Recent Comments

At the time, not a catch; subsequent to that year, a catch.

Is it an awkward tagline? perhaps. Is it a negative one? No.

Again that is your interpretation. From reading the article it is clear to me that he is talking about program trajectory, specifically the path programs seem to take after year two where it either sticks or it doesn't. An introspective on whether Chew leaving is foreboding or simply part of the business. These are the questions. Neither negative.

you seem to be at conflict with yourself regarding TAMU:

When he's says VT's program is "far inferior", I don't think he's really accurately assessing the current program, or the progress the VT program has made. I think he's taking the current state of the program at face value. If the current trajectory continues as I'd expect, I anticipate VT will make the tournament in the next few years

Yes, Texas A&M is the better program. For now.

Is it the better opportunity? One's a blue chip stock and one is a growth stock. The relative value is subjective.

It either is or is not better. It cannot be better, but all relative, and inaccurately assessed. By your words it is better. You are talking about VT's trajectory of a program, which is the entire point of the article. Let's try unwind the misinterpretation.

Factually, they made the Sweet 16 and we the NIT. They are the better team.
Subjectively, you are saying that VT's trajectory is up but you didn't say if TAMU's is as well. So even if VT's is going up so could TAMU's, and since at face value they are better (Sweet16) it is subjectively the better team.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. VT is on the rise. But taking issue with a statement of being "far inferior" as overly negative is missing the entire point of the article. Which again is about the 2 year fork in the road and the questions that arise programs at that fork. Again, factually, TAMU went to Sweet16 and VT the NIT, so it is the inferior team. I believe it won't always be but it is now.

Nobody here can climb into Chew's head and understand what he values, so IMHO trying to compare Texas A&M basketball to VT basketball doesnt' seem to me to be that valuable an exercise.

This is the same "why bother?" level of comment as "coaches know best". Yes, nobody (including you) can climb into Chew's head. But this is an OpEd piece on the state of the program, where he is specifically taking a stance on whether Chew leaving is or is not a big deal. And again, in his opinion, as he plainly stated:

Chew leaving isn't as big a deal as it seems on the surface.

If you are going to limit the content that is written only to your liking then what's the point dude? Personally I love these type of articles because I appreciate the difference in outlook, which is kind of the point around here. Provide different substantive points of view. I don't need him to write only how I want him to, and you shouldn't either.

Finally, your words:

For me, Buzz is on track, and Chew leaving isn't a show-stopper. It doesn't offset the continued bonny recruiting news. It seems to me that some are just holding their breath and waiting for the other shoe to drop.

this is exactly what the article is saying. Just written with facts and context to support his point of view.

We all agree (you, me and Brian) that Chew leaving is not the end of the world, and it shouldn't detract from the positive recruiting news we are getting. And as Brian highlighted some fans are indeed "holding the breath waiting for the shoe to drop" and that he believes it is wrong to do so. Yet, VT has a LONG way to go to being a TAMU level program and being at the 2 year fork begs questions as to which fork VT is ultimately going down.

THIS COMMENT IS AWESOME!

Thanks for the insider info.

I'd say huge, to friggin huge.

I think that there might not be a huge walk-up crowd trying to scalp, because of the location not being in the heart of a town or city, but people who live close are going to want to come to a big event.

360 Degree View from 50 Yd line

They talk awfully big about this every upcoming season for a team that hasn't won much yet since 1998.

FTFY

Thanks.

That gif is for one use and one use only.

My favorite part of this one is that one of the garnishes of this Bloody Mary is another Bloody Mary.

I disagree, Garfield had a much younger vibe to him than Maguire and played the part so much better. Both Spiderman 3 and the reboot's Sequel both suffered from the same problems (poor screenplay, too many villains). Regardless, I cannot understand why Maguire was a better Spiderman than Garfield.

Oh God, here we go.

via GIPHY