All Hokie, All the Time. Period. Presented by First Bank & Trust Company

B
Battlesuggs OP
Apr 22, 2026 at 11:31 PM ET
Perspective
Lets be realistic here. We are a good team. Maybe a very good team. And all the players are great and seem like good people. They are a solid #2 seed. No shame in that, especially when you look at the rest of the athletic dept major teams. The team will make the post season. Did football, mbb, mens soccer or womens soccer. No they did not. Will baseball no they will not. Only WBB made the postseason. Lets give these kids credit for what they are doing to make the postseason for the 5th or 6th year in a row. But there is no curse, there is no slump, its not bad managing, they arent collapsing. Its simple analytics here, not advanced metrics like useless offensive efficiency and pitching efficiency, but wins and losses metrics. Of our 38 wins, 21 have come against teams with overall winning records and 17 have come against teams with .500 or losing records. But lets take that a step further, 13 of the 21 wins against teams with winning records are against teams that have .500 or losing records within their own conference. So 30 of 38 wins are against teams with overall .500 or losing records or overall .500 or losing conference records. Glad we beat south carolina but they are 5-13 in the sec. Glad we beat auburn but they are 3-15 in the sec. Of the 8 wins against teams that have winning overall and conference records, that list is Winthrop, USC Upstate twice, Clemson twice, Georgia twice (but only 10-8 in the sec) and Duke. Not a top 10 team on the list. We also have the 68th best strength of schedule and there are 53 teams playing softball in the power 4 conferences. How can you have such a lousy strength of schedule and be in a major league. With these metrics, its not surprising they lose some games. But it also doesnt mean they are bad or collapsing. They are a solid team and thats ok. But they will make the post season which is something virtually every Va Tech team fails to do. So lets give these kids credit and support them.

36 Replies

H
Hokie_Forester
3mo
I disagree. The last 2 games they have lost the defense has played
borderline awful. Our pitching was not great last night but errors and bad decisions cost them the game. Routine plays that they have made all year looked impossible at times. The sunday game vs GT was not much different, they misplayed several balls to the outfield and looked lost at times defensively. Maybe this does not warrant collapsing but this team has not played up to their ability for the last 2 or 3 games in a row.
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
Answer this: How many of our losses have been to teams with more . . .
. . . talented 1-8 lineups? I think the only team you might argue is better 1-8 is Duke. If you accept that answer then you know where our issue is.
H
HokieAvalanche
3mo
We'll have our answer about just how good we are after the UNC games.
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
UNC is not very good. In fact their pitching borders on bad. Anything . .
. . . less than a sweep would be a sign of under achievement. I think this team is more talented than the record indicates, at least 1-8.
hokiepro hokiepro
3mo
We’re more talented than 38-9? That’s pretty talented
vatechcowpatty vatechcowpatty
3mo
GT is not very good. Liberty is just plain bad. Of course now that they
beat us both teams are good.
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
I wouldn't call Liberty 'bad'. They are 15-6 in CUSA. They have . .
. . played a tough OOC schedule. That said VT should beat them 10 out of 10 times . . . instead of 9 out of 10.
vatechcowpatty vatechcowpatty
3mo
They had a losing record. GT barely had a winning record and a losing ACC
record. We can sugar coat stuff with talk of RPIs and tough schedules, but the point is they lose. A lot. So we definitely should not have lost 3 of 5 to these teams. UNC can definitely beat us.
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
I'm not excusing the loss to Liberty but they aren't a 'bad' team.
** Edited by MidloHokie at 4/23/2026, 5:58:21 PM
H
HokieAvalanche
3mo
I'm very supportive of our Team. But the way they have played lately
makes wonder if we can even win one out three against UNC right now. Hopefully the Team bounces back against UNC. I highly doubt we sweep them.
P
pharlap_99
3mo
I believe most posters on this board are very supportive of the women in
the softball program, regardless of record, etc ... However, being supportive does not mean one cannot be respectfully critical, especially of the coaching staff (and the AD for woefully supporting what has been a top 4 program at VT for quite a while). Your post above is the perfect example. Points out our weaknesses but still supports and praises the athletes. I personally feel Pete is a solid HC who has made a few questionable decisions in recent postseasons but is annually hamstrung with an ever-increasing financial gap. I am surprised he hasn't taken offers for greener pastures. Softball will always be one of my favorite programs at VT, no matter the results. But I do feel VT missed a real opportunity to become an annual top 10 program. Now that ship has probably sailed.
B
Battlesuggs OP
3mo
Praise of the Athlete
I praise the athlete because you are who you are. Trying harder doesnt necessarily make you any better. These kids are trying as hard as they can. And the other teams are trying hard as well. To expect more from the players may not be realistic. To criticize coaching decisions or the AD or the administration for not investing more in softball to take advantage of the big run a few years ago and in a team that continues to win, thats completely fair. I frankly think the Franklin hire was a mistake. One, we arent ever winning a national championship and 2) all the other sports are getting short changed.
U2Hokie U2Hokie
3mo
Football will be the hand that feeds after it takes...we can be top ten in
softball with more $$$ and NIL...just no rev sharing till we charge $5 for softball admission...lol ** Edited by U2Hokie at 4/23/2026, 5:52:04 AM
N
nkhooch
3mo
I agree there is no shame in being a #2 seed in the NCAA. And we do it
consistently. But, we are so close to taking the next step it's discouraging to always fall short late in the season. And it does seem like we are having trouble attracting an elite pitcher (like Keely). And that's what could put us at the next level.
hokiepro hokiepro
3mo
Lemley was an elite pitcher; otherwise she’d not have received an AUSL GOLD
ticket The sport has become very popular and the talent is spread out. More and more parity in the sport where you see Long Beach beat OU, Samford beat Bama and a 9’ wall at Tennessee preventing Radford from taking the Vols to extra innings (RU double hit the orange line on top of the wall, tall wall at UT) Our pitchers before GT had the lowest ERA in the ACC Before GT, Carrico had a lower ERA than Nija Canady the $1m arm at Texas Tech We’ve had 2 bad weeks, and lost 5 of our 9 Ls in the span of basically 6 days total
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
Nope. Lemley was very good but not what I term 'elite'. VT has only . . .
. . . had two elite pitchers in it's softball history, AT and Keely.
U2Hokie U2Hokie
3mo
Eberle pretty close - no?
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
Yes.
TomTurkey TomTurkey
3mo
AT was generational beyond elite
R
RVAHokie05
3mo
I'd argue that Keely was not yet elite when she came in as a freshman
She became elite through hard work when Pete and team showed up. I don't say this to denigrate her in any way - she was most definitely a talented, sought-after prospect coming in.
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
Agree. Her work and the result of it is pretty rare. It would . . .
. . . be interesting to know how much improvement she attributes to the VT pitching coach. He was the guy who 'mysteriously' exited the program a couple of years ago I believe.
R
RVAHokie05
3mo
Yeah I remember you saying a pitcher is usually 80% “formed”
When she arrives on campus, so there’s not a ton of room for growth. Makes Keely’s improvement extra special for sure.
hokiepro hokiepro
3mo
I think elite is defined by the times
Hitting and offense has taken off in the last 3 years. The no-nos and perfect games Lem threw are fewer and fewer with the crazy increase in offense. Hitting science and a shrinking strike zone has changed things a lot. I’d say relative to her senior class, Lemley was elite. Bree has a chance to be even without upper 60s-70 velo. Her command and spin is elite. If she has an off day? Yeah that happens.
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
Agree, the pitcher's job is getting tougher.
N
nkhooch
3mo
You are kind of all over the place. We are discussing elite pitchers.
I am not criticizing our pitching staff or our team. Not sure why the plea there. We are talking about elite pitchers, not staffs. We have not had an elite pitcher since KR. "Elite" is not just ERA. It's carrying a team. Pitching a high majority of innings and winning a very high % of games. Often means starting Friday and Sunday and relieving to protect other wins. Keely did that with a much lower ERA than Lemley. Here are EL and KR ACC stats from their senior years. EL, 67.2 innings, 6 - 4, 4.54 ERA KR, 96.1 innings, 15 - 0, 1.67 ERA See the difference? We rode KR to two Super regionals. She started 4 of the 6 games. Haven't made it to Supers since. Lemley was never an All-American or got close to the national accolades KR got. EL had a great career. AUSL selection had other elements to it. Softball has not changed that much since 2022. Bree Carrico's stats are elite. Her load is not. She has pitched 88 innings and is 12-1. She is not carrying the team, yet. Maybe she will at some point. I assume if Pete thought she could start Fri and Sun and maintain those stats, she would be doing it. And Mazz would be a great 2nd game starter. Keely was not the primary pitcher her freshman year either. In 2024, Canady pitched 240 innings, was 34 - 7 and had a 1.11 ERA. Do you think TT makes it to the CWS without her? This year she is 18-3 with a 115 innings. She is pitching less innings because they have a 2nd elite pitcher who is 18-1 with a 1.34 ERA. They have two Canadys. And they are 42-4. Do you think if we had Canady that we would have 9 losses?
H
HokieAvalanche
3mo
I don't think either Bree or Mazz are "elite". Bree may have the higher
upside value given she still has a couple of years left. I think Mazz will always be be wild to a certain extent.
vatechcowpatty vatechcowpatty
3mo
I agree with this. A week ago I thought Mazz 26 and Bree 26 were better
than Lemley 25 and Mazz 25. Not sure now after a rough week. You’re right about Bree. I made the case a couple weeks ago why Mazz needed to stay the Friday Sunday starter. Bree’s stats are padded by pitching a lot of games 1 time through the order. Mazz has been the workhorse. Pete has protected Bree, not starting her until the second half of the season. There has to be something psychological about it. I think she’s fragile emotionally and probably gets her confidence wrecked easily. Just a guess, but that would explain Pete easing her into the season, redshirting her last year, instead of just throwing her into the fire and let her learn. Every time Mazz pitches she pitches until they hit her. That finally happened with Bree at GT and she got pulled, then didn’t look like she took it well in the dugout. Everybody’s personality is different. Some just need to fail, get used to it, and move on. Some need to learn slowly that a bad day isn’t the end of the world. I think the coaches know Bree is a special talent they have to develop, but Mazz is their reliable one at the moment. ** Edited by vatechcowpatty at 4/23/2026, 8:17:55 AM
N
nkhooch
3mo
Good points. This is her first year. So, maybe they are being careful
about giving her too much responsibility. But, for sure, Bree's performance level is why we have had as successful a season as we have had. No disrespect to Layton, who is also in her first year and has great potential. But if Bree was performing at her level I think we would be fighting for a spot in the NCAA instead of being in contention for a hosting spot.
H
HokieAvalanche
3mo
The missing ingredient with our current team!
V
VAHokie89
3mo
If we want to be specific. Michelle Chatfield's power numbers are below
her previous two years.........
hokiepro hokiepro
3mo
It wasn’t missing until this week. We had the lowest team ERA in ACC
Before the 2nd GT game Bree Carrico before her rough GT weekend was 7th in the country in ERA
B
Battlesuggs OP
3mo
Schedule
We have played a weak schedule. Stats are inflated when you play weaker competition
hokiepro hokiepro
3mo
Our schedule strength was not much different than TTech’s
And Bree had a lower ERA than Canady before Saturday’s game We’re in a team wide slump. There’s really no other way to put it
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
You really can't put Bree and Canady in the same sentence. You put way . .
. . too much stock in ERA's.
hokiepro hokiepro
3mo
What metric would you use to better compare pitchers? WHIP? Maybe…
Bottom line is ERA usually tells the story of a pitcher’s production. If you watched Canady and Bree throw side by side, if you’re drafting someone we know the answer would be Canady. But as I said a snapshot in time prior to GT which included the bulk of the season, Bree had been just as productive ** Edited by hokiepro at 4/24/2026, 11:55:16 AM
MidloHokie MidloHokie
3mo
Well Canady's career ERA is 0.94 after pitching . . .
700 innings. She has 1031 K's and only 144 BB. I've sat behind the backstop and watched both pitch multiple games. Get back to me when Bree has pitched 500 innings.