that led Weaver to draw the conclusion he did and what corrective actions needed to be taken to address the "problem."

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by VTHokie2000 View Post
    Ahhh.....well that would be an incorrect comparison since the views in my example do not reflect the views of the writer. The example was written as if I had taken a snippet from an email or letter (written by an alum who has that view) to Weaver. Heck the alum could have said it in a conversation. Hence my disclaimer that the example was over the top since it is possible that 1 alum did not express all those opinions at 1 time. The alum could have expressed those views at different times or it could have been multiple alumni expressing those opinions at 1 time/various times that led Weaver to draw the conclusion he did and what corrective actions needed to be taken to address the "problem."
    Sorry, I misread -- he was comparing the hypothetical letter-writer to the crusty old man.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Nova Hokie 95 View Post
    Sorry, I misread -- he was comparing the hypothetical letter-writer to the crusty old man.
    Not a problem. Your explanation does make sense and I guess it is possible that some of the more wealthy donors could see Worsham Field as "their lawn" even though their last name is not Worsham.

  10. #20
    Will Stewart's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 18, 1999
    Location
    Radford, VA
    Posts
    42,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Freddyburg Hokie View Post
    Fixed the statement for you.

    Edit: Oh, come on, @Will! Throw us loyal vBers a bone, and give us [s]strikethrough[/s]!
    I can control that?
    Always use "Reply With Quote", so everyone knows to whom you're responding.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •