Recent Comments

He was happy, happy, happy.

Are there people who believe the toilet paper should feed from below? Or are there just people who don't care enough to flip it over if they put it on wrong?

Because, clearly, it should go over the top. It just functions that way.

Nothing like a good Thursday night hammertime

Green machine

Do we get a new color for 20?

I believe the recent additions (Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, ND) were all disclosed and voted on by member universities, and with Louisville this was a causality of MD leaving to which the ACC could not be held accountable for.

What you are talking about regarding the fact that none of the BIG schools actually changed again is outside the letter of the law, as you say in your last question. It doesn't matter if any university even picked up the phone really. If the ACC orchestrated even any attempt at change it could still be considered a breach, which is exactly what MD is being sued for.

Again, at this point I think MD's case is a stretch and IMO it will ultimately come down to the judge's personal bias toward trust/anti-trust judgments. If he/she believes that ACC as the parent organization should be held to the same letter to which it holds it's members than they could find for MD, provided the evidence is strong and clear. If the judge believes that the ACC as the parent holds the right to negotiate for the financial well being of its members in a manner that holds them above the letter in which they hold its members, then the ACC will win even with strong evidence. The problem is there are previous judgments both ways.

Defense is what beat Duke and UNC. Duke has always been the model of high intensity slap the court man to man help defense that most teams that play man want to achieve, and we were always able to match their defensive intensity. Duke and UNC at the time always played flawless help defense which at a flawless level is more difficult to play offense against then any zone. I fully agree that Seth sucked at coaching offense (especially vs zones) and it also didnt help that we didnt have a true ACC point guard except Zabian Dowdell, but that is his fault not being able to recruit one. As much as people think having great big men inside is the key to zones, a smart, athletic, and true point guard is what helps you beat zones and we did not have that.

I agree completely. I think the biggest difference, at least currently, between Seth and JJ is that JJ can't seem to coach offense or defense. Our offense right now consists of Devin Wilson penetrating and Adam Smith and Ben chucking up terrible 3's. The only "sets" that we run are the staggered screens for guards that are set 3 times in a row and a pitiful excuse for an offensive set that features one ball reversal through the center at the top of the key followed by someone jogging through a backscreen that has never been open and never will be open.

There is absolutely no movement and no threat of any inside presence.

Okay, so you want consistently good, have some turmoil, then win it all?

Would that be like 8 straight 10+ win seasons, followed by a 7-6 and an 8-5 season, then possibly winning it all in another couple of years?

My point is yes, I want a national championship. But refuse to be disappointed by winning 10+ games in a season, no matter what. I may be disappointed immediately after a loss, but to look back at the year and think it was a failure? No. I will not do that, nor do I see any reason to do that.

TEAM USA!!!

U S A, U S A, U S A, U S A!

You didn't say a "part of". You said "stepping stone". To say that 10 wins is a part of winning a championship is completely asinine as you need to play in 14 games to win one. if you lose more than 3 you aren't going to get that opportunity. But if you want to disprove what I said by taking it absolutely literally while you were speaking metaphorically there's nothing I can do about that.

My post was a response to the "stepping stone" part as many teams didn't have a string of 10-win seasons before they won the MNC. 10-win seasons are great and all but if you fall flat on your face on the biggest stages they're only a consolation prize to make you feel better. It's like trying to get a promotion, it going to someone else, but you get a 1% raise. It's acceptable, but not good when you were aiming much higher. 10 wins is a crutch used to make us feel better about not making the crowning achievement. Just because you can consistently win 10 times every year doesn't give you any better of a shot of winning a MNC than teams that previously didn't break that mark for multiple previous seasons. We are the absolute proof of that.

I would rather be like Ohio State or Florida State in which they are consistently good, have some turmoil, and then win it all. Don't tell me that if you could you would trade a couple 10 win seasons for a MNC.

The post of yours which I replied to was a direct reply to mine about the 2014 team being weak vs OSU. Your entire reply pointed out the past successes. But nowhere in my post did I say the current situation made the past a failure. You reply to mine was a knee jerk response to you inferring that my analysis of today's team was somehow an indictment of the past.

Soooooooooo... I forgive you, you silly passionate Hokie. ;)

Also in re "I am not calling you or anyone a bad fan" I'm not sure how anyone could interpret this other wise..."Have some faith, stop being so negative, buckle up your chin strap and start being the type of fan that Beamer deserves."

So..... I forgive you again, you silly passionate Hokie!

Also, I'll buy you a horse on a treadmill t-shirt in 1 year if you can point to the OSU game and show me how our past successes translated into us being a team that won the game. Hell, if we keep it within 10 and you can again show a connection between our past successes and the outcome of that game, I'll buy you the t-shirt.