Gobbler Guru

Women's hoops at VT has more funds relative to some of their conference peers than the men's team does. Women's hoops at VT has a better recruiter as HC than the men's team does. It's not either/or. Money has always been part of recruiting, whether that shows up in facilities or direct payments to players. But the vision, track record, charisma and salesmanship of the recruiter matters too.

Hopefully Sorsby can control his addiction better than Schlichter could.

1. Whatever Rocovich did or didn't do, he is entirely correct that the Governor is legally required to submit a PUBLIC document indicating the specific reasons for his removal. The (so far) failure to do so just pours more gas on the conspiracy theories and culture wars. 2. The rhetoric from VA politicians isn't helping either. It just illustrates how stupidly polarized we are. When "our" side makes BOV changes at an institution, it's "reform". When "their" side does it, it's "politicization". Can we ever move past this kind of tribal thinking?

And when I can get past those and actually get to TSL, CSS rarely loads.

is, IMHO, the central point in the whole "what to do about NIL" debate. As college sports have become more professionalized, one of the glaring differences between the franchise-based pro leagues and the college-based pro leagues is the approach to dividing up the revenue pie. Pro players now receive infinitely more of that pie, proportionately, than they did a generation ago. And player salaries for the top pros dwarf coaching salaries. A pro team's spend on roster talent is way higher than its spend on coaching and front office talent. And as pro salaries increase, ticket prices usually follow, but that's about the extent of fan gouging that occurs. Salaries and caps go up because revenue continues to go up. College-based pro sports seems to follow entirely different logic. The structure of the past several decades, where schools, coaches, athletic directors, and assorted hangers-on reap enormous financial rewards, and players received no direct compensation, has now been upended. But the response has not been "now we have to divide the pie differently and share". Nor has it been "how can we grow the pie even faster". It's been "we want to continue to keep most of the money for ourselves, and it's up the fans to help pay the players". Player compensation is not going away. Schools, admins, and coaches are going to have to realize that (a) their own compensation will inevitably have to decline in relative terms and (b) asking fans to be a primary source of funding player salaries is not a sustainable long-term solution.

I haven't seen much, if any, chatter about a recruiting class this year, other than transfer mentions. I know that the portal has become the primary means of roster building, but it's still hard to imagine a team with zero freshmen on it. That certainly hasn't ever happened under MY, and may have never happened in VT history. Given that 2 of the 3 guys who are viewed as our returning core players came from the HS ranks, I don't think we should give up on that talent pipeline. Anyone know of possible HS targets that might still be out there? Or has the staff made a conscious decision not to add any true freshmen to next year's team?

both relatively good at play action, neither is a classic, dropback, pocket QB. Both came out of college with accuracy issues. Willis undoubtedly has the stronger arm, but Drones doesn't have a weak arm by any means. I would argue that Willis was used much more effectively at the college level in terms of scheme and playcalling. All I'm saying is that Willis is a way more refined QB now than he was when he first got to GB (as evidenced by the big payday he just received). Drones in 2 years will not be where Willis is now, but he is a similar enough player that I believe GB looked at him and thought, we struck gold with one mobile backup QB, why not try it again? There's a reason they brought him in for a pre-draft visit. Drones just has to beat out Kyle McCord to be the 3rd string/PS QB. If he shows any promise at all, he just might.

Apparently, the Packers have some interest in him as a possible QB3/practice squad guy, because they brought him in for a pre-draft visit. If anyone can turn Drones into a NFL QB, you would think it would be LaFleur. He completely resurrected Malik Willis' career, and there are a few skillset similarities between Willis and Drones. Go Pack Go!

And how appropriate that the final act in that play is for Babcock himself to continue collecting paychecks after multiple years of subpar performance. He certainly enriched some undeserving coaches that way during his tenure. How anyone could have looked at the state of VT athletics in 2021 and decided to guarantee 8 more years of Babcock's salary is almost incomprehensible. Longer term contracts *might* make sense on the academic side of the university, where stability is arguably more important. In a dynamic industry like college athletics, anything more than a 4 year deal represents a gigantic and unnecessary gamble that performance will maintain an upward trend over a long timeframe. I hope that the next VT president and next VT AD will exercise better judgment when hiring coaches and administrators for jobs where outcomes are known to change dramatically (both for the positive and negative) over as little as 1-2 years.

UK's former AD was just forced to give up his own lucrative "retirement" gig after a firestorm of public criticism, including from that state's governor. Personally, I don't understand why VT would want to continue paying Babcock after hiring his replacement.

Lame duck coach, working for a lame duck AD, with a basketball donor base and fanbase feeling alienated by the athletic dept, and a very limited pool of NIL $$$... not sure what type of player that's going to attract. I'm actually surprised that MY didn't retire after this season. While it was probably a frustrating one for him, I suspect next year will be even more so.

But VT should not point to a school with an infinitely richer hoops tradition, and one that plays in the wealthiest conference, as the blueprint for success. When a "system coach" has Matt Painter's budget, Matt Painter's NCAA tournament resume, Purdue's conference membership, and Purdue's decades-long history of basketball success, then yes, maybe they could convince guys to stick around for 3-4 years. What do you think are the odds of that happening at VT? For most schools not in the BiG or SEC, the blueprint is now running a system that is easy to pick up and fun to play in (i.e. fast pace, lots of pressing, transition oriented). Because the way you are going to attract players is NOT by either having the deepest pockets or by telling them that they will need to learn for 1-2 years before they will see meaningful playing time, or experience meaningful success. That world is gone forever at the D1 level.

After being a VT hoops fan since the late 1970's, I am at the point where I can feel myself just not caring any more. Not just because of the letdown after what was supposed to be a promising season. Not just because we have a caretaker, apathetic athletic director with one foot out the door. Not just because we have a coach who has clearly hit his ceiling here and also has one foot out the door (toward retirement). It's because after decades of hoping that VT would actually care about hoops and FINALLY take some aggressive steps to move the program forward, I have given up hope that will ever happen in my lifetime. Whether it's something ingrained in the school culture, the athletic dept culture, or the fanbase/alum culture, it seems clear that there has not been and perhaps never will be a sense of urgency around the men's basketball program like what we have seen with football this offseason. I don't expect basketball to ever come close to football funding levels, and don't think it needs to be. But it is really depressing to see how the decades-long apathy around basketball has continued to adversely impact the program over multiple athletic directors and multiple coaches. I will always pay attention to and cheer for VT hoops, because I'm an alum and I love the sport. Otherwise I wouldn't take the time to post on this board. But until I see some sign that VT administrators, coaches, and players are truly driven to win, and have some kind of vision to lift the program out of this perpetual spin cycle of mediocrity, I just can't see a reason to invest any real passion as a fan. It's not that the current vision is flawed. The problem is that there is no vision at all.

I guess you're opposed to adjustments in general then. Team is having no success trying to score inside against bigger, more physical defenders? Sorry guys, you're not allowed to try outside shooting, you haven't mastered the inside game yet. Team is having a rough shooting night and wants to focus more on the transition game and layups? Sorry guys, you haven't mastered the 3-pointer yet. Team is getting killed off the bounce and wants to try packing the paint with a zone to stop it? Sorry guys, you haven't mastered man-to-man defense yet. I can actually believe that you have a coaching background, because the hallmark of many coaches is a stubborn belief that their strategy and tactics are perfect, it's just that those darn players can't execute perfectly. Keep digging that hole.

Teaching and playing zone defense is NOT rocket science. It is no more difficult than man-to-man, it just has different strengths and weaknesses. Only in Blacksburg, and specifically only in certain corners of this board, do people twist themselves into intellectual knots trying to convince others that one of the most basic defenses in all of basketball, one that the vast majority of teams both practice and at least occasionally play, is some kind of exotic, gimmicky scheme that only deep hoops savants can master. Truly incredible.

1. He is not asked to be a primary scoring option for his new team. 2. He accepts that his handle and vision are great for a SF, not so great for a PG. Neo was miscast in his role this year, and it seems that was primarily by his own request. He will thrive and be a matchup nightmare if he's more of a facilitator in a point forward role. If he goes somewhere else hoping to be The Man, he will struggle again. He simply does not have the quickness or ballhandling ability to play the 1, possibly the 2 as well. But at the 3 or 4, he could be deadly.

And the reactions to the decline- and the underwhelming season just completed- are very telling. From the AD down, and including a not insignificant portion of the fanbase (and this board), the reaction to yet another failed season and yet another self-inflicted wound is simply to shrug, to rationalize, to explain it away, and to continually promote the idea that mediocrity is as good as we can expect. And with that mentality, the expectation is (and has been for decades) self-fulfilling. VT should demand better and should pursue excellence in hoops aggressively. And that does NOT simply mean spending money. It means spending wisely and starting each season with the expectation and goal of at least making the big dance. And when that doesn't happen, year after year, it means being willing to make necessary changes and holding program leadership accountable.

FTFY

but there is more to the game than that. Recruiting and roster building, chemistry and culture and motivation, adaptability and willingness to make adjustments, all of those things are just as important as X's and O's. This year's team definitely seemed to be disjointed and less than the sum of its parts, and that falls on the coach, not the players. At this point, Mike Young is what he is, and that's a decent, good, but not great coach. It takes more than that to win at VT. If you're like the primary board troll and you think that slightly above mediocre is all that VT hoops can ever aspire to, then Young's your guy. If you think we have a higher ceiling, well, at this point what makes you think Young is suddenly going to change his style or deliver different results?

but man, your posting style is incredibly annoying. You really need to give it a rest. It's actually possible to disagree with people without constantly descending into snark, sarcasm, and condescension.

At USF, Greenberg went 7 straight years with no NCAA appearance, was 0-20 against top 25 opponents, and barely won more than half his games. The natives were definitely restless in Tampa. Why VT took a look at that situation and decided to nearly triple Greenberg's compensation is baffling- they were only bidding against themselves. At the time, it seemed like a panic move by Weaver after getting rejected by Jim Baron at the 11th hour.

I maintain that hiring practices, more than conference membership, the location of Blacksburg, basketball facilities, or budget, have been what has really held VT hoops back. The first four coaches on your list would never have been hired as a HC by any other Metro, A10, or ACC school. Three of them were VT assistants who were promoted after the previous HC retired or was fired. That is the definition of lazy. Greenberg was about to be fired by South Florida when VT hired him. His winning percentage at USF was 52%. No other power conference program was beating down the doors to hire him when VT called. Mike Young was a lifer at a SoCon school. It so happened that he had his best team ever the same year that VT needed to replace Buzz. While the hire was somewhat understandable, I submit that coming on the heels of what Buzz achieved at VT, we should have and could have aimed higher. Young would have been a great hire had he been replacing Allen, Hussey, Stokes, Johnson, or Greenberg- but not as a replacement for a coach with 4 Sweet Sixteen appearances and 1 Elite Eight appearance. Buzz is the only top-level, power conference head coach that VT has ever hired in hoops. Yes, the circumstances that caused him to even consider VT were unique, but VT also had to be willing to take the swing (much like they did recently in football). Whenever Mike Young does hang it up, I would really like to see VT take a similar swing. Go get a James Franklin for basketball. It can be done, it's been done here before, and the results will speak for themselves.

Team comes out really flat, in a game with nothing really to win and everything to lose, and is in danger of getting run off the floor. Coach calls a timeout. And the team comes out of that timeout playing absolute lockdown defense for the entire next quarter. They don't rush shots, they don't jack up threes trying to make up the deficit immediately, they just lock in, grind, and hustle. And they go on an amazing run, fueled by grit, effort and connection, to completely flip the game. It's a basketball truism that shooting doesn't always travel, but defense and rebounding do. I would add coaching to that list. Duffy has gotten the most out of this team all year and that second quarter was a perfect example of how and why. Very glad she's a Hokie.

I think the example of JPJ is instructive. Although it is located in Charlottesville, not Richmond, it has become the de facto indoor concert arena for both cities. Richmond, like Roanoke, lacks the finances and the political will to build a new, modern, arena, so JPJ stepped into that void and ended up capturing many shows that used to end up at the Richmond Coliseum. While Roanoke isn't as large as Richmond, it's closer to Blacksburg than Richmond is to Charlottesville. I do think a new coliseum at VT would be able to draw enough interest from Roanoke/Salem to make it plausible to attract concerts and other events that would help to fill seats other than for basketball games.

People who say "Cassell is just fine as is" remind me of Babcock's infamous quote that "weights weigh the same". Cassell is severely outdated, from the lighting to the sound system to the scoreboards to the concessions to the concourses to the gates to the ticket windows to the restrooms. It looks and feels exactly like what it is, which is a building that was designed and constructed based on the aesthetics and fan expectations of six decades ago. Unless there are plans to completely gut and rebuild the interior, a newer coliseum is very much needed. BUT BUT BUT CAMERON. Please. If VT had even 1/100th of Duke's basketball history and brand, then maybe it could afford to continue clinging to the past when it comes to facilities. Duke could play home games in a large shipping container and it wouldn't affect their recruiting or their attendance. At VT, the lack of a modern arena definitely has an impact on both those things. Other than Duke, not one of our ACC peers, heck even our in-state A10 or Sun Belt peers, plays in such an old, cramped, and outmoded facility. It speaks volumes as to VT's lack of interest or will to support a hoops program at the level of the conference it lobbied so hard to join.

With pro sports, the average fan is only asked to subsidize the team by either watching on TV or occasionally buying tickets. The bulk of pro revenue and salary outlays comes from broadcast dollars, along with the deep pockets of billionaire owners. College sports? The same revenue streams exist, but because of the hypocritical pretense that athletes are not school employees, the schools end up retaining more of the $$$ and directly sharing less of them with the players. As a result, fans are asked to pay for the players, via donating to NIL collectives. And for the average person these days, that's a bridge too far. Eventually all of this will collapse and college sports will shed the sham image it continues to cultivate, the players will be paid directly, and the fans can just go back to being... fans.

1. Carleigh really put the team on her back. She's not always a shooter per se (although she generally has good form on her shot), but she is a great scorer. During the long stretch in the second half where the team was totally stuck against the zone, she totally carried the offense. And major props for the ice in her veins at the FT line. 2. Johnson for UVA is a very good player, no doubt. But she gives a forearm shiver to her defender on almost every drive. I haven't watched enough UVA games to know whether she benefited from some home cooking today, or if she always gets away with that, but was surprised she didn't pick up a few more charges. 3. Related to 2 above... those officials were really baffling, both ways. The way-too-long delay for the "undetected flagrant" review was followed by a complete lack of explanation as to who the foul was on. Everyone in my section, UVA and VT fans alike, was surprised when Mackie took the two FTs, then the UVA player took two. Until that moment no one had any idea what team the flagrant was on, and they never identified the player by name or number. And on any given drive to the hoop by either team, no one ever knew when/if a foul might be called. In that respect, the call at the end was not surprising, because it seemed the opposite of what you would expect them to call. Which was exactly how they called the whole game. 4. When UVA went to the zone, I was surprised that Carys tended to stay down low and rarely flashed for a 3. The one time she did, she hit one from the top of the key. I would think that against zone D's we would mainly want her and Carleigh taking the outside shots. 5. The other thing that surprised me was that in the first half, VT often doubled Johnson as soon as she touched it, and that was very effective- she only had 1 point at halftime. Everyone knew that she would come out determined to attack in the second half, and when she got her driving game going, VT was playing her more straight up 1 on 1. I wonder why they didn't repeat the first half strategy? Overall, what a fun game to see, it was certainly a lot better feeling than the last time I was in JPJ (Liz's last game). Major props to the players and coaches for gutting out the win during absolute crunch time.

I hope VT is able to be patient with Dorn, and he wants to stay. Like a lot of big guys, he just needs time and experience.

To destroy the Hoos on their home field and then carry their goalpost out of the stadium- it just doesn't get any better.

just within our state, UVA, JMU, UR, ODU, GMU, VCU, and Liberty all play in newer and nicer arenas than Cassell? And of those schools listed, UVA is the only one with the financial benefits of conference membership that VT enjoys. The fact is, W&M is the only school in Virginia- mid major level and above- who plays in a worse, more outdated arena than VT. That's pathetic. I went to the game this past Saturday and it was like stepping back in time to the 1980s. Other than a few coats of lipstick (carpet in the concourses, bigger video boards, maroon seats), Cassell is exactly the same as it was when I was a student. The concessions and the restrooms are particularly horribly outdated in the modern era. VT can, and should, do better.

Too bad his arms aren't as long as Kevin's.

when he rises straight up, his shot is pretty true. But often, on his stepback 3's, he is not only doing the stepback, he's also slightly fading away when he releases. Hopefully he can build on today's momentum, and part of that will be to lean into his outside shot rather than shooting off the back foot.

We'll never know, but I suspect results would have been better even given the same level of funding. Ballein is an idiot, but he should never have had that much say in revenue sport hires to begin with. Babcock completely abdicated his responsibility, and in any other industry besides a small-town, good ol' boy college athletic department, he would have been fired years ago.

Foster- semi retired retread. Hussey- Foster's assistant. Stokes- never been a head coach. Greenberg- just over .500 lifer about to be fired by USF. Johnson- never been a head coach. Young- lifer mid major coach. I was at the Sweet 16 game and we all knew Buzz was leaving then. VT had so much momentum as a program and I was really disappointed, but not surprised, that Whit did not replace Buzz with a more high profile coach. Mike Young is a nice guy, but like Greenberg his results at VT have been about what he did prior to VT. We knew what we were getting, but because of cost and "fit", we settled when we didn't have to. It was a conscious choice, and the same choice we have been making seemingly forever.

the style of play is largely the same. And I don't think that style of play is best suited for guys like Hammond, Avdalas, Lawal, or Bedford.

When you play at a slow pace and your strategy is predicated on players being highly efficient on offense and highly connected in an exclusively man-to-man defense, you don't have much margin for error. When the team is "on" any given night, that style can look beautiful, and produce great results. But when there is a lapse, or when roster churn impacts the learning curve, what is the fallback plan? Teams that play more uptempo, emphasize transition buckets, and press you on D don't have to be as efficient. They rely more on outhustling you and generating a greater volume of possessions. I submit that style is easier to recruit to, more players want to play in it, and it doesn't require players to be nearly perfect all the time in order to be successful.

Tyler Johnson is a nice defensive player. Would he help? Yes. But the trend of opposing guards absolutely torching VT's defense is another of the growing examples where Mike Young doesn't make effective in-game adjustments. He's going to "run his stuff", on both ends of the floor, no matter what the opponent is doing. When VT is absolutely clicking on both offense and defense, that stuff looks great. When VT is not, or the opponent is doing something that VT cannot deal with effectively, you rarely if ever see Young make a significant strategic or tactical change. He's an excellent teacher and clearly has a good basketball mind, but like many coaches, stubbornness and lack of flexibility are his undoing. Simply asking the players to execute a failed strategy better is not a recipe for success.

I don't see how anyone could watch this year's VT women's team vs. this year's VT men's team and not conclude that the former is, in fact, more cohesive, and being coached more effectively. And I am not talking about cherry-picking one game, not directly comparing the Cal game last night to the FSU game Saturday. I have watched most of the games involving both teams this year, and to me, it is clear that Duffy has done a better job of melding the talent she has into a connected, consistent, high-effort group. There is absolutely no doubt that underfunding the men's team last year had a dramatic impact on the talent level. It's obvious that this year's NIL increase resulted in a better roster. However, I am not sure that this year's team is any more cohesive or efficient, relative to their built-in abilities, than last year's team. They're more athletic and skilled for sure, but are they any better at maximizing the basketball talents that they showed up to VT with? IMHO Mike Young hit his ceiling at VT some time ago, and I don't think that throwing more money at his program will dramatically change anything. It would continue to result in higher profile players finding their way here, but it would not resolve some of the continuing issues that we have seen not just for individual games this year, but as long term trends that date back several seasons. There are structural issues with his approach to tempo, defense, and roster management that seem increasingly out of step with the current era of college hoops. I have much more confidence that Duffy is set up for long-term success and will provide a better ROI for funds invested in her program.

then hoops is doomed to the eternal spin cycle of mediocrity that we have been enduring since the 1980s, with a brief interruption during the Buzz Era. The only reason Franklin is in Blacksburg is because the BOV made it happen. Our athletic dept is about as insular and smalltown in its thinking as any in the country.

the biggest recruiting disadvantage, the toughest schedule, the worst luck, blah blah blah. New year, same old tired excuses. The real truth is that VT has actually tried to be a real basketball program exactly once in the last 40 years, and that is when they hired Buzz Williams. Every move before and since then has been just more of the small-town, aw-shucks-just-happy-to-be-here thinking that has artificially constrained this athletic dept for decades. Fortunately, the larger university was able to get past that a long time ago.

I think we would have beaten Wake if that game hadn't immediately followed the triple OT win vs UVA. There was bound to be a mental and physical letdown no matter who we played next. I fully expect that the team will beat Wake in the rematch. The Stanford game and the SMU game are the ones that are inexcusable. Two of the worst meltdowns in modern VT hoops history.

Here are some (not all) of the things that are not supposed to happen on this board. I find the latter two especially interesting. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Personal attacks or insults on ANYONE (including athletes, recruits, coaches or administrators, other users of the boards, beat writers, Site staff, et al). Posts with the sole intent of eliciting negative responses (flaming). Excessive numbers of posts. If you’re “living” on the boards, posting every 2-3 minutes, and getting in heated discussions with numerous other posters, this will be considered a violation of these Terms of Use. Repeated “pot-stirring,” or always being the center of controversy on the boards. If you post in a fashion that otherwise abides by the terms of service, but which continually raises the ire of the message board community, this may be considered a violation of these Terms of Use.

There will always be games, or stretches of games, where shooters lose confidence, where they realize that the ball is just not going to go down for them that day. The response to that is to tell yourself that you're gonna bust your butt to help the team in all the ways that you CAN control... rebounding, defending, passing, attacking the rim, defense. There is no such thing as being in a "hustle slump". It's OK and understandable to be unhappy, probably baffled, about why you're suddenly struggling on offense. It's not acceptable to hang your head and lower your effort.

When players had to sit out a year after transferring, you didn't see anything close to the current volume of annual roster raiding. College football could have survived the portal with no NIL. Or it could have survived NIL with no portal. The current bubble is completely unsustainable and when it ends, a lot of irreparable damage will have been done to the sport. One could argue it already has.

And that is by making them pay for it with easy baskets at the other end. Young's approach simply begs other teams to press. For the opposition it is all reward, no risk.

that year after year, through multiple different rosters, Mike Young's teams at VT are absolutely terrible against a press. The other particulars in any specific collapse may vary- who is turning it over, who is missing FTs, who is playing bad D- but that is the one failing you can count on. And the fact that it keeps happening, at a multi-year level, with so many different players involved over the years, indicates loud and clear that it is a fundamental coaching issue.

UVA has the same conference record but slightly worse overall record compared to VT. UVA has a really bad loss (to UMBC) and got blown out at home by the same Cuse team that VT just beat on the road by 20. Are we getting penalized that much for the margin vs Louisville and the loss to JMU?

he is really struggling to make defenses pay for guarding him aggressively. Seems like the more he struggles, the more he's trying to do one-on-one stuff, rather than intentionally drawing defenders and finding the resulting open teammates. He just looks in a total funk right now, both offensively and defensively. Hopefully he can recapture his early season form.