pic.twitter.com/xW6CVIQlyE— Sean Pedulla (@PedullaSean) April 23, 2024
Not exactly a surprise after comments by Coach Young. Appears it's down to Oklahoma and Alabama.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Well on the brightside, turnovers should go down next year
Turnovers might have been bad, but there is always worse.
Best player on the roster (by a mile). Asked to do way too much (on the ball) due to the roster constructed around him. Would have loved to see him with other shot-creators.
He will thrive in a system where other guys can create (for him and with him). Best of Luck.
Kid was a key part of our ACC title run. Gave us a ton of juice off the bench and played key minutes in February in March. Going to miss his swagger and confidence
Of all the Portal Entrants, the one that I would have liked back the most---even more so than Kidd.
Would have been nice to see him with a more developed backcourt to take some pressure off. Thought he and Curry could have been a potent combination potentially.
Not surprising and Young pretty much made it clear he wasn't coming back in the recent interview posted here.
Bummer nonetheless.
Have a feeling this is gonna be the norm for programs like VT going forward; extensive Roster turnover every year. Really enhances the fan experience.
/SSS
The "fans" created this shit show. Claiming that players were slaves, etc. emotional, irrational argument that gained momentum.
I think you're being facetious.
The answer is the NCAA created this mess. They had years to find a solution and instead hoped that lawmakers would allow them to continue to operate as is. Then the court decisions forced their hand and they STILL refuse to enact any real reforms.
Irrational arguments forced the change was my point. I strongly think that was the driver. That's how we went from you can sign autographs to pay for play in 3 seconds.
It should never have been NIL, but there needs to be contracts. College sports had no legs to stand on legally once institutions started making billions of dollars while the students were not employees.
Solution: standard contracts across the board, no bidding wars allowed. NIL is capped pretty low. Transfers limited because the players are now employees.
"institutions started making billions of dollars" Certainly not the case at VT as that dead horse has been beaten to death. We don't have billions in revenue- not close.
Nobody has billions in revenue. Or even half a billion. Nobody outside the top five even breaks 200 million. We are #38.
As employees and recipients of NIL contracts, they are going to have to pay taxes, etc. I hope they are actually saving.
And that would be the improper restraint of earning potential (I can't remember the legal term, sorry) that was the impetus for the original lawsuit about NIL. For NCAA to do that, they'd need antitrust exemption or some sort of collective bargaining.
NIL should have no cap. It would take care of itself. VT's stretch 4 that nobody knows outside of christiansburg would get a few bucks in real "NIL"- no problem. The HUGE issue is that it's not NIL, its salary/pay for play. - Take that away, and we don't need to talk about NIL, as Sean Pedulla wouldn't get more than a bit of autograph money.
It was the kids that sued EA for using their likeness in their NCAA Football line. Here we are, 10+ years later after EA cancelled all NCAA related games, with a steaming pile of college athletics.
I'm not blaming these kids for the underlying problem, but it was their legal action that started this snowball.
It wasn't kids, it was Ed O'bannon. He graduated/was drafted in 1995. His lawsuit was filed in 2015, after he saw himself in a video game and realized he didn't get any compensation for that.
I'm thinking of a different one then. I wasn't even aware of the lawsuit filed by O'Bannon... i didn't even know who O'Bannon was until 30s ago.
Edit: Kain Colter & Vad Lee
There's a significant difference between calling college athletes slaves (which some media members did - and that's absolutely ludicrous and ignorant) and believe that college athletes should have the right to capitalize on - what could be for many - the most lucrative years of their lives.
"have the right to capitalize on" - Sure, America. Millions of high school graduates go get that bag immediately- they go get jobs, start businesses, etc. Thousands join the military, go on deployment and bank nearly their entire tax free check and then go to college with 100K in their account. American's 100% have the right to make money. Some choose to volunteer to play football in college though, which comes with certain pesky things like amateur competition rules, title 9, having to progress academically at said college (that is why colleges exist, correct? Or are we going to argue that? ) The players wanting to capitalize on their prime earning years always had the option of playing professional ball overseas or starting their own league, etc. But they volunteer to play for Alabama football because - oh, that's like getting into Harvard law... Harvard being the key word, Alabama being the key word. The players get exposure they literally couldn't buy. But irrational people claim that the school is meaningless- there is a market out there- regardless of brand for semi pro football players. I mean look at the UFL attendance numbers... huge demand.
No reasonable person thinks the school is meaningless. There's a symbiotic/chicken-and-egg relationship here - good players can help elevate a school's profile. A school with a great profile can provide a better platform for players.
The collective market exists because schools care about being good at football. This is a market created by university athletic departments - One can (and, you often do) argue that schools care too much about football - but this is the reality, and that reality is what creates a market for these players.
I'll add to this - I understand why people are upset by the changes that happening in the sport. It was fun to watch coaches actually develop a roster. It was cool to see kids climb up the depth chart, have breakout years, etc. It sucks that a team can develop a player (or find a player that no one else knew about) and that player can leave the next year.
I also believe it's possible (but unlikely) that we can live in a world where players can get paid for their work far beyond the value of a scholarship and we can minimize player movement throughout the sport.
The Alabama spring game - a practice - will outdraw every game the Birmingham Stallions play at home, ever. People in Alabama love football...I thought. Turns out that they just love the university of Alabama. Weird. The brand is the market, not the players. People in Birmingham aren't interested in arguably more talented young football players capitalizing on their value. Duke basketball just had 7 players transfer and 3 of their 5 best players at that.... Cameron will be more packed than ever. Duke is the market. Not dudes that stay there 8 months.
There is no brand loyalty for Alabama sports without the athletes that chose to play Alabama sports.
Hence, the chicken-and-egg argument Bar mentioned.
The reason people will show up to an Alabama spring game is based on the decades of entertainment that fans were given by watching the elite players who chose to play football there.
How do you think the talent on the Birmingham Stallions compares to the current Bama roster? Many former college stars in the UFL.
But Alabama fans are happier/like Alabama more when there are better players there, and they are willing to pay in order to make sure those better players attended.
Many other college programs feel similarly.
Thus, there is a market.
I'm not suggesting that players are 'entitled' to getting paid beyond a scholarship. I'm not making an ethical argument for it (though I would gladly make one). I'm just saying that there are a limited amount of players who can make a difference on an FBS football team, and there is a demand for those players, thus those players are able to ask for, and receive, money to play.
Are you and bar not in complete agreement on this? I am being completely honest here. I do not know what you are asking. The Birmingham Stallions roster is probably better that the current Bama roster. Does that mean they are a better draw for fans? Will fans pay more to see the stallions? No, there is an expectation and experience associated with Bama football that can not be easily replicated. And because that experience, among other things, has been monetized (for decades illegally, now only recently legally), Bama players are now being compensated for their contributions. And I can't fault the players for capitalizing on the situation they currently find themselves in.
Part of that value comes from the university itself by way of its long history. Part of it comes from their (the player's) inherent talent and new landscape where that suddenly has monetary value. And many many other factors.
But Bama, the institution, did not just pop into existence out of thin air one day. It was built and paid for all along the way
Bar's first sentence is "No reasonable person thinks the school is meaningless". I do not know the financial situation of the stallions, but my assumption is that Bama has a larger operating budget, which I then assume is why you are bringing it up as a comparison.
I just don't know what you are trying to say. And I want to if for no other reason than to unwrap it from all the double negatives and rhetorical questions.
The football market in Birmingham is not hot right now for talented football players on the stallions. We are talking about football skills here, right? Perhaps even more talented than the rare, elite players at Bama. There is a huge market in Birmingham for Alabama football though. Yes chicken and egg, but undisputable that the bama brand is the market and not Joe Defensive End- the stallions have those guys and zero people give a shit.
Stallions ain't played nobody, Pawl!
Hard to play anyone in an 8 team league. Product for UFL seems really watered down compared to last XFL season.
I was debating mentioning that. Last year, with a little hunting you could find stats or at least write ups regarding the game. It seems like every sports center is deliberately ignoring the entire league this year.
The XFL only had 8 teams during the reincarnation years in 2020-2023
So Nick Saban should have been paid with a scholarship? If people love alabama football no matter who coaches or plays then why pay coaches? If it's an amateur sport then why do coaches get paid? I get paid the same as the kids I coach.
I'm sorry, college coaches are employees of the university and are bound by those employment laws, not amateurism rules put in place for competitive balance and a focus on academics- these are major universities after all. You want to make football players employees? fine- but they are not employees to date. So its not an honest argument.
Coaches weren't always employees and there was an uproar when that happened. And while none (probably) of us were alive it happened and eroded away competitive balance. As soon as the coaches got paid, it wasn't an amateur sport.
I am not arguing that Nick Saban shouldn't have gotten paid, I'm arguing that the coaches shouldn't be an employeed position in amateur sports because then it is just the athletes with money backing them that win.
When was this? 1960?
https://www.bannersociety.com/2019/8/15/20732192/coach-salaries-history-...
As long ago as 1892!
This might be the most naive take I've ever seen on TKP:
Here's another more academic piece from SBJ on the history of Amateurism. I also recommend reading The Sinful Seven - which is half allegory/half non-fiction recount of the history of the NCAA.
Anyways, at no point was amateurism created or implemented with the (honest) intent of leveling a playing field. Focusing on academics has never been anything more than a tagline. Amateurism has always been used as a means of furthering exclusivity, or a way to navigate a legal grey area.
Welp my post could be the most naive, maybe not. This post IS the most revisionist, playing the result post ever. Hands down. And I knew we would eventually get to Virginia Tech is not really an academic thing post. Congrats. and in terms of "Focusing on academics has never been anything more than a tagline" - you do realize that the top 3 players on the basketball team and 25 football players represent a fraction of VT's student athletes? you do realize that? Was academics not a focus for Justin Mutts? Was it not a focus for Andrew Luck? Who got 2 degrees from Stanford while playing- as arguably the top player in the country? Was it not a focus for Bob Knight? who demanded academic focus and won 3 titles and retired with the most wins- by far? Is it not a focus for VT's tennis team? Swim and Dive team? Of fucking course it is. Where it is a "tag line" is 3-4 hoops players (not VT's best player the past couple years either, mind you) and some football guys. That's it. It's not a focus for Kentucky basketball- correct, I grant you that. I get killed on here daily for "blanket statements"- well this nonsense that colleges have been pro sports not focused on academics since the yale rowing team you cited- lol- its the most blanket incorrect statement of all time.
I am not in any way, shape, or form suggesting that:
Your previous post suggested that amateurism was implemented to allow athletes to focus on their studies and maintain a competitive balance throughout the sport. This is not and has never been the case. Amateurism has always been about maintaining power/control by (a) excluding 'other' groups and/or (b) navigating legal grey areas. Amateurism has never about the well being of the athlete.
My original comment was intended to be about the NCAA, specifically with regards to the alledged benefits of amateurism. But I agree after rereading it that my word choice was sloppy.
I know nothing about Justyn Mutts's academic pursuits, but I imagine he would not have turned down the option to graduate with whatever degree(s) he earned AND years of additional compensation.
Bob Knight would've been fired if he lost games, regardless of the academic prowess of his players. Ironically, the fact that Bob Knight was allowed to continue to work at NCAA member institution after (a) choking a player, (b) getting in a physical altercation with an opposing fan, (c) hitting a player, and (d) firing a shotgun at a neighbor shows that he was probably wasn't a great person to further the NCAA's finger quote "values" (yes, I recognize there was some level of dispute to all of these situations, but still...)
Yes, Bob Knight would have been fired for losing. Correct. Bob Knight also would have a wins record that would have stood forever if he took the players John Thompson, Calipari, Tarkanian, Roy, Beoheim took over his career. You have to be fair. Bobby Knight took students first. He didn't take Michael Graham or Rakeem Christmas or the Harrison Twins. Fact. You have to be fair.
Hell of a post. Thanks.
Agree with everything except the word "volunteer". These kids were/are compensated with tuition, lodging, etc. They aren't playing for free out of the kindness of their hearts, they just have a total compensation package that is predominantly not cash. Your "Harvard" point is spot on - kids that end up at a big name school get more airtime and recognition, which serves to boost their prospect status when it comes time to turn pro. This is no different to me than taking a lower-paying job at a high-profile employer once you graduate to build up expertise and have a big name attached to your resume. Yeah, the pay and the hours are gonna suck, but the long-term payoff is significant.
Time for Rechsteiner to actually be better than Pedulla- which has been the talking point all along.
Never heard that talking point.... Source?
Me. I said it to my wife five minutes ago. At least I hope so.
My apologies, I do not have an AI program or time to search comments made about Rechsteiner as a prospect. I can delete my comment if you like.
I was just curious - I had not heard that, and was wondering if you left off the /s or if you had heard some where that he was leaving because he was losing playing time.
Not sarcasm and he is not transferring because of playing time. I was trying to say that Rech was a highly recruited kid and the regular comps were a "better pedulla".. could be hype or whatever, but it's time to see if that is true. Rech isn't big enough to be an ACC 2 guard, so he has to play Pedulla's position now
I don't think he's big enough to be a ACC PG. Hoping he proves me wrong
He was the only person who could create for this team. Tough loss. Hopefully these portal guys have a little more athleticism. The offense just couldn't compete last year.
Man I am going to miss that guy. We had two amazing point guards in Georgia and Sean, and now both are gone. Difference being Amoore had more talent around her [Kitley, cough cough]. Too bad we never got Sean that same level of support this year or last year.
committed to ole miss
At least it was to a blue blood basketball school. /s
Sweet, he can room with Dae'quan Wright.
The bag outweighed Pedulla playing for a total cheating scum bag wife beater. LOL. He's going from one of the classiest coaches in college to one of the worst scum out there. I hope he invests his bag well.
Rumors on other websites that he got north of $800K. Chasing that bag.
Jesus. This is now beyond ridiculous.
You can't fault him for that. That is a nice base to start out with after graduating.
Yeah. Can you imagine how pissed recent grads who couldn't go pro must feel? They could have started their non-sports lives with a retirement account that a 35 year old would envy.
Remember that NCAA ad from way back "almost all of us will go pro in something other than sports?" Now it's "why not both?"
No kidding, and future kids, because 800K for a mid, small point guard is totally sustainable and is only going to get bigger.
If so, best decision VT basketball ever made letting him go. I look at it that way. We can not make the tourney again without him. He gets consumed by good defenses and long guards anyway
we couldn't make the tourney with him as the starter...
I just think he can't be the primary scorer for his team to be successful. If his role is facilitating, shooting open threes and getting easy buckets he's a great point guard.
If he has to do it all in an offensive system that is basically slo-mo ball, then yeah longer more athletic guards are going to force a ton of turnovers and stops like they did the last two years
That's a lot of money for a 1.4 A/TO ratio.
Good for him, but this is beyond ridiculous.
When NIL first started, I kept hearing how these outrageous payments would eventually go away. That this was unsustainable. We are a couple years in and they are still here and really no signs that things are going to change any time soon.
I really dont care. Go chase the money.
This is gonna get a lot of use.....