I don't think he would be a good fit at all in Greenberg's system but it's hard to say what we'll see moving forward. I think offensive philosophy/system is the biggest question mark heading into Coach Johnson's tenure anyway.
Money, bowls, at-large bids, tv coverage, are all determined by brand-name popularity and not a "fair" contest of performance on the field. Kind of like money in politics. This is why I like the tournaments for all the other divisions of NCAA football.
Do the times Miami and VT were in the Big East count? It still looks bad for the ACC only having 2 opportunities in the last 10 years.
Is being a victim of the Alabama Football Industrial Complex. He knows he'll never beat AJ McCarron outright and will probably be passed by another 5* his senior year. This move reeks of entitlement and he couldn't go to a better school for that. Here's to another 2 years of Rocco at QB and London lying to Tidewater players.
I haven't read any college football article or blog post from ESPN in nearly two years other than the extremely dumb ones that people post on twitter.
I have way less headaches now. lol
We have needed a pure jump shooter for a long time. He is small which might hurt on the defensive side a little. Steph Curry was small though not that I am saying he is Steph Curry, but glad the mindset is changing. Greenberg loved the midsized athletes who lack shooting, so I think this is a step in the right direction.
HD just hyperlinks Andy Bitter's (a very good VT journalist) articles
I stopped reading it it got so bad. At least HD adds some backhanded compliments into her writing to make it interesting and spark up some coversation. The rest of these folks look like that tke about 2 minutes to write and proofread each entry.
a tweet earlier today from David Teel that Weaver said that those series were safe for now fwiw
I can't say I'm a big fan of her's, but have you been reading the ESPN blog recently? These guys make HD look like a professional journalist. They're just straight awful.
14 is too many
VT in '99 (4) and '07 (4)
FSU '98 (4), '99 (4), '00 (4), '03 (1)
Thanks for keeping me on my toes.
16 is the correct number for ACC possibilities, but you did not list FSU in 2000. that chart is awesome
The ratings he shows is exactly what they mean to be: tv ratings. This means that it isn't a valuation of performance, which, as you suggest, fluctuates often, but of the consumer base for the school's sports. That is why we had decent basketball ratings last year even though we weren't great, and that is why Miami had good football ratings last year even though they weren't great. In my opinion, short term performance probably only makes a +-10% difference on consumer base. Ex. Notre Dame, Miami. That is why valuation is best determined in this way.
Also consider, however, that a school's value to a conference isn't just tv ratings (just mostly tv ratings, since tv ratings = $)
They can go to the Big 12 without a buyout but they have to take BC with them.
Can you continue to rely on past performance to predict the future? If so what explains Notre Dame? When was the last time they were really relevant in football (beside TV ratings)?
I have a problem with putting valuation on amatuer sports. I know it factors into TV deals, bowl games, and the BCS but there needs to be some balance with all this. Money should not be the primary concern..
More in-state tatlent is staying in-state. Which means both Uva and VT are getting them.
this kid is an absolute beast. look 1:02 in the first video he manhandles that o tackle
they sure did deliver that northeastern market huh?
I will try to check that math sometime this week, but it seems like it is roughly accurate. The two big shortcomings are that it only considers 2011 data and it excludes post-season play (think sugar bowl).
Very interesting, though. The guy did a good job with the data that he did use.
because my wife is an Iowa grad (although neither of us are big b-ball fans)
There lagging ticket sales won't come up when they are in a Big XII division that features games against WVU, Kansas, Iowa State, etc. They could make up the money for the buyout in a few years possibly with the new deal but attendance issues are likely to continue and might be worse for awhile until the "they are back" possibly comes for real. The would probably lose out on an annual matchup with Miami as well which is one of their sure fire sellouts as well.
ACC looks to be in a bad situation in which the only way they could save face is Hail Mary of getting Notre Dame, far fetched for it to happen but I still have some hope
If FSU leaves then VT needs to jump on the SEC bandwagon w/ NC State
They're supposed to be the football anchors in the conference and they've got a combined 1 ACC title since the 2003 expansion (and as a buddy reminded me, FSU required some horrendous officiating to win that game). FSU has no room to complain. They haven't been pulling their weight, and if it wouldn't hurt the conference I'd love for them to tell FSU to get out.
an example of product placement? Did Tech pay for its appearance?