Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 1234567812 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 200
  1. #11
    Believe me Myth #11 is most definitely a myth. Consider this myth busted. VT fans aren't special and certainly not better than the average fanbase Re behavior. They have demonstrated that they are by and large just like every other school; some bad some good some great and some despicable. This realization has taken some of the shine off my alma mater for sure. I still love and root for VT; but I am not nearly as passionate as I used to be.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    1,492
    THANK YOU...How many noticed how SG attacked the vaunted "pack line D"

    Any B Ball players or coaches noticed what he did...I thought it was pretty good....

    Now, the execution by a bunch of freshmen left a little to be desired but from my seat at JPJ (Behind the basket) it was obvious he knew how to exploit the weakness in that D...

    Also, starting the O deep into the clock shortened the game and this was by design.
    (Notice how SG didn't get upset too much when we had shot clock violations?)

    This guy need some credit...

    Any BBall guy like to weigh in ???

  3. #13

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Squatro View Post
    2. Seth is not an X’s and O’s coach. Really? He’s been coaching 30 years – do you think he doesn’t know how to design an offense or draw up plays? Isn’t it more likely that the players just aren’t executing very well – especially the younger, less experienced ones? Now I will admit that he has to be responsible for that, too. But just because they aren’t doing it doesn’t mean he isn’t teaching it. Note that the screening was much better last game, for example.
    A lack of offense under Seth Greenberg coached teams isn't anything new. I'm sorry, you just can't use the "youth" excuse with this one. Anyone interested in doing an honest evaluation of the situation acknowledges that the offensive side of the ball is just not an area where SG performs very well.

    5. The players who transfer would have been stars if they had stayed. Well, this is a matter of opinion, but Hank Thorns, Manny Adkins, etc, were not ACC starter-caliber athletes. Pretty good role players, yes, but not difference makers. May they wonderful careers at their new homes.
    You could have said the same thing about Green before this year, could you have not?

    I think it's logically inconsistent to evaluate transferred players based on what they did here and assume that they would never be "ACC-Caliber" while simultaneously lecturing everyone about the importance of patience and player improvement over time.
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  4. #14

    Join Date
    October 05, 2003
    Posts
    16,985
    Incredible Post - Seth is not perfect, but Seth is fully engaged in making our program as best it can be. Our fans should appreciate that. I think Seth's #1 weakness as a coach is his ability to get his teams to run fluid offensive sets. To say he knows nothing about coaching offense is assenine. He draws up plays out of a time out about as well as anyone. That play he drew up for ADV against FSU a few yrs back was a thing of beauty. My favorite (2) complaints are the "Seth can't coach Free Throws" and "Seth teams can't close out games." I think we closed out BC quite well. I think we closed out Duke last year quite well (including Green tanking 2 FT's). We are at a talent disadvantage against most ACC teams, yet we have 1 of the top 5 records in conference when we join.

    The guy isn't perfect, and it's to be seen whether he's going to get us to the next level. But I think we all agree that had some arbitrary process (NCAA tournament selection) broken our way 2 of the past 4 years, which it very well could (last year SHOULD) have, perception would be much different...

  5. #15

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by reece4vt View Post
    The guy isn't perfect, and it's to be seen whether he's going to get us to the next level. But I think we all agree that had some arbitrary process (NCAA tournament selection) broken our way 2 of the past 4 years, which it very well could (last year SHOULD) have, perception would be much different...
    The NCAA tournament selection process isn't "arbitrary" - Talk about Message board Myths.

    Things only get arbitrary when you play yourself onto the bubble. When you put yourself at the whims of the selection committee to determine the difference between you and 7 other roughly equal teams it's going to come down to something "arbitrary." You avoid that by avoiding the bubble in the first place. You don't follow up a win @ Duke by being blown out at home on Senior Night. You beat Miami in the tournament. Pretty much every time we got "jobbed" by the selection committee, there was one or more very legitimate things we could have done to get in that had nothing to do with "luck," and we have consistently failed to do them.

    This is a legitimate complaint against Coach Greenberg, if we're truly interested in separating "myths" from "facts."
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  6. #16

    Join Date
    October 05, 2003
    Posts
    16,985
    so a process where a group of men decide who does and does not deserve to make a tournament without any SET IN STONE criteria established is not arbitrary? That's the definition of arbitrary (Defined as: subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion

  7. #17

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by reece4vt View Post
    so a process where a group of men decide who does and does not deserve to make a tournament without any SET IN STONE criteria established is not arbitrary? That's the definition of arbitrary (Defined as: subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion
    Yes, the process isn't "arbitrary" because anyone familiar with the process can accurately tell you ~95% of the teams who will be participating on a yearly basis. That's not arbitrary. As I said in my post, the only aspect that's "arbitrary" is when you're on the bubble. You guys have a flawed concept of what the selection process is because we always find ourselves on the bubble. The secret to removing the arbitrary aspect of the selection process is - don't put yourself on the bubble.

    Either we are concerned with separating facts from myths or we're not. If we are, then that's a big myth that needs to be busted. If you can't accept the reality of the selection process, then you're not actually interested in separating facts from myths, you're just interested in posting one side of 'the debate' and masquerading it as an even-handed and rational analysis.
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  8. #18

    Join Date
    October 05, 2003
    Posts
    16,985
    the problem is we are not and have not been a program that is above the "bubble." Our current progressive step is to get INTO the tournament on a regular basis (say 2 out of 4 years). Once we can do that, then let's start shooting for consistant 7-5 seeds. But you can't walk w/out crawling. We had the 1 big year in '06/'07. But the 1st step is getting into the dance, and that is what we are judging our programs success/failures on.

    Say the committee selected us last year as a 9 seed. That season would have 100% been perceived as a success (especially considering the injuries). Instead, they left us out, and the perception is we failed last year...We ignore the records, the wins, the conference records, and we lay the success/failure of our program on a process instead of the facts...That's my problem w/it all.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by reece4vt View Post
    the problem is we are not and have not been a program that is above the "bubble." Our current progressive step is to get INTO the tournament on a regular basis (say 2 out of 4 years). Once we can do that, then let's start shooting for consistant 7-5 seeds. But you can't walk w/out crawling. We had the 1 big year in '06/'07. But the 1st step is getting into the dance, and that is what we are judging our programs success/failures on.
    Being on the bubble isn't about your "program" it's about your season. It's about your wins and losses. 06-07 we were in and weren't even close to the bubble. funny how the selection process wasn't "arbitrary" that year, eh?

    Say the committee selected us last year as a 9 seed. That season would have 100% been perceived as a success (especially considering the injuries). Instead, they left us out, and the perception is we failed last year...We ignore the records, the wins, the conference records, and we lay the success/failure of our program on a process instead of the facts...That's my problem w/it all.
    But the committee didn't select us last year as a 9 seed. Why didn't they do that? Because we failed to seize every opportunity post-@Duke that would have put us off the bubble and put us in the tournament. This is a very real fact, I'm sorry that you absolutely refuse to acknowledge it, but it is a fact, and it's an appropriate thing to evaluate a coach's performance on. Please stop pretending that people who disagree with you aren't being factual. They are, you just don't like the facts that they are using.

    Seriously, you just presented a hypothetical (i.e. not real, didn't actually happen) situation and then used that to make an argument that people who disagree with you aren't being factual. I can't even begin to grasp the double-think required to do that.
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  10. #20
    Senior Member Culpeper Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Location
    Glen Allen, VA (far western Henrico County)
    Posts
    19,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Squatro View Post
    There’s a lot of stuff I read on this board that leave me shaking my head. I know that they are matters of opinion, but I think of them as Message Board Myths…
    GREAT post. I think you should start a Hokie-Snopes.com web site!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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