Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 12345678913 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 200
  1. #21

    Join Date
    January 14, 2000
    Location
    Rockville VA
    Posts
    25,081
    All you have to do is look at the "reasons" we get left out. It changes every year, and last year Gene Smith, moron in chief, couldn't even give the team a valid reason.
    Last edited by Chris Coleman; Tue Feb 14 2012 at 10:49 AM.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    October 09, 1999
    Posts
    39,463
    Looks like the CSG supporters outnumber the Negative Nancys a brazillion to one (thank God).
    I want to die in my sleep like my grandfather, not like the screaming passengers in his car.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by WestEndHokie39 View Post
    Complete and utter garbage...all you have to do is look at the "reasons" we get left out. It changes every year, and last year Gene Smith, moron in chief, couldn't even give the team a valid reason.
    Like I said, when you play yourself onto the bubble every year, you are subjecting yourself to a yearly-changing criteria. The teams on the bubble are different every year (well except for us), they are all roughly the same, and the differentiators are going to be different every time.

    If only there were *some way* to avoid that arbitrary aspect of the process!
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  4. #24

    Join Date
    October 05, 2003
    Posts
    16,985
    we smacked GT and beat FSU at the ACC tournament. It was my opinion (biased as it may have been) that we did what we needed in beating FSU to get into the dance. Unfortunately, it wasn't the opinion of the committee; instead they selected 2 teams that clearly had less in their body of work to qualify. That, to me, seamed clear. To them, it did not hense the arbitrary nature of the process.

    I agree w/you that fait is in our own hands - to some extent. We probably aren't disagreeing as much as it may seem.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    October 05, 2003
    Posts
    16,985
    last year was inexplicable based on the teams that did get in. It truly was...

  6. #26
    bfloyd89's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 15, 2010
    Posts
    606
    Quote Originally Posted by reece4vt View Post
    we smacked GT and beat FSU at the ACC tournament. It was my opinion (biased as it may have been) that we did what we needed in beating FSU to get into the dance. Unfortunately, it wasn't the opinion of the committee; instead they selected 2 teams that clearly had less in their body of work to qualify. That, to me, seamed clear. To them, it did not hense the arbitrary nature of the process.

    I agree w/you that fait is in our own hands - to some extent. We probably aren't disagreeing as much as it may seem.
    Yes, and that FSU win put us in the tournament according to every guru in the country. Unfortunately there is a slight anti-VT bias in the selection committee, which makes it lean more towards the whole "arbitrary" argument.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by reece4vt View Post
    we smacked GT and beat FSU at the ACC tournament. It was my opinion (biased as it may have been) that we did what we needed in beating FSU to get into the dance. Unfortunately, it wasn't the opinion of the committee; instead they selected 2 teams that clearly had less in their body of work to qualify. That, to me, seamed clear. To them, it did not hense the arbitrary nature of the process.
    Someone posted a really good article on here last year that was all about the selection process and how the committee makes their decisions. It was very enlightening, I'll try and find it. But one of the takeaways I got from it was that unless you make a really deep run in your conference tournament (like, the finals), the committee doesn't really factor tournament performance into the selection. Tournament wins are certainly not given then weight of regular season wins. So, like if you go 8-8 in the conference, and then win two tournament games, that's not 10 conference wins. Does that make sense?

    It's not to say that those tournament wins mean nothing, but basically they'll be considered as part of your resume to be compared to other bubble teams (for instance, that FSU win was a quality win in our favor).

    I disagree about your statement that there were two teams that clearly had less in their body of work to qualify, because I think you are counting VCU in there. We did a direct resume to resume comparison of the two teams and *at best* they were equal. I'll give you UAB.

    I agree w/you that fait is in our own hands - to some extent. We probably aren't disagreeing as much as it may seem.
    I think you're right about us not disagreeing as much as we think. I think we as a fan base have a warped view of the arbitrarity (If that's not a word, it should be) as the process because we constantly find ourselves mired in the arbitrary part of the process.
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  8. #28

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by bfloyd89 View Post
    Yes, and that FSU win put us in the tournament according to every guru in the country. Unfortunately there is a slight anti-VT bias in the selection committee, which makes it lean more towards the whole "arbitrary" argument.
    We were already on the bubble because we lost vs. BC and @CU in the regular season at that point.

    Beat BC at home on senior night, and we're in - not even on the bubble.

    All that FSU win did was pad our bubble resume.
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  9. #29
    Chris Coleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 18, 2001
    Location
    Blacksburg, VA
    Posts
    36,685
    Quote Originally Posted by YBYSAIAHokie View Post
    Looks like the CSG supporters outnumber the Negative Nancys a brazillion to one (thank God).
    You know, you aren't helping the culture of the board by labeling people like that. The "Negative Nancys"? Come on.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    September 19, 2002
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by Groff View Post
    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.

    I too find the offensive execution frustrating. It takes them too long to get into sets, and they don't execute cuts and screens as sharply as I think they should. Still, I think the bigger problem is the lack of a strong post scoring threat - which allows the defense to guard the three-point line and switch on screens. But you have a good point.

    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.
    I don't agree with you here. I just don't think Thorns and Adkins have the quickness to be significant ACC players. Maybe Marquie Cooke or Witherspoon or some of the other earlier transfers could have been stars, but IMHO this is not true of the more recent ones. Again, one man's opinion - thanks for sharing yours.

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
  •