78 Replies
V
VT One
3mo
they told to play? I know they had a new coach in Pearl junior but they had to be disappointed not to make the NCAA. But they played in the NIT and won it. There’s something to be said for that.
(In response to this post by BAMAHOKIE)
H
HokieNL
3mo
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
And thats precisely when the NCAA started the slow death of the NIT.
So by that logic no team should turn down the NIT...or the CBI...or the CIT...or the whatever tournament plays in Vegas
But...you have to turn down one of those tournaments to play in the others, so youre stuck in a loop of having to play whatever tournament asks you first.
Or are you drawing the line at NIT? And if so...why? Why is the NIT a better tournament than the others?
Is it acceptable to turn down the CBI? CIT? Why is that?
(In response to this post by HokieNL)
S
saret
3mo
minimize and mitigate the decisions of people who could care less about the fans/donors. @HokieNL 's post deserves more than just word salad.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
H
HokieNL
3mo
The NIT has been around since 1938. To equate it with any other new tournament like the CBI, is nothing other than a red herring, and intellectual dishonesty.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
Im sorry we aren't in 1938 and the NIT champion isnt the NCAA champion anymore. Time moves along. The world keeps turning.
(In response to this post by HokieNL)
S
saret
3mo
1973 NIT. And, @GCHokie34 , as a Hokie, you should no that.
(In response to this post by HokieNL)
S
saret
3mo
different generations, obviously. But this response is condescending. And, so you don't have to look it up, I'll provide the definition I googled, infra. It is this type of post you resort to that ingratiates you so much to us on here. Keep proving my point. But, to say my post was "sad" is just condescending to a tee.
Condescending: "Condescending describes behavior or attitudes that show a patronizing, arrogant sense of superiority, often where one person acts as if they are better, smarter, or more important than another. It involves talking down to people, causing resentment, discomfort, and a breakdown in communication. Common in both professional and personal settings, it is a key component of communication failures."
This is not an attribute I aspire to.
(In response to this post by saret)
V
VT One
3mo
post. The more information given to the fans about post season decisions for not playing the less disappointment or upset.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
"Given the current health status of members of our roster and the need for a number of our student-athletes to focus on recovery and preparation for their professional careers, we believe it is in the best interest of our players and the long-term direction of our program to conclude our season at this time."
You'd be behind it?
(In response to this post by VT One)
S
saret
3mo
said,..." is the word IF. They didn't. So, to me at least, they mishandled it. Other than announcing they weren't going to participate in the NIT, it's been "cricket city." Leaves a very bad taste in fans' mouths. imho, the mbb program used up a lot of good will with the fan/donor base the way the cancellation was handled. Good will they couldn't afford to squander.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
S
saret
3mo
handling of the situation. No consideration for fans. And, you may remember my email to Young, Whit, Brad, Chris and Sands. What about us. Again, thanks for that, I missed it. But I guess we'll have to see if next year the fans reciprocate in kind.
What is that from? facebook, instagram, X, what?
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
account. Now, where did I misplace that.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
And not an email to donors/customers. And there has been no follow-up discussion or press conferences, just radio silence.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
(In response to this post by Will Stewart)
S
saret
3mo
YEAH! No communication except that tweet? And before you ask, I've received no response from quintessential quintet, other that an auto reply from Brad that he was out of town. I expected little from four of them, but Young lost a lot of good will with me.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
I just dont think thats where their largest audience is. But they should still do it.
But what needs to be combatted is the notion that they put out nothing. That's simply not the case. The basketball program very clearly stated why they were not playing in the NIT, and this specific IG post was posted and referenced on TSL, so it reached everyone who would be posting here in the very least.
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
as possible. They folded, and robbed me of seeing them play at least one more time. And, I specifically chose the word robbed. As I said in my email to the quintessential quintet, and paraphrasing the 76ers, They Owe us One.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
Slighted by not having an announcement
Im just not sure "hey guys, we dont have enough players to play in the NIT" would satiate the fan base regardless of the platform.
I think people are frustrated they didn't get to see their Hokies play...and I think thats reasonable
I also think its reasonable to allow their athletes the choice to move on or recover rather than put themselves at risk/more risk by playing in a tournament that no one will remember.
The tournaments VT plays in during the season actually count and Im not sure I remember the exact outcome of 90% of them. Much less for a tournament that is not the same one from pre-2000s that people were fond of
So I think VT was reasonable in saying no. I think they could have done more to cover all platforms, but they certainly put out a well-worded reasoning behind their decision to the largest of their audience.
And I think fans are reasonable to be frustrated that the circumstances are what they are.
Just not sure theres a different outcome without being disrespectful to the players wishes or the fans wishes
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
You say, "Im just not sure "hey guys, we dont have enough players to play in the NIT" would satiate the fan base regardless of the platform.' On this, I agree. Those single announcements on social media probably would not have satiated the fan base. So, why didn't they do more. But this is SOP for the VT AthDept. Issue a statement, then enter the fortress of silence, and let
it stew with the fan/donor base. They just bunker down and an let the news cycle die. Piss poor. Very similar to how they handled the abdication of the Wisconsin home game.
Then you say, "I think people are frustrated they didn't get to see their Hokies play...and I think thats reasonable." Wow! Thanks for allowing me to be frustrated.
Then you say, "I also think its reasonable to allow their athletes the choice to move on or recover rather than put themselves at risk/more risk by playing in a tournament that no one will remember." When do fans and donors get a choice? I guess our risk of donating to NIL, seat premiums, tickets, etc. is just a risk we have to take. And, remember, many of us decided to ReNewAll for next year, then they decide not to play. But the fans' risks are ignored while businessmen/players/agents/coaches just move on because they decide to move on. Got my money, see ya! Hopefully, there will be some modifications to the next group of NIL and Revenue Sharing contracts, that cover decisions by players/agents to not play in the post season, and their are pecuniary penalties involved.
Then you talk about in-season tournaments counting. Don't post-season tourneys count? To the fans/donors, all tourney games count, as do all the other games. The games and tourneys are the product of the team. So a few of this yea'rs players just decide to not provide the required product? Oh, that's right, a few of the players are allowed "...to move on or recover rather than put themselves at risk/more risk by playing in a tournament. The info available to us peon fans is some of the players wanted to play. Perhaps someone would deign to identify who wanted to play and who didn't. That info might be of interest to their next team and/or their next employer.
Then you denigrate the NIT in an attempt to emphasize your point. Most of us fans just wanted to see'em play (probably in Cassell). Now, I'm all for NIL, revenue sharing, etc. for the players. But where is there accountability for the players, and the program managers. What they are counting on is the temporal nature of the news cycle, and the energy that is VT Football and James Franklin to just let this die. And, they're right. But, next Oct/Nov, when MBB is on nigh, a lot of us are going to remember this, and it will re-appear on TSL,...and for good reason. And, in the end, you are right. There isn't thing one any of us can do about. And, they don't try to defend it, because they can't. I can forgive, but I won't forget. And, my fandom is a little less fanatical.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
.....Then you say, "I think people are frustrated they didn't get to see their Hokies play...and I think thats reasonable." Wow! Thanks for allowing me to be frustrated.....
I mean...youre welcome? How else would you like me to put that I understand your frustration? Make sure to issue a press release so I can see it.
....When do fans and donors get a choice?...
Uh...every day. Are the athletes robbing you at gunpoint to go watch them?
....Then you talk about in-season tournaments counting. Don't post-season tourneys count?...
What exactly does the NIT count towards? Be specific.
....Perhaps someone would deign to identify who wanted to play and who didn't. That info might be of interest to their next team and/or their next employer....
Are you their next team or employer? No? OK, then why do you need to know?
....Then you denigrate the NIT in an attempt to emphasize your point. Most of us fans just wanted to see'em play....
I literally said this was reasonable, but you tried to hit me with a jab when I conceded the point.
....But, next Oct/Nov, when MBB is on nigh, a lot of us are going to remember this...
Not a single person is asking you to forget it. Ive stated multiple times people are welcome to do with their money how they choose and that includes supporting the program
"WeLl ThAnKs FoR tElLiNg Me WhAt I cAn Do WiTh My MoNeY"
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
disagreeing viewpoints. Maybe you are better off at Radford.
Yeah, we do get a choice. And the ultimate shortcomings of ticket sales, attendance, donations are an indicator.
What does the NIT count for. You're asking that question of fans who just want to see them play? That's what it counts for. The fans.
And your last lines are just smug, pretentious and snarky. Just another example of why posters on here are as fond of you as some of us are fond of the the decisions of the quintessential quintet. In this instance, you should go into turtle mode like Whit and his Minions.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
You: Wow! Thanks for allowing me to be frustrated.
Me: give you the same energy back
You: this is why no one likes you
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
(In response to this post by AnotherTechW)
3mo
... a NCAA invite also?
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
"put themselves at risk/more risk by playing in a tournament that no one will remember."
The choice to play in the NCAAT vs NIT is very different. Just as competing in the CFP is different than the TaxSlayer Liberty PopTart Bowl brought to you by Arby's
Its the difference between competing for a national title and competing for a free beer from a fan 20 years from now.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
S
saret
3mo
the more selfish and mercenary, which they were. Leaving it out was a purposeful omission to avoid accentuating their selfishness and mercenary behavior. And while everyone knows that the NCAAT has grown into the more prestigious tourney, that in no way absolves them from the selfishness of their decision. Without fans, they're nothing but a well attended pickup game with a bunch of dudes.
You can try to mitigate and minimize the decision of the quintessential quintet and the players, but I hope they all have some karma about their decisions.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
H
HokieNL
3mo
The lie that we "don't have enough players" or whatever the exact thing said was.
If you want to be straight forward honest and say it something like, "Oh, we got enough NCAA players. We just ain't got no NIT players," that would be honest, and gives something to talk about.
Some would like this statement, and agree. While I don't, at least I could understand where that person is coming from, since there's no BS, no wiggle room, etc.
But to all who are doing this, and don't want to be called out on it, stop talking like we don't have enough to make a team, so much that we would turn down an NCAA bid. That's not been stated, but one could get that dishonest "vibe."
It's one thing to say, "we can't do this." It's another to say, "well, we could do this, we just don't wanna."
And one can argue merits, based on such a cards on the table approach.
You can make the argument that it is not worth it, to accept an NIT bid. Fine. We can talk about that. But don't cloak it in dishonest language. Just come out and say, "We would have accepted an NCAA bid. But since we didn't make it, we don't feel like playing in the NIT. Sorry fans! Now if you'll excuse us, we're off to spend our NIL money."
As for the "social media" aspect, the line between official and unofficial is blurring, to the detriment of everyone. Don't assume that "everyone" uses Instagram, X (Twitter), or even Facebook.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
So...deal with it?
(In response to this post by HokieNL)
H
HokieNL
3mo
Sorry, dude. I don't like dealing with intellectually dishonest people.
** Edited by HokieNL at 4/6/2026, 8:30:17 PM
Link:
Troll
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
There was no lie...they didn't have enough players. Im not responding to your tangents
(In response to this post by HokieNL)
3mo
EDIT: and half of Johnson and half of Dorn
** Edited by GCHokie34 at 4/6/2026, 9:06:24 PM
(In response to this post by saret)
3mo
Who battled injuries all year
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
And, as far as Johnson and Dorn, who made that decision? Young? The players? The Player's agents. Who?
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
Name one thing that changes of note if those questions are answered
** Edited by GCHokie34 at 4/6/2026, 9:16:34 PM
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
that makes 9. Now, all those guys were getting paid. So, of those nine, obviously some of those nine opted not to play. Their decision. So, if they just opted not to play, any funds still outstanding should have stopped immediately. That would be in their "contracts." And, rightfully so. Then, you note publicly who opted not to play, and if you have less than five, then you announce the team isn't playing. I can only guess who wanted to play, and so do you. Then everyone's accountable, and has "skin" in their decision. And, if their individual decisions are publicly known, perspective recruiters/employees knows they're quitters.
I suspect (emphasis on suspect) some of those who opted out did it for personal reasons, not because they were physically unable to perform. I also suspect, that some would have opted to play were planning on portalling out. If so, what better opportunity than to play, showcase their skills, and get picked up. I will say now, that if Lawal gets invited to the PIT and decides to play, that will indicate to me in which camp he falls.
Also, if the decision not to play was entirely up to CMY, I will be greatly disappointed in him.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
Lawal and Avdalas stand to gain way more than the remainder of their VT contract could possibly be, so I dont think that really matters.
You need more than 5 to play a basketball game. Christian Gurdak isnt playing 40 minutes. Not a single person listed is a 4. Is the bag of reanimated bones of Tyler Johnson playing 40 minutes at the 4?
I realize you have no issue risking the health of the athletes for your entertainment, but thankfully the ones actually in charge of the decision actually care about them as human beings and not property
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
NEITHER TO YOU! And what they "stand to gain" is just speculation on your part, too. I see potential in both, but you and I can only speculate. Any player worth his weight "wants" to play. And if they didn't, and it became known, it would only hurt that speculative opportunities.
You keep saying you need more than five, and I counted nine. Even you can count. And, as you've pointed out, all year (as have I), we had very few games with a full roster. And, I've never once said the roster would be optimal. Using your logic, maybe CMY should opt out of games where he does not have an optimal roster.
And, this last section of yours is just beyond the pale, which indicates to me you're getting desperate. "I realize you have no issue risking the health of the athletes for your entertainment, but thankfully the ones actually in charge of the decision actually care about them as human beings and not property"
You lose the argument. When you have to resort to personal attacks on a poster's integrity and morals, you lose. I'll expect an apology in your next post.
** Edited by saret at 4/6/2026, 10:21:19 PM
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
So if you conclude from that that its an attack on your morals youre gonna need to argue with yourself on that one.
You keep counting 9 because you have no issue risking what theyre risking. You dont have 9 if you see them as humans.
But yet...here we are
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
not truthfully synopsizing my viewpoint. You now owe me TWO apologies. And, disingenuous is a word lawyers use when they don't want to use the three letter one, which is more appropriate in this instance.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
3mo
3 of which missed half the season with injuries. 2 of which stand to make life changing money in the coming decade.
You demand reasoning for why they should put their health and their future earnings at risk all for your entertainment
That's literally your argument.
Theyre your property. You want them to dance. You paid your fee at the door so you deserve to see them dance. It doesnt matter they have personal decisions to make...this is about you.
Dance for me
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
what I've said/posted. What you said in your first sentence "3 of which missed half the season with injuries. 2 of which stand to make life changing money in the coming decade." That's an opinion (opinions are like anuses, everybody has one), and one to which I do not subscribe. You're deflecting because your logic isn't following.
And, you are trying to ascribe to me a "plantational" mentality, which implies yet another personal insult which I find morally repugnant. And, you do it knowing nothing about me nor my history. These personal attacks may have worked in your HS debate club, but they don't work here or with me. You're practically calling me a racist. You're getting repugnant in your posts, and have now surpassed the apology phase.
It's getting late. So I'm going to bed. I've just "followed" you, so if you continue, I'll pick it up tomorrow. I learned a long time ago to not attack someone's morals or integrity unless I could prove it. Keep digging your hole with me.
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
H
HokieNL
3mo
Some men will use any immoral "trick," to "win" an "argument."
(In response to this post by saret)
3mo
It is objectively true they missed games due to injury
It is objectively true they stand to make life changing money (you dont have to be in the NBA to make life changing money)
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
"You demand reasoning for why they should put their health and their future earnings at risk all for your entertainment That's literally your argument." That's hyperbole, and you know it. By that logic, every game they play puts their health at risk and their future earnings. Following your logic (and this is also hyperbolic) they should have never played and just followed another pursuit/career. I know that's a fallacious statement, but it follows your logic. I'm going to be interested if Lawal gets invited to the PIT and decides to play. Following your logic, he shouldn't, because it would put his health and future earnings in peril.
Next, "Theyre (sic) your property. You want them to dance. You paid your fee at the door so you deserve to see them dance. It doesnt matter they have personal decisions to make...this is about you." I find that first sentence (despite the typos) to be insulting. You'll stoop to any depths to browbeat people on this board. I personally won't accept it. I pay, I attend, I support, I cheer. Yes! They made personal decisions. Yes! I don't think it's untoward for them to face criticism/consequences for their individual decisions (which neither you nor I KNOW). A prospective team would want to know if a player "wanted to play" and wasn't selfish before making a player an offer. Quitting an opportunity to play would be an indicator.
And, as part of this discussion, it is about me and other fans/donors. The AthDept regularly calls us "stakeholders." But that's just so much lip service done to "con" us into giving, buying tickets, attending games as backdrops, etc. In this situation, much like the Wisconsin game, we stakeholders were never consulted or explained to. They just made a decision and were told to "suck it up." Much like Howard Beale in "Network," i'm tired of taking it anymore.
** Edited by saret at 4/7/2026, 11:34:33 AM
** Edited by saret at 4/7/2026, 12:08:21 PM
(In response to this post by GCHokie34)
H
HokieNL
3mo
Is it assumed as part of any NIL deal, or "mere" scholarships, that a player is expected to play in the NCAAT if we make it? (Outside of injuries, etc.)
In other words - if we had squeezed into, say, the very last open spot (let's assume the Boopie miracle did not happen), and had to go through a Play In game, would a player who is able to play, without complications, in danger of losing something, if they decline to play? I hope I am asking this correctly.
By the way, just give up on expecting a fair and logical discussion, from someone that you know will not provide one. It's not your job, or my job, or anyone's job, to "correct" their behavior. Save the mental energy, for those that will provide such.
That "plantation" comment really bothered you, and it should have. It bothered me, even though it was not directed at me.
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
And, when I got a copy of a blank revenue sharing contract, nothing in that says any thing about the post season.
That being said, I would hope the brain trust that is the AthDept legal dept is looking into the eventuality, and it would be fixed going forward. But, one never knows what VT might/might not due. I would also hope, that going forward, NIL contracts and revenue sharing contracts would start structuring the payments in such a way that if an athlete opts out for post season (and this would include football), there would be financial disincentives to opt out of post season.
All parties involved/signatories would be aware of that at the very beginning. And, if an athlete balks at those conditions, terms could be negotiated right then. VT would have to decide what that reluctance might bode, and decide to waive that condition. It might indicate the intended transitory intent of the athlete. It might not.
I am, by no means, an authority, and I'm certainly not an attorney. But, this whole thing should be a learning experience for the athletes, and for VT. I have little to no confidence that the VT AthDept will do a "lessons learned" analysis over the coming year.
(In response to this post by HokieNL)
V
VT One
3mo
regarding my money are made. I’m not a big investor but I’m a longtime investor who has spent a lot of extra money going to bowls and post season basketball tournaments. Without accountability, the dead horses are going to be the investors.
(In response to this post by jrc3rd)
J
jrc3rd
3mo
to enter the the portal you are not going to play anymore. That's 4 players gone. 3 are injured and 2 are redshirts. I don't think Lawal wanted to play so he could concentrate on his pro workouts. Peterkin is playing football.
So we are left with Hammond, Johnson (who is not 100%), and Bedford.
(In response to this post by VT One)
J
jrc3rd
3mo
Lawal. If Dorn could give us a few minutes, that's 9. They just did not want to do it for the NIT. School loyalty was an illusion before NIL.
(In response to this post by Atlee Hokie)
H
HokieNL
3mo
"Oh, we got enough NCAA players. We just ain't got enough NIT players."
(In response to this post by jrc3rd)
J
jrc3rd
3mo
coaches are rarely loyal to players. Meaning, Uni's accepting players with no chance of receiving a meaningful degree or education, coaches pulling scholarships once a player has diminished skills due to injuries, and donors that don't care about the future of the players. It's been that way for as long as there has been competition.
I support the player' right to make decisions that they feel is the best for them.
(In response to this post by HokieNL)
3mo
have been available it very well could have been near impossible from a pure available bodies perspective.
And let’s say we rolled out a team made up mostly of walkons and deep bench players. How do we think that would have gone? Would we feel any better if we’d gotten boat raced at home by a lower seeded team?
(In response to this post by jrc3rd)
S
saret
3mo
walkons rather than fold like a cheap tent.
(In response to this post by AbsolutVT03)
3mo
As for your preferred a "walk-on team".Maybe you want to think about how embarrassing that would be to the majority of VT fans. A horrible look!!
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
walk ons on VT MBB, ok. But, if you got 5, you play. And, if they lost (badly), I wouldn't be embarrassed as a fan. Some of my best memories of VT MBB was when Seth was here, and Jeff Baker joined the MBB team, and played against Duke (and won). I didn't think it was a horrible look then, and I wouldn't now. It was a necessity, because of dwindled numbers. But the difference was, Jeff and the other players "wanted to play." This group, this year,didn't.
(In response to this post by ancient alien 2018)
H
HokieNL
3mo
I'm not saying he played a lot, or was that good, but I love that kind of thing.
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
(In response to this post by HokieNL)
H
HokieNL
3mo
I divide things into good and bad, right and wrong, etc. I don't give a care about irrelevant distinctions. I'd like to think that certain foundational things should unify people from different life circumstances, backgrounds, etc.
Most of life might not work like that. Maybe most people don't think the way that I do.
I don't put my opinions up for a vote. I can listen to others who might persuade me on some things, and maybe I can persuade them. But, I sell my mind and intellectual sovereignty, to nobody.
(In response to this post by saret)
S
saret
3mo
For over 30 years, I was paid to be judgemental, confrontational, etc. In short, since I was paid to do that, I was a "professional a$$***e." The govt was paying me to do that, but they're not paying me anymore, so I'm trying to atone. I do think there are shades of grey in a lot of areas, but not all. In some instances, there is just right or wrong, good or bad. But your last sentence says it all, "But, I sell my mind and intellectual sovereignty, to nobody." Hear! Hear! Well said!
(In response to this post by HokieNL)