Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 610111213141516
Results 151 to 155 of 155
  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by Groff View Post
    What do you mean when you say "regular tournament team?" I hear that phrase thrown around all the time by people in the pro-seth camp in an effort to create a straw man about their opposition.

    Does anyone really think that we should be making the tournament every year? To me that's what a "regular tournament team" means.

    I think making the Tournament 40-50% of the time should be the goal. Do you think that's a fair goal? Do you think that's possible?
    I know its a very long thread but if you read the entire thing, at least one person has mentioned "regular tournament team". I don't care to go find it, personally, but I know it is there because I made several responses to it yesterday. As for your question... its definitely a fair goal to make the tournament 40-50% of the time. Do I expect it to happen, or want to fire the coach if it doesn't? Not necessarily.

    I am still 100% convinced we deserved to be in the tournament the past 2 seasons... which would put Seth at 3/9 tournaments made, 33%. Given what he started with (a completely dead program)... I would personally give him a break, and start his "realistic shot to make the tournament" with the 06-07 season... the first season we made it in a loooong time. It takes time to build a program up from nothing, so I think it is fair to give him those first few years without counting them against him.

    So if we do that, there have been 6 seasons, since he built the program up, where we could "realistically make the tournament". We made it 1 time, and should've made it a minimum of 2 more. That is 3/6, 50%, which honestly is about the best VT will ever see imo. Additionally, if Seth is allowed to stay, I see no reason why he wouldn't continue that 50% mark. We are in the midst of the winningest period in VT bball history, and have some of if not THE most talent / incoming talent this program has ever seen.

  2. #152

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by nc_hokie87 View Post
    Do I expect it to happen, or want to fire the coach if it doesn't? Not necessarily.
    Well, then the whole discussion is pointless, then isn't it?

    If actually making the tournament doesn't matter because you will always find an excuse why we didn't and/or count not making the tournament as making the tournament because you feel we "should" have, then anything short of an absolute tanking of the program would merit continued tenure in your eyes.

    Seriously, it's looking like anything other than 3 or 4 sub-.500 seasons and you think the guy should stay. Call me crazy, but I would like to prevent a complete reversion to the Stokes era before it happens rather than try to claw our way out of that hole again.

    Bottom Line: at some point actually making the actual tournament and things that actually are happening in reality have to actually matter. If you can construct hypothetical situations and alternate realities in your mind to justify why we should keep a guy for decades, then you will always find a way to justify said decision.
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  3. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by Groff View Post
    Well, then the whole discussion is pointless, then isn't it?

    If actually making the tournament doesn't matter because you will always find an excuse why we didn't and/or count not making the tournament as making the tournament because you feel we "should" have, then anything short of an absolute tanking of the program would merit continued tenure in your eyes.

    Seriously, it's looking like anything other than 3 or 4 sub-.500 seasons and you think the guy should stay. Call me crazy, but I would like to prevent a complete reversion to the Stokes era before it happens rather than try to claw our way out of that hole again.

    Bottom Line: at some point actually making the actual tournament and things that actually are happening in reality have to actually matter. If you can construct hypothetical situations and alternate realities in your mind to justify why we should keep a guy for decades, then you will always find a way to justify said decision.

    My problem is with the ncaa selection committee and their total lack of logic or reasoning... not our coach.

    And if you really think we are in the process of "reverting to the Stokes era", I just don't know what to tell you... we are in the midst of the winningest period in VT bball history, and have a group of freshmen that makes up the best recruiting class in VT bball history, too.

    We are currently having ONE bad season (in which we lost all our scoring rebounding and assists from the year before) .... lets not exaggerate ourselves completely out of reality in saying were beginning to revert back to cellar dweller status

  4. #154

    Join Date
    July 11, 2001
    Posts
    18,411
    Quote Originally Posted by nc_hokie87 View Post
    And if you really think we are in the process of "reverting to the Stokes era", I just don't know what to tell you...
    Well, it's a good thing that I didn't say or even imply that, then.

    Goodness, take a deep breath and actually read what is being written before you go all crazy writing an angry, spittle-flecked response. You literally do this thing where you like scan a post, find one thing to get enraged about and then craft a relatively lengthy response to something that was never actually said.

    Re-Read the post. I think I made it pretty clear what I was saying. It is my impression that you don't actually factor actually making the tournament into your evaluation of a coach. Which is fine, if that's how you want to view things, that's totally cool. My point was that when you make your evaluation criteria so specious so as to include hypothetical situations and perpetual excuses, then you are creating an evaluation criteria that is essentially meaningless.

    When you have an evaluation criteria that is that meaningless, anything but the absolute worst possible outcome (i.e. a reversion to the Stokes era) will merit a "passing" grade. I'm suggesting that a more robust, concrete set of evaluation criteria needs to be in place in order to prevent that complete reversion from ever happening, something I don't think your set of criteria would accomplish.
    There's a difference between a "fact" and an "opinion that you agree with."

  5. #155

    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Posts
    6,346
    I'll ask for the 100th time on this board: Why do feel like VT should be a regular NCAA tournament participant?

    Considering that about the top third of teams in the ACC gets into the tournament and VT is at or near the bottom of the ACC in attractiveness to recruits (if you don't believe that, you are in denial), how is VT's coach going to overcome that and make VT a regular tournament participant? And by the way, with PITT and Syracuse entering the ACC, VT is going to be even farther from the top third of the conference.

    Maybe we should have a definition of "regular participant".
    50% - not a chance;
    40% - highly unlikely;
    30% - not likely;
    20% - should be doable, but there will some no-show streak years in there

    This of course is based on VT having a coach who is ethical and doesn't eventually get VT on probation.

    Also, if by chance VT does hire a coach who can achieve regular tournament appearances that make VT's fanbase happy, he will be in high demand and will leave VT for greener ($$$) pastures, possibly soon before the NCAA starts investigating the program.

Posting Permissions

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