Continuing the series begun last week, this post will serve as sort of a closing-down of the offseason, even though it's only July; tomorrow begins the ACC football previews, which we'll intersperse with various other football-type things as August rolls along.
Connor Jones - RHP
Great Bridge HS (VA)
Drafted: 21st round, San Diego Padres (628th overall)
By virtue of being the best prospect in the state of Virginia and a potential top-5-round pick (had he not committed to a school where signability is a legit concern for MLB scouts) Connor Jones is easily the most well-known member of the class. (Jones, by the way, ended up just five picks behind UVA senior Reed Gragnani.)
Jones was named the top player in the state by just about everyone who did that, and was a very legit pro prospect. He throws a 91-93 fastball that's reported by multiple sources to have a very good sinking action, a highly desirable trait for both college aces and pro prospects. His second best pitch: probably his breaking ball, and he'll probably need to work some on his changeup before he's ready to be ace material.
That he dropped all the way to the 21st round is a function of his announcement that he would not sign in the MLB draft, not his talent; Keith Law rated him the 25th-best prospect in the draft and called him one of the draft's "few premium right-handed prep arms." Obvious comparisons to a right-handed Nathan Kirby go here, as Jones has the same pedigree that Kirby did coming in. Kirby's fastball proved awfully flat and hittable once he got to Charlottesville, and he spent the season making some headway on that but never really cracking the starting rotation. In-stone predictions for Jones, therefore, would probably be unwise, but it's fair to assume he'll start off right in the mix for innings, whether as a starter or reliever. And he appears to have the mental makeup and dedication to improve and succeed, so even with Kirby as a cautionary tale, there's no reason not to be excited about the possibilities.
Austin Nicely - LHP
Spotswood HS (VA)
Drafted: 10th round, Houston Astros (287th overall)
Nicely is a hard thrower for a lefty and would've made a solid left-handed addition to the staff, but we'll have to file him in the could've-been category; Nicely signed with the Astros for about a $610,000 bonus, which was more than $400,000 above his slot.
Daniel Pinero - INF
Western Tech. Inst. (ON)
Drafted: 20th round, Houston Astros (587th overall)
The 'Stros only went 1-for-2 with UVA prospects, though, as Pinero didn't sign with Houston. Pinero is a big guy whose 6'6" size will probably put him at first base sooner or later, though he does prefer shortstop. Pinero is a key part of Canada's junior national team, and in the 18U Pan Am championships in 2011, made the all-tournament team as a first baseman.
Perfect Game has a high opinion of Pinero, rating him a 10 of 10 as a prospect and suggesting that he does have the athleticism to play short or third base. They also mention multiple times his line-drive hitting ability, and between that and his "projectable" frame (he's kind of long and skinny and at 6'6", 200, he could add another 20-30 pounds) he has potential to be exactly the kind of extra-bases hitter that BOC likes in the middle of the lineup. Pinero might be in line for a few at-bats here and there as a first baseman in 2014, and might get a shot at third base as well; shortstop is out of the question with Brandon Cogswell around. Long-term, that height probably consigns him to first base, but there's a great possibility he follows in Jared King's footsteps as a top-notch defender there and reliable hitter as well.
Jack Roberts - RHP
James River HS (VA)
Undrafted
Roberts can talk with Ben Carraway about what it'll be like to follow in the footsteps of an accomplished older brother at UVA; he is not only the younger brother of perfect-game tosser Will Roberts, but a high school teammate of Nathan Kirby as well. With a name like Jack Roberts, he's the clear winner of this year's Hard to Google Award, but he's got a fastball that sits around 89-90 and still on its upward trajectory, and made Rawlings's all-region first team in the mid-Atlantic. Also of importance: Roberts was the Richmond T-D's male scholar-athlete of the year this spring.
Righties will be a bit more plentiful on the roster next year than southpaws, and Roberts will find himself in a fight for innings. It probably won't be til 2015 that he starts to be a major part of the mix, but at a minimum during his career he should provide good, solid depth.
Matt Thaiss - C
Jackson Memorial HS (NJ)
Drafted: 32nd round, Boston Red Sox (953rd overall)
Nate Irving handled so much of the catching load that it's plain he'll do the same next year, and it's not really even clear that he'll leave after the 2014 season as a junior. With Robbie Coman looking like a decent bet for heir apparent, it's possible Matt Thaiss might have to wait a little while for his chance.
Might not be smart to bet against him either, though. Thaiss's MLB scouting report described him as an "elite defensive catcher" and "has an advanced understanding of the game and plays aggressively." High praise for a prep draft prospect. Thaiss hit in high school for a relatively low average (in the .300s) as compared to a lot of high schoolers that routinely reach the .400s and .500s, but had decent power and went on a rampage in this spring's Carpenter Cup, which is a Philadelphia all-star tournament that pits regional all-star teams from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware against each other. Thaiss doesn't have much of a path to the lineup as a freshman, but that MLB report is very encouraging and, if it pans out that way, will give Thaiss a clear path to eventually grabbing the starting role.
***************************************************
As a whole, this recruiting class doesn't need to carry the water for the future the way the past couple have done; the way the numbers have been shaking out means we're in a small cycle for this year and will probably see a much bigger class in 2014-15. But there's not much filler here. Connor Jones provides the star power, there's good pitching depth with guys like Adam Bleday and Jack Roberts, and I really like each of the position players' potential to work their way into the starting lineup in the future.
Don't be too worried, this year or any year, about the lack of high-level draftees. UVA has cemented a nasty reputation among MLB teams as a black hole of signability. Guys like Connor Jones drop from the 1st round to the 21st. Players that might be drafted in the mid-20s just aren't bothered with. It took a signing bonus of roughly 450% of the recommended slot to pry Austin Nicely away, and at this point, when a player says before the draft that he's not going to sign, teams take him at his word. It makes draft position a fairly unreliable indicator of our incoming talent level. It's not huge, so this isn't a class I'm over the moon about, but I like it.
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Friday, July 19, 2013
big picture look
On the right you'll find the depth chart updated with all the changes over the summer. A few things we know since the last time that was done:
-- Phillip Sims and Clifton Richardson are no longer on the team.
-- Neither is Justin Renfrow.
-- Corwin Cutler will prep. I mean, that was kind of an open thing for a long time, but I decided to wait until the roster was updated before I made anything official on my charts. Just in case.
-- Zack Jones....probably won't ever make it to UVA. I don't think anything's a real done deal yet, but he's making other plans, and guys with that much of their foot out the door don't usually make it back. So I think we're going to have to write off Perry Jones's younger brother.
A few other shuffles have been made too, but none really worth going over in detail. The upshot now is that we'll go into this season with 81 scholarship players....and only seven of them seniors.
We'll discuss later the roster questions that face the 2013 season, like who's going to carry the ball the most (Parks and Mizzell, perhaps), who's going to throw the ball (probably Watford or Lambert), what happens if Sean Cascarano's hip is a long-term problem (pray), what Renfrow's departure means for the DT rotation (lots of PT for the true freshmen, probably) and so on. Today we deal with the longer-term stuff. Which is a euphemism for recruiting.
With Cutler headed off to FUMA, there are currently ten players signed up to be 2014 freshmen - which thanks to some rather disappointing attrition (Richardson, Renfrow in particular) means there's actually one more slot open just to get us to the limit of 85. After that you look to the junior class for non-invitee possibilities, of which I see a few. This would be the 2010 recruiting class that we're looking to, which, since that was the coaching-change class, isn't one of our best. I'd say I see three strong possibilities (not going to go into names at the moment) with one or two more outside possibilities. Then of course you'd have to figure on the usual other attrition routes too.
Not taking anything for granted, but Chris Brathwaite is a decent possibility to go the Jameel Sewell route and work his way back to school, so for now let's say that one-short slot that we talked about is his. So future hauls for the 2014 recruiting class will rely on uninvited fifth years and attrition for their slots. For the sake of argument, let's call it three non-invites and four attrites; probably a conservative guess. Now, who fills those spots?
-- Probably one more offensive lineman, maybe two. This could either be someone like Alex Bookser or Marcus Applefield, or a story like last year with a late-blooming pickup.
-- A space is there for Jamil Kamara whenever he wants it. I think the coaches would take both him and Cameron Phillips in a heartbeat as well.
-- A space is also there for Derrick Nnadi if he wants it, which is looking less and less likely by the week.
-- Melvin Keihn and Greg Stroman are each, I would guess, slightly better than 50/50 chances to pick UVA. Maybe two-thirds chance they do, one-third chance they don't.
So let's say we do get one lineman, both receivers, Keihn, and Stroman. That's five, and by the way that'd really round out this class in beautiful fashion especially if that lineman is Bookser. (He seems more likely Pitt or OSU-bound, but UVA does have a shot.)
That leaves two more slots, maybe three to four if the attrition guess turns out to be too conservative. Other possibilities, then? Jeffery Farrar appears to have a very genuine interest, and Mike London really likes "athletes" that he can get on Grounds and then figure out his position later, which is the deal with Farrar. I think we badly need a born-and-bred tight end; the only real one on the list currently is Devin Pike, but there might be a guy like Jamal Custis that the coaches think they can turn into a tight end. On the other hand, if Pike was someone the coaches absolutely had to have, I think he'd be committed by now.
Defensive end is another major need. Andrew Brown might get a look on the outside. Kentavius Street would be the pipe-dream scenario, and Kurt Holuba would be a great addition as well. Neither seem likely at this point, but they're not dead to us either.
In a realistic good-case scenario, then, the seven slots will be filled by:
-- An O-lineman
-- Kamara
-- Phillips
-- Stroman
-- Keihn
-- Farrar
-- A defensive end
Missing on any of those (and let's be honest, even with optimistic appraisals of our chances in all five specific cases, we only have about a 15% of bringing them all in) would probably open the door to London offering an as-yet unnamed instate guy, as he tends to do. (Think Mason Thomas, Divante Walker.) Also opening the door: the likelihood that seven spots is a conservative guess.
The overall point: we're looking at a lot of flexibility at this point. I'd guess more than the coaches anticipated. They have the freedom to really put out the red carpet and work hard on the players listed above, as well as to not give up the ship on guys like Nnadi. And I think we'll see the recruiting board expand at some point with new offers. I'm easing up on worrying that the class will be full with some badly-wanted players on the outside looking in.
-- Phillip Sims and Clifton Richardson are no longer on the team.
-- Neither is Justin Renfrow.
-- Corwin Cutler will prep. I mean, that was kind of an open thing for a long time, but I decided to wait until the roster was updated before I made anything official on my charts. Just in case.
-- Zack Jones....probably won't ever make it to UVA. I don't think anything's a real done deal yet, but he's making other plans, and guys with that much of their foot out the door don't usually make it back. So I think we're going to have to write off Perry Jones's younger brother.
A few other shuffles have been made too, but none really worth going over in detail. The upshot now is that we'll go into this season with 81 scholarship players....and only seven of them seniors.
We'll discuss later the roster questions that face the 2013 season, like who's going to carry the ball the most (Parks and Mizzell, perhaps), who's going to throw the ball (probably Watford or Lambert), what happens if Sean Cascarano's hip is a long-term problem (pray), what Renfrow's departure means for the DT rotation (lots of PT for the true freshmen, probably) and so on. Today we deal with the longer-term stuff. Which is a euphemism for recruiting.
With Cutler headed off to FUMA, there are currently ten players signed up to be 2014 freshmen - which thanks to some rather disappointing attrition (Richardson, Renfrow in particular) means there's actually one more slot open just to get us to the limit of 85. After that you look to the junior class for non-invitee possibilities, of which I see a few. This would be the 2010 recruiting class that we're looking to, which, since that was the coaching-change class, isn't one of our best. I'd say I see three strong possibilities (not going to go into names at the moment) with one or two more outside possibilities. Then of course you'd have to figure on the usual other attrition routes too.
Not taking anything for granted, but Chris Brathwaite is a decent possibility to go the Jameel Sewell route and work his way back to school, so for now let's say that one-short slot that we talked about is his. So future hauls for the 2014 recruiting class will rely on uninvited fifth years and attrition for their slots. For the sake of argument, let's call it three non-invites and four attrites; probably a conservative guess. Now, who fills those spots?
-- Probably one more offensive lineman, maybe two. This could either be someone like Alex Bookser or Marcus Applefield, or a story like last year with a late-blooming pickup.
-- A space is there for Jamil Kamara whenever he wants it. I think the coaches would take both him and Cameron Phillips in a heartbeat as well.
-- A space is also there for Derrick Nnadi if he wants it, which is looking less and less likely by the week.
-- Melvin Keihn and Greg Stroman are each, I would guess, slightly better than 50/50 chances to pick UVA. Maybe two-thirds chance they do, one-third chance they don't.
So let's say we do get one lineman, both receivers, Keihn, and Stroman. That's five, and by the way that'd really round out this class in beautiful fashion especially if that lineman is Bookser. (He seems more likely Pitt or OSU-bound, but UVA does have a shot.)
That leaves two more slots, maybe three to four if the attrition guess turns out to be too conservative. Other possibilities, then? Jeffery Farrar appears to have a very genuine interest, and Mike London really likes "athletes" that he can get on Grounds and then figure out his position later, which is the deal with Farrar. I think we badly need a born-and-bred tight end; the only real one on the list currently is Devin Pike, but there might be a guy like Jamal Custis that the coaches think they can turn into a tight end. On the other hand, if Pike was someone the coaches absolutely had to have, I think he'd be committed by now.
Defensive end is another major need. Andrew Brown might get a look on the outside. Kentavius Street would be the pipe-dream scenario, and Kurt Holuba would be a great addition as well. Neither seem likely at this point, but they're not dead to us either.
In a realistic good-case scenario, then, the seven slots will be filled by:
-- An O-lineman
-- Kamara
-- Phillips
-- Stroman
-- Keihn
-- Farrar
-- A defensive end
Missing on any of those (and let's be honest, even with optimistic appraisals of our chances in all five specific cases, we only have about a 15% of bringing them all in) would probably open the door to London offering an as-yet unnamed instate guy, as he tends to do. (Think Mason Thomas, Divante Walker.) Also opening the door: the likelihood that seven spots is a conservative guess.
The overall point: we're looking at a lot of flexibility at this point. I'd guess more than the coaches anticipated. They have the freedom to really put out the red carpet and work hard on the players listed above, as well as to not give up the ship on guys like Nnadi. And I think we'll see the recruiting board expand at some point with new offers. I'm easing up on worrying that the class will be full with some badly-wanted players on the outside looking in.
2013 baseball recruiting class, part 1
I guess I usually do this closer to baseball season when the thought is still fresh in everyone's mind, but I didn't. So we'll do it now. It's our annual series in getting acquainted with the prospects that will grace UVA's roster as freshmen next season. "Acquainted" is not an accidental choice of words; this can be an awfully imprecise exercise. Probably the worst prediction I've ever made in five years of writing this blog is that Brandon Waddell would be "probably a future LOOGY or one-inning specialist." That's about as far from "Friday starter" as it gets. Sometimes I don't include everyone, because lists found on the Internet aren't up to the level of the comprehensive coverage of football recruiting, and sometimes guys leave unexpectedly before the season or the semester begin. It's the sort of imprecision that every year makes me strongly consider not doing this, and every year deciding that I at least want to have it as a reference for when the season begins in seven or eight months. On the plus side, the signing deadline is earlier than it was, so we don't have to stretch to August to find out if our signees are skipping school.
The class is a little smaller this year, which is unsurprising because of the small number of players lost to graduation/the draft. BOC knows how to manage a roster. Last year I had to make this a three-parter, but we're back to two this year and the entries are shorter than usual as well.
Tyler Allen - OF
Powhatan HS (VA)
Undrafted
The road to playing time next year for a freshman outfielder is nigh-impossible, so Tyler Allen is a name that'll have to be stashed in the long-term memory banks. He's the only outfielder in the class, which is not too surprising; we have at least five legitimate candidates for playing time and even if Mike Papi moves to first base, the rest of the field is crowded with ouststanding hitters. It'd be a huge surprise to see him in the lineup in 2014.
That said, though, Allen is a good all-around outfield prospect. I wouldn't go so far as to call him "five-tool" because that carries some connotations of sky-high expectations, but Allen can hit, run, field, and throw, all with the skills to do so competitively in college. He's fairly tall with good speed and a left-handed bat, and he could probably at least compete for time in center field when it's his turn. Left field otherwise. Like most college prospects, he's a .400 hitter, and he was player of the year in his district. About half the class made a Rawlings all-region first team; Allen was one who did. He's got great timing, too; in a 15-3 win this season, Allen hit two grand slams. Nice display of power for his future coach; Brian O'Connor was in the stands for that one.
Allen will see the field sparingly, if at all, in 2014. You'd expect that Brandon Downes and Derek Fisher will leave after next year, though, which opens the door. Both left and center field will be open for competition in 2015, which is when Allen's time will come.
Alec Bettinger - RHP
CD Hylton HS (VA)
Undrafted
Bettinger is a summer-ball teammate of UVA's best-known prospect in this class, Connor Jones. He's got a fastball that tops out around 90 and a good breaking ball. Different coaches of his seem to have different ideas as to the effectiveness of his off-speed stuff and which is his better pitch and so on, so they sound like something that'll need honing before they're college-ready. If Bettinger is eventually destined for the rotation, a stop in the bullpen on the way seems highly likely. One possible obstacle for him will be his size; other than Whit Mayberry there aren't any heavily-used righties on UVA's staff shorter than 6'3; Bettinger stands just 6'0". Lefties get more of a pass than righties on height and Bettinger will have to work hard to separate from the pack.
Adam Bleday - LHP
Titusville Area HS (PA)
Undrafted
Bleday is an interesting prospect; he's not big or super-athletic and as a pitcher, he's not by any means a hard thrower. But he's a very good hitter (.429 batting average) who played center field as well as pitched for his high school team, and as a pitcher, his senior season saw him finish with an 0.18 ERA. That means in the 38 innings he pitched, only one earned run crossed the plate. He struck out 72 against only 12 walks. In his junior year, he pitched a full 9 innings in one game (which qualifies as extra innings in high school) and struck out 23(!!) hitters.
Stuff-wise, he's sort of a typical lefty; fastball in the mid-80s at best, but with obviously excellent command and two other pitches that work well for him. He's also small, even for a lefty. With three good pitches, Bleday could get at least a look as a starter and might have that in his long-term future. The competition for the 2014 starting rotation looks as wide open as it's ever been, and the field is stocked with veterans like Whit Mayberry and Artie Lewicki, so if a freshman can crack it, that freshman would have to be very impressive. Mental makeup means a lot to BOC and Karl Kuhn, and we've got no way of knowing how that will go (which is why I make occasionally awful predictions like the Waddell one) but the fact is that the competition both in the rotation and among bullpen lefties is going to be strong in 2014. It might be tough for a guy like Bleday to have a major role early, but long-term he should be in the thick of the race. (Kind of the story of this freshman class, really.)
Tony Butler - INF
Sun Prairie HS (WI)
Undrafted
I wish there were more on Tony Butler, but he's been unfortunately injury-prone in his high school career. He's had two surgeries already; one on his hand after his sophomore year and one this spring, on his shoulder after suffering a dislocation and torn labrum. That injury cost him his senior year.
A shame, because he did some gaudy things as a junior. He batted .521 as a shortstop, had an 0.78 ERA (three ER in 28 IP) as a pitcher, and tossed a no-hitter as well. At least one publication, during the preseason, called him the best player in Wisconsin, and he played for the best team, too; his team was state champs in both 2012 and 2013. This year, instead of playing, he coached.
Butler is one of the members of this class to make Rawlings's all-region first teams, and one of two infielders in the class. The amount of playing time available for infielders will depend partly on what the coaches decide to do with Nick Howard; does he continue to play third base (where he's a little bit of a butcher with the glove) or does he focus on pitching full time? John LaPrise may have the inside track on the vacated second base job, and we'll also be interested to see what we get out of George Ragsdale. By virtue of being an infielder, though, and also by virtue of being pretty good, Butler stands to be one of the few freshmen with a solid path to some playing time in 2014.
Ben Carraway - RHP
Creekview HS (GA)
Undrafted
Yes, this is the year for younger brothers of former Hoo pitchers. Ben's older brother is Andrew, one-time standout starter for UVA and current Seattle Mariners minor leaguer. Carraway is otherwise somewhat overshadowed in this class; his fastball currently tops out around 88, low for a righty, and beyond that there's precious little information on him. I would guess just based on that fastball that Carraway would have an uphill climb for innings, but with so little to go on, predictions are even dicier than usual.
***************************************************
For future reference, next week I go offline for three days and then return with the second half of this series and then the first of the preseason ACC football previews. I feel like it's way too early for that shit but I have two more of them to do now and if I don't get an early start I'll never finish. Even with just 11 to do (on top of, you know, actually focusing on our own team) they had a way of making August race past at the speed of sound. The fall roster is out, so tomorrow there will be depth chart discussion as part of the previously-promised big recruiting picture post.
The class is a little smaller this year, which is unsurprising because of the small number of players lost to graduation/the draft. BOC knows how to manage a roster. Last year I had to make this a three-parter, but we're back to two this year and the entries are shorter than usual as well.
Tyler Allen - OF
Powhatan HS (VA)
Undrafted
The road to playing time next year for a freshman outfielder is nigh-impossible, so Tyler Allen is a name that'll have to be stashed in the long-term memory banks. He's the only outfielder in the class, which is not too surprising; we have at least five legitimate candidates for playing time and even if Mike Papi moves to first base, the rest of the field is crowded with ouststanding hitters. It'd be a huge surprise to see him in the lineup in 2014.
That said, though, Allen is a good all-around outfield prospect. I wouldn't go so far as to call him "five-tool" because that carries some connotations of sky-high expectations, but Allen can hit, run, field, and throw, all with the skills to do so competitively in college. He's fairly tall with good speed and a left-handed bat, and he could probably at least compete for time in center field when it's his turn. Left field otherwise. Like most college prospects, he's a .400 hitter, and he was player of the year in his district. About half the class made a Rawlings all-region first team; Allen was one who did. He's got great timing, too; in a 15-3 win this season, Allen hit two grand slams. Nice display of power for his future coach; Brian O'Connor was in the stands for that one.
Allen will see the field sparingly, if at all, in 2014. You'd expect that Brandon Downes and Derek Fisher will leave after next year, though, which opens the door. Both left and center field will be open for competition in 2015, which is when Allen's time will come.
Alec Bettinger - RHP
CD Hylton HS (VA)
Undrafted
Bettinger is a summer-ball teammate of UVA's best-known prospect in this class, Connor Jones. He's got a fastball that tops out around 90 and a good breaking ball. Different coaches of his seem to have different ideas as to the effectiveness of his off-speed stuff and which is his better pitch and so on, so they sound like something that'll need honing before they're college-ready. If Bettinger is eventually destined for the rotation, a stop in the bullpen on the way seems highly likely. One possible obstacle for him will be his size; other than Whit Mayberry there aren't any heavily-used righties on UVA's staff shorter than 6'3; Bettinger stands just 6'0". Lefties get more of a pass than righties on height and Bettinger will have to work hard to separate from the pack.
Adam Bleday - LHP
Titusville Area HS (PA)
Undrafted
Bleday is an interesting prospect; he's not big or super-athletic and as a pitcher, he's not by any means a hard thrower. But he's a very good hitter (.429 batting average) who played center field as well as pitched for his high school team, and as a pitcher, his senior season saw him finish with an 0.18 ERA. That means in the 38 innings he pitched, only one earned run crossed the plate. He struck out 72 against only 12 walks. In his junior year, he pitched a full 9 innings in one game (which qualifies as extra innings in high school) and struck out 23(!!) hitters.
Stuff-wise, he's sort of a typical lefty; fastball in the mid-80s at best, but with obviously excellent command and two other pitches that work well for him. He's also small, even for a lefty. With three good pitches, Bleday could get at least a look as a starter and might have that in his long-term future. The competition for the 2014 starting rotation looks as wide open as it's ever been, and the field is stocked with veterans like Whit Mayberry and Artie Lewicki, so if a freshman can crack it, that freshman would have to be very impressive. Mental makeup means a lot to BOC and Karl Kuhn, and we've got no way of knowing how that will go (which is why I make occasionally awful predictions like the Waddell one) but the fact is that the competition both in the rotation and among bullpen lefties is going to be strong in 2014. It might be tough for a guy like Bleday to have a major role early, but long-term he should be in the thick of the race. (Kind of the story of this freshman class, really.)
Tony Butler - INF
Sun Prairie HS (WI)
Undrafted
I wish there were more on Tony Butler, but he's been unfortunately injury-prone in his high school career. He's had two surgeries already; one on his hand after his sophomore year and one this spring, on his shoulder after suffering a dislocation and torn labrum. That injury cost him his senior year.
A shame, because he did some gaudy things as a junior. He batted .521 as a shortstop, had an 0.78 ERA (three ER in 28 IP) as a pitcher, and tossed a no-hitter as well. At least one publication, during the preseason, called him the best player in Wisconsin, and he played for the best team, too; his team was state champs in both 2012 and 2013. This year, instead of playing, he coached.
Butler is one of the members of this class to make Rawlings's all-region first teams, and one of two infielders in the class. The amount of playing time available for infielders will depend partly on what the coaches decide to do with Nick Howard; does he continue to play third base (where he's a little bit of a butcher with the glove) or does he focus on pitching full time? John LaPrise may have the inside track on the vacated second base job, and we'll also be interested to see what we get out of George Ragsdale. By virtue of being an infielder, though, and also by virtue of being pretty good, Butler stands to be one of the few freshmen with a solid path to some playing time in 2014.
Ben Carraway - RHP
Creekview HS (GA)
Undrafted
Yes, this is the year for younger brothers of former Hoo pitchers. Ben's older brother is Andrew, one-time standout starter for UVA and current Seattle Mariners minor leaguer. Carraway is otherwise somewhat overshadowed in this class; his fastball currently tops out around 88, low for a righty, and beyond that there's precious little information on him. I would guess just based on that fastball that Carraway would have an uphill climb for innings, but with so little to go on, predictions are even dicier than usual.
***************************************************
For future reference, next week I go offline for three days and then return with the second half of this series and then the first of the preseason ACC football previews. I feel like it's way too early for that shit but I have two more of them to do now and if I don't get an early start I'll never finish. Even with just 11 to do (on top of, you know, actually focusing on our own team) they had a way of making August race past at the speed of sound. The fall roster is out, so tomorrow there will be depth chart discussion as part of the previously-promised big recruiting picture post.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
recruiting board update
Not a lot of movement this time at the top of the board, but some interesting shuffles down below. You know where this thing lives.
-- Moved ATH Jeffery Farrar from yellow to green. I'd no longer be surprised if Farrar committed to UVA, which is one of the big differences from yellow to green.
-- Moved OT Bentley Spain from yellow to red. A move that may be long overdue.
-- Added DE Kentavius Street to yellow. Street is a big-time prospect who is taking public notice of the fact that other big-time prospects (Andrew Brown, to be specific in this case) are committing to UVA. Street's main focus is NC State at the moment, and he's got a lot of other suitors, and yes I'd be awfully surprised to see him actually verbal up to UVA, but stranger things have (occasionally) happened.
-- Removed OT Justin Falcinelli (Clemson), ATH M.J. Stewart (UNC), and CB Christopher Murphy (Arkansas) from red.
Before the end of summer I'll have a big picture type look. Hopefully soon, cause there won't be much point to that after another couple commitments. If it's not some time this week, then it'll be interspersed with the annual football previews, which start at the end of next week and run through August.
-- Moved ATH Jeffery Farrar from yellow to green. I'd no longer be surprised if Farrar committed to UVA, which is one of the big differences from yellow to green.
-- Moved OT Bentley Spain from yellow to red. A move that may be long overdue.
-- Added DE Kentavius Street to yellow. Street is a big-time prospect who is taking public notice of the fact that other big-time prospects (Andrew Brown, to be specific in this case) are committing to UVA. Street's main focus is NC State at the moment, and he's got a lot of other suitors, and yes I'd be awfully surprised to see him actually verbal up to UVA, but stranger things have (occasionally) happened.
-- Removed OT Justin Falcinelli (Clemson), ATH M.J. Stewart (UNC), and CB Christopher Murphy (Arkansas) from red.
Before the end of summer I'll have a big picture type look. Hopefully soon, cause there won't be much point to that after another couple commitments. If it's not some time this week, then it'll be interspersed with the annual football previews, which start at the end of next week and run through August.
Monday, July 15, 2013
weekend review
OK so it's more of a weekly review but regardless.
-- Folks must be feeling good about our ability to reinstate fired employees, because a group of people are expressing their discontent over Mark Bernardino's resignation. Or firing or whatever it might have been. There was definitely a certain abruptness to that. I doubt there was anything too fishy because reporters always nose around these things and there doesn't seem to have been anything much that showed up beyond what you're seeing. OK, it probably wasn't totally Bernardino's idea to quit either - at least not without something that might've triggered it - but on the rage-scale it ends up a few notches below the whole Sullivan Affair too.
-- This particular group didn't get the moratorium they wanted (which is not terribly surprising) because UVA was not slow in hiring a replacement. If we have to set aside one of UVA's most successful coaches in any sport, I think the profile of his replacement is just what you'd look for. Augie Busch has the bloodlines (his dad once ran the national team, which is only the most successful swimming organization in the whole world), worked at one of the NCAA's elite programs (Arizona) for a long time, and has head coaching experience which proves he's not a screw-up once handed the reins. Swimming is even more completely about recruiting than most sports, since coaches are deprived of the chance to invent schemes, and Busch was UA's recruiting coordinator. I'll take it.
-- More than 420 basketball players have transferred this offseason. I say this mainly to point out that that makes it not totally off the wall that UVA has had two now, with Taylor Barnette being the second. It's still a little annoying that a little under 10% of basketball players transfer every year. Player goes to team, realizes he's not going to play 25 minutes a night, transfers. We're getting to the point where the NCAA really ought to create some incentives for staying all four years at one school. (Yes, I know, a UVA degree ought to be enough of one.) Arguments are always made against making it harder because shouldn't kids have the right to play where they want, what about hardships, etc. etc. Fine. Then figure out a way to reward loyalty.
From a depth chart perspective, it might've been nice to create a little instant heat off the bench the way Barnette was able to do at times, but there are certainly more than a few guys who should be able to hit that shot. And it relieves some of the crazy scholarship crunch in that class. Tony has room for three guys in 2014 (to go along with B.J. Stith) if he likes, and he probably will if he can swing it.
-- John LaPrise is doing really well in summer ball. (His Northwoods League is probably about second on the hierarchy of summer ball leagues, behind Cape Cod and even with New England.) Possible front-runner next year for the vacated 2B job left open by Reed Gragnani.
-- Hokie running back Michael Holmes was kicked out of Virginia Tech - by a student-run disciplinary council. Frank Beamer must be pissed that his usual policy of never punishing misdemeanors (after first having Jimmy Turk make sure no felony charge ever touches his players) was undercut by students who don't want to be represented by a guy who beat someone else up to the tune of $13,000 of damages. If you hear Hokies complaining about this, it's probably because they're used to seeing guys with much worse behavior kept on the team without any student council being involved. The really amusing part of that article was this line, though: "It would be refreshing if other colleges and universities looked at what took place in Blacksburg and said, 'This is what we need to do.'" Funny, I can't think of any other schools in the state of Virginia where students get a hand in deciding who their classmates will be, can you?
Recruiting board update coming tomorrow.
-- Folks must be feeling good about our ability to reinstate fired employees, because a group of people are expressing their discontent over Mark Bernardino's resignation. Or firing or whatever it might have been. There was definitely a certain abruptness to that. I doubt there was anything too fishy because reporters always nose around these things and there doesn't seem to have been anything much that showed up beyond what you're seeing. OK, it probably wasn't totally Bernardino's idea to quit either - at least not without something that might've triggered it - but on the rage-scale it ends up a few notches below the whole Sullivan Affair too.
-- This particular group didn't get the moratorium they wanted (which is not terribly surprising) because UVA was not slow in hiring a replacement. If we have to set aside one of UVA's most successful coaches in any sport, I think the profile of his replacement is just what you'd look for. Augie Busch has the bloodlines (his dad once ran the national team, which is only the most successful swimming organization in the whole world), worked at one of the NCAA's elite programs (Arizona) for a long time, and has head coaching experience which proves he's not a screw-up once handed the reins. Swimming is even more completely about recruiting than most sports, since coaches are deprived of the chance to invent schemes, and Busch was UA's recruiting coordinator. I'll take it.
-- More than 420 basketball players have transferred this offseason. I say this mainly to point out that that makes it not totally off the wall that UVA has had two now, with Taylor Barnette being the second. It's still a little annoying that a little under 10% of basketball players transfer every year. Player goes to team, realizes he's not going to play 25 minutes a night, transfers. We're getting to the point where the NCAA really ought to create some incentives for staying all four years at one school. (Yes, I know, a UVA degree ought to be enough of one.) Arguments are always made against making it harder because shouldn't kids have the right to play where they want, what about hardships, etc. etc. Fine. Then figure out a way to reward loyalty.
From a depth chart perspective, it might've been nice to create a little instant heat off the bench the way Barnette was able to do at times, but there are certainly more than a few guys who should be able to hit that shot. And it relieves some of the crazy scholarship crunch in that class. Tony has room for three guys in 2014 (to go along with B.J. Stith) if he likes, and he probably will if he can swing it.
-- John LaPrise is doing really well in summer ball. (His Northwoods League is probably about second on the hierarchy of summer ball leagues, behind Cape Cod and even with New England.) Possible front-runner next year for the vacated 2B job left open by Reed Gragnani.
-- Hokie running back Michael Holmes was kicked out of Virginia Tech - by a student-run disciplinary council. Frank Beamer must be pissed that his usual policy of never punishing misdemeanors (after first having Jimmy Turk make sure no felony charge ever touches his players) was undercut by students who don't want to be represented by a guy who beat someone else up to the tune of $13,000 of damages. If you hear Hokies complaining about this, it's probably because they're used to seeing guys with much worse behavior kept on the team without any student council being involved. The really amusing part of that article was this line, though: "It would be refreshing if other colleges and universities looked at what took place in Blacksburg and said, 'This is what we need to do.'" Funny, I can't think of any other schools in the state of Virginia where students get a hand in deciding who their classmates will be, can you?
Recruiting board update coming tomorrow.
Thursday, July 11, 2013
why you should be rooting against ed o'bannon
Chances are you don't need the update, but in case you're a little behind, the deal is this: One day, former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon noticed he was in a video game and realized he hadn't seen a dime of the money from it. So he sued - Electronic Arts for using his likeness and not paying him and the NCAA for licensing it.
That was nearly four years ago. Much legal wrangling has gone on since then, which is not entirely important except to note that the defendants have been totally unsuccessful in getting the case dismissed. Which either means a settlement (bad for the NCAA) or a trial (very risky for the NCAA.) Either way, the case trundles toward a resolution sometime in another few years.
It's really, really bad form to be cheering for the NCAA in this one. It feels like taking a big bite of a slime sandwich. The idea goes something like this:
-- The NCAA puts these players - football and basketball, we're talking about here - through long hours and uses their labor to make a lot of money.
-- That money then goes to line various pockets. Maybe it pays exorbitant coaching salaries, like Nick Saban's $5.3 million per year, which when other compensation is included probably rolls in closer to about $8 million. Maybe it's used to build extravagant palaces, including waterfalls in the locker room. Whatever the use, it goes to something other than the players who actually appear on TV.
-- This is bad.
I'm here to tell you why it's not. And why, if Ed O'Bannon gets the USFL treatment, the world will be better off. (History lesson: The USFL won their antitrust lawsuit against the NFL and received for their trouble a check for $3.76, which has never been cashed.)
Here's the problem. O'Bannon is asking for a lot of things. First he wants a lot of money to cover all those years that players had their likenesses used, seemingly without permission. Players do waive their right to their likenesses as regards their college careers, but O'Bannon argues this is a violation of antitrust law. I can't really argue against this part. Jake McGee is a white, 6'6", 250 lb tight end with very good pass-catching skills and average blocking skills who wears #83 for the Virginia Cavaliers. So when EA puts out a video game and includes a white, 6'6", 250 lb tight end with very good pass-catching skills and average blocking skills who wears #83 for the Virginia Cavaliers, not many courts will accept the argument that that isn't Jake McGee.
The problem is that the NCAA and EA aren't competitors. If an agreement was made between GM and Toyota to fix the price of their products, that would be antitrust; the NCAA and EA don't compete. It's perfectly legitimate for the NCAA to license out likenesses to which it has a legal right; whether it's legally fair for them to have that legal right in perpetuity is something the courts will decide.
So there are, like, jillions of dollars of damages at stake there, because antitrust law triples any damages automatically. But those are one-time fees. What O'Bannon is also demanding is that players receive 50% of future TV revenues. Current and future players.
I wish there were more clarity on that, because to me, that's the huge kicker. Even the text of the lawsuit doesn't define that very well. Nobody is really sure what this means, and every article on the subject just says "players" as if that answers it. Players who regularly appear on TV? Players who appear on TV once? Every athlete on the roster of a team? What if the school never appears on TV? What if Florida State is on TV all the time and Wake Forest is only occasionally? What if not a single Coppin State game ever shows up on TV? Schools tend to receive TV distributions equally within a conference regardless of how much their value contributed to that revenue, so one would imagine that Wake is on the hook just as much as FSU. But if FSU's softball team plays on TV and BC's never does, which softball players get a cut?
Then of course, we have to ask about the form of these payments. Can their scholarships count or is it straight cash? O'Bannon is opening up a major can of worms here.
What bugs me is this, though. It is very easy to root against the scummy ol' NCAA here, for the nasty exploitation of their players. Emotion leads us to believe that of course the players deserve to be compensated for their efforts. Of course they should get a cut of their jersey sales and video game sales and so on. There are a load of articles gleefully predicting the demise of the NCAA, some in the guise of "a guide to the lawsuit," which is more like "why you should hate those bastards."
Well, let's try something. Let's talk in those terms: athletes should get what they deserve, not what the NCAA and their schools allow them to have. Chris Webber semi-famously wondered why he had to scrounge for pizza money while his jersey was on sale in the school store; this was part of the impetus for all the under-the-table money the Fab Five took that sent Michigan into basketball irrelevance for fifteen years. Fine: athletes like Webber should get what they deserve.
But let's give everyone what they deserve. And what do wrestlers, runners, swimmers, volleyball players, tennis players, rowers, gymnasts, golfers, and other obscure athletes deserve? Nothing. NOT A DAMN THING. Screw them, man - they don't sell jerseys, drive ratings, or pack stadiums. They're leeches on the system. Forget scholarships - they should pay for the right to play their sport in dedicated facilities with fancy uniforms and they definitely shouldn't be getting $8.8 million tennis facilities. What a country where a tennis player whose audience is smaller than my rec league soccer games can shower and change in donated luxury.
The gleeful vultures like Charles Pierce would have you believe it's "skyrocketing coaching salaries" and straw men in suits taking all this money. That's not how this works. Yes, part of the money goes to gold-plated facilities and expensive coaches - all to attract these exploited players, who eat that shit up like the fat kid at the donut buffet. Nothing recruits like excess. Kids get a personal tour of Alabama's country-club locker room facilities from a coaching legend and they suddenly forget all about the fact that their future appearance on ESPN is paying for all this. Or they realize "man, I get to play on ESPN!"
But what really happens is that a whole hell of a lot of opportunities are being paid for by all this TV money. In what I would call zero-revenue sports (swimming, wrestling, tennis, etc.), the NCAA allows a maximum of 71.1 scholarships, and in low-revenue sports (soccer, baseball, lacrosse, hockey) there are a further 52.2 for a total of 123.3. Let's say the average school offers 75 of them at an average cost of $20,000 each (somewhere in the middle between in-state and out-of-state tuition); the school spends $1.5 million on scholarships, and probably a further $5-10 million total on coaches, and another few million a year on facility maintenance.
O'Bannon wants to take about $10 million - by instantly cutting schools' TV revenue in half and sending it I don't know where. Schools may be able to count scholarship money in that and thus substantially reduce the financial hit, but I doubt it; O'Bannon is already contending that a scholarship does not equal compensation.
Title IX proponents have always said that they think schools ought to get themselves in compliance by spending more money on women's sports, not by cutting men's. These people live in gumdrop-rainbow-land. In real life, schools have always complied with Title IX by killing off opportunities for men. Because they can't make money appear out of thin air, that's why. It's a scarce resource, in the economic sense of the word.
They'll deal with O'Bannon compliance the same way. They won't wave magic wands and hand four-figure checks to all their players and still pay for a tennis team. They'll likely face the choice between a football team and a bunch of non-revenue sports. The wave of new D-I football teams like Georgia State and South Alabama is because most schools think football will raise their profile and visibility and thus the expenditures are worth it for the school. They're probably right. Which means tennis and swimming go right out the window. Quite a few schools won't be able to afford Division I any more, because that requires six each of men's and women's sports. Other reforms aside, schools are not going to stop paying coaches and building nice facilities, they're just going to do so for fewer sports. That's how they've always operated and that's how they'll continue to operate.
The overstuffing of D-I aside, this means way fewer opportunities. Especially for men, since Title IX makes it that much harder to cut women's sports. Play football or don't play. No scholarship for you. There are a ton of reasonable suggestions out there that could put to rest quite a few of these problems. Trust funds and the like - then you could even put names on the jerseys and maybe even sell more of them that way. Salary caps for coaches. What have you. There are no possible reasonable suggestions to fairly divvy up TV money if you are talking about writing checks directly out of the TV pot, because no matter how you do it someone can always make a case they deserve more than the next guy. Ed O'Bannon thinks he is taking money from rich guys in suits and giving it to exploited athletes; he's really just setting up a mechanism to move money from some athletes to others. Not a good future.
That was nearly four years ago. Much legal wrangling has gone on since then, which is not entirely important except to note that the defendants have been totally unsuccessful in getting the case dismissed. Which either means a settlement (bad for the NCAA) or a trial (very risky for the NCAA.) Either way, the case trundles toward a resolution sometime in another few years.
It's really, really bad form to be cheering for the NCAA in this one. It feels like taking a big bite of a slime sandwich. The idea goes something like this:
-- The NCAA puts these players - football and basketball, we're talking about here - through long hours and uses their labor to make a lot of money.
-- That money then goes to line various pockets. Maybe it pays exorbitant coaching salaries, like Nick Saban's $5.3 million per year, which when other compensation is included probably rolls in closer to about $8 million. Maybe it's used to build extravagant palaces, including waterfalls in the locker room. Whatever the use, it goes to something other than the players who actually appear on TV.
-- This is bad.
I'm here to tell you why it's not. And why, if Ed O'Bannon gets the USFL treatment, the world will be better off. (History lesson: The USFL won their antitrust lawsuit against the NFL and received for their trouble a check for $3.76, which has never been cashed.)
Here's the problem. O'Bannon is asking for a lot of things. First he wants a lot of money to cover all those years that players had their likenesses used, seemingly without permission. Players do waive their right to their likenesses as regards their college careers, but O'Bannon argues this is a violation of antitrust law. I can't really argue against this part. Jake McGee is a white, 6'6", 250 lb tight end with very good pass-catching skills and average blocking skills who wears #83 for the Virginia Cavaliers. So when EA puts out a video game and includes a white, 6'6", 250 lb tight end with very good pass-catching skills and average blocking skills who wears #83 for the Virginia Cavaliers, not many courts will accept the argument that that isn't Jake McGee.
The problem is that the NCAA and EA aren't competitors. If an agreement was made between GM and Toyota to fix the price of their products, that would be antitrust; the NCAA and EA don't compete. It's perfectly legitimate for the NCAA to license out likenesses to which it has a legal right; whether it's legally fair for them to have that legal right in perpetuity is something the courts will decide.
So there are, like, jillions of dollars of damages at stake there, because antitrust law triples any damages automatically. But those are one-time fees. What O'Bannon is also demanding is that players receive 50% of future TV revenues. Current and future players.
I wish there were more clarity on that, because to me, that's the huge kicker. Even the text of the lawsuit doesn't define that very well. Nobody is really sure what this means, and every article on the subject just says "players" as if that answers it. Players who regularly appear on TV? Players who appear on TV once? Every athlete on the roster of a team? What if the school never appears on TV? What if Florida State is on TV all the time and Wake Forest is only occasionally? What if not a single Coppin State game ever shows up on TV? Schools tend to receive TV distributions equally within a conference regardless of how much their value contributed to that revenue, so one would imagine that Wake is on the hook just as much as FSU. But if FSU's softball team plays on TV and BC's never does, which softball players get a cut?
Then of course, we have to ask about the form of these payments. Can their scholarships count or is it straight cash? O'Bannon is opening up a major can of worms here.
What bugs me is this, though. It is very easy to root against the scummy ol' NCAA here, for the nasty exploitation of their players. Emotion leads us to believe that of course the players deserve to be compensated for their efforts. Of course they should get a cut of their jersey sales and video game sales and so on. There are a load of articles gleefully predicting the demise of the NCAA, some in the guise of "a guide to the lawsuit," which is more like "why you should hate those bastards."
Well, let's try something. Let's talk in those terms: athletes should get what they deserve, not what the NCAA and their schools allow them to have. Chris Webber semi-famously wondered why he had to scrounge for pizza money while his jersey was on sale in the school store; this was part of the impetus for all the under-the-table money the Fab Five took that sent Michigan into basketball irrelevance for fifteen years. Fine: athletes like Webber should get what they deserve.
But let's give everyone what they deserve. And what do wrestlers, runners, swimmers, volleyball players, tennis players, rowers, gymnasts, golfers, and other obscure athletes deserve? Nothing. NOT A DAMN THING. Screw them, man - they don't sell jerseys, drive ratings, or pack stadiums. They're leeches on the system. Forget scholarships - they should pay for the right to play their sport in dedicated facilities with fancy uniforms and they definitely shouldn't be getting $8.8 million tennis facilities. What a country where a tennis player whose audience is smaller than my rec league soccer games can shower and change in donated luxury.
The gleeful vultures like Charles Pierce would have you believe it's "skyrocketing coaching salaries" and straw men in suits taking all this money. That's not how this works. Yes, part of the money goes to gold-plated facilities and expensive coaches - all to attract these exploited players, who eat that shit up like the fat kid at the donut buffet. Nothing recruits like excess. Kids get a personal tour of Alabama's country-club locker room facilities from a coaching legend and they suddenly forget all about the fact that their future appearance on ESPN is paying for all this. Or they realize "man, I get to play on ESPN!"
But what really happens is that a whole hell of a lot of opportunities are being paid for by all this TV money. In what I would call zero-revenue sports (swimming, wrestling, tennis, etc.), the NCAA allows a maximum of 71.1 scholarships, and in low-revenue sports (soccer, baseball, lacrosse, hockey) there are a further 52.2 for a total of 123.3. Let's say the average school offers 75 of them at an average cost of $20,000 each (somewhere in the middle between in-state and out-of-state tuition); the school spends $1.5 million on scholarships, and probably a further $5-10 million total on coaches, and another few million a year on facility maintenance.
O'Bannon wants to take about $10 million - by instantly cutting schools' TV revenue in half and sending it I don't know where. Schools may be able to count scholarship money in that and thus substantially reduce the financial hit, but I doubt it; O'Bannon is already contending that a scholarship does not equal compensation.
Title IX proponents have always said that they think schools ought to get themselves in compliance by spending more money on women's sports, not by cutting men's. These people live in gumdrop-rainbow-land. In real life, schools have always complied with Title IX by killing off opportunities for men. Because they can't make money appear out of thin air, that's why. It's a scarce resource, in the economic sense of the word.
They'll deal with O'Bannon compliance the same way. They won't wave magic wands and hand four-figure checks to all their players and still pay for a tennis team. They'll likely face the choice between a football team and a bunch of non-revenue sports. The wave of new D-I football teams like Georgia State and South Alabama is because most schools think football will raise their profile and visibility and thus the expenditures are worth it for the school. They're probably right. Which means tennis and swimming go right out the window. Quite a few schools won't be able to afford Division I any more, because that requires six each of men's and women's sports. Other reforms aside, schools are not going to stop paying coaches and building nice facilities, they're just going to do so for fewer sports. That's how they've always operated and that's how they'll continue to operate.
The overstuffing of D-I aside, this means way fewer opportunities. Especially for men, since Title IX makes it that much harder to cut women's sports. Play football or don't play. No scholarship for you. There are a ton of reasonable suggestions out there that could put to rest quite a few of these problems. Trust funds and the like - then you could even put names on the jerseys and maybe even sell more of them that way. Salary caps for coaches. What have you. There are no possible reasonable suggestions to fairly divvy up TV money if you are talking about writing checks directly out of the TV pot, because no matter how you do it someone can always make a case they deserve more than the next guy. Ed O'Bannon thinks he is taking money from rich guys in suits and giving it to exploited athletes; he's really just setting up a mechanism to move money from some athletes to others. Not a good future.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
2012-2013 Cavalier of the Year
Last year there was just one intrepid soul that voted for Jarmere Jenkins. That person can congratulate himself or herself for being into tennis before it was cool. Jenkins's national championships - plural, as he earned both the team and doubles trophy and came within a hair of earning the singles trophy as well - were enough to sway this year's voting public into making him the FOV Cavalier of the Year.
Frankly, this award has turned out exactly as I'd hoped. The winners have come from five different sports and only one is a traditional revenue sport; we have baseball (twice), men's soccer, women's soccer, men's basketball, and now, men's tennis. Does it suck that our football team isn't ever good enough to produce stronger candidates? Yeah, kinda. But the one year they were pretty good, women's soccer still beat them out with a better player. I'd like a better football team, but I can't help it that UVA is so dang exceptional at pumping out really good athletes everywhere else.
Jarmere Jenkins is as worthy a candidate as you'll ever see for the award, and for the record, yes, I voted for him too. One vote, same as you. I thought it was a shame Caroline Miller didn't earn more votes, as I figured her for the second-best choice, and we also really ought to give like a lifetime achievement award to Paige Selenski for being the first four-time nominee. Of all the athletes I've ever nominated, Selenski has had probably the best UVA career.
But Jenkins, man: national champion. You can't beat it. Here are the voting totals for posterity:
Jarmere Jenkins: 81
Joe Harris: 30
Mike Papi: 19
Paige Selenski: 8
Steve Greer: 6
Caroline Miller: 5
Brittany Altomare, Melanie Mitchell, Luke Papendick: 1
Will Bates, Casey Bocklet, Scott McWilliams: 0
Frankly, this award has turned out exactly as I'd hoped. The winners have come from five different sports and only one is a traditional revenue sport; we have baseball (twice), men's soccer, women's soccer, men's basketball, and now, men's tennis. Does it suck that our football team isn't ever good enough to produce stronger candidates? Yeah, kinda. But the one year they were pretty good, women's soccer still beat them out with a better player. I'd like a better football team, but I can't help it that UVA is so dang exceptional at pumping out really good athletes everywhere else.
Jarmere Jenkins is as worthy a candidate as you'll ever see for the award, and for the record, yes, I voted for him too. One vote, same as you. I thought it was a shame Caroline Miller didn't earn more votes, as I figured her for the second-best choice, and we also really ought to give like a lifetime achievement award to Paige Selenski for being the first four-time nominee. Of all the athletes I've ever nominated, Selenski has had probably the best UVA career.
But Jenkins, man: national champion. You can't beat it. Here are the voting totals for posterity:
Jarmere Jenkins: 81
Joe Harris: 30
Mike Papi: 19
Paige Selenski: 8
Steve Greer: 6
Caroline Miller: 5
Brittany Altomare, Melanie Mitchell, Luke Papendick: 1
Will Bates, Casey Bocklet, Scott McWilliams: 0
Monday, July 8, 2013
the school: Notre Dame
It pains me to say it, because Lord knows the Domers don't need larger heads than they've already got, but Notre Dame is not only a brilliant addition to the ACC, it's essentially a necessary one. Everyone else has been looking to add to their conference a big, high-profile team, and of all the teams that actually moved conferences, Notre Dame has the highest of profiles. The ND logo looks decidedly odd among all the other ACC ones, even the other two new schools, but it's a marriage of some necessity. And the Irish bring a ton of instant, and very tangible, cachet.
Overall profile
Enrollment (undergrad):
1. Florida State: 31,800
2. Maryland: 26,800
3. NC State: 26,200
4. Virginia Tech: 23,900
5. North Carolina: 18,600
6. Pittsburgh: 18,400
7. Clemson: 16,600
8. Virginia: 15,800
9. Syracuse: 14,800
10. Georgia Tech: 14,500
11. Miami: 10,300
12. Boston College: 9,100
13. Notre Dame: 8,400
14. Duke: 6,500
15. Wake Forest: 4,800
Academic rank (USN&WR):
1. Duke (#8)
2. Notre Dame (#17)
3. Virginia (#24)
4. Wake Forest (#27)
5. North Carolina (#30)
6. Boston College (#31)
7. Georgia Tech (#36)
8. Miami (#44)
9(t). Syracuse (#58)
9(t). Maryland (#58)
9(t). Pittsburgh (#58)
12. Clemson (#68)
13. Virginia Tech (#72)
14. Florida State (#97)
15. NC State (#106)
Director's Cup average:**
1. North Carolina: 6.2
2. Florida State: 9
3. Virginia: 10.6
4. Duke: 12
5. Notre Dame: 18.4
6. Maryland: 28.8
7. Virginia Tech: 40
8. Clemson: 50.8
9. Syracuse: 54
10. Miami: 56.4
11. Georgia Tech: 59.6
12. NC State: 60.2
13. Boston College: 67.6
14. Wake Forest: 70.8
15. Pittsburgh: 113.6
**average finish in the last five years, including 2013.
When you think about it, having five teams that averaged in the Director's Cup top 20 in the past five years is pretty good. It leaves less than four each to be scattered among the other four major conferences. I think a world-class university should excel in everything it does, athletics included, and there are really only three schools in the ACC that can make a strong claim that they do. (And one of them is muddling their way through a no-show class scandal with tutors who wrote papers for players and getting caught agents crawling around the place being buddies with "Coach Black Santa." So.)
Anyway, Notre Dame. Their academic prowess is well-known and their Director's Cup standings have been moving in the right direction as well, from 27th in 2010 to 9th in 2013. People talk about how the ACC will add Louisville at just the right time, but basketball and football fame can be fleeting if they don't work to maintain their grasp and there's another whole season to go. ND has their whole program moving upwards just as they hit the ACC.
Sports we play that they don't
Men:
Wrestling
Women:
Field hockey
Sports they play that we don't
Men:
Fencing
Ice hockey
Women:
Fencing
With 23 teams, UVA offers more varsity sports than most other schools. I haven't counted, but I would guess maybe only 15 or so D-I schools offer that many or more. We're talking Michigan, Ohio State, UCLA, Texas, that kind of school. (Actually, I just looked it up and UCLA only has 22 if you don't count "sand volleyball.") Anyway, with 24 sports, ND is one of those schools; they have 12 for men and 12 for women. The big one is hockey (and it's a little surprising there's no women's team.) There's also fencing, which I think will make them the only ACC team to have that sport. We've got wrestling and field hockey; I'm a little surprised that a Midwestern school has no wrestling and that a rich kids' school has no field hockey.
Common sports
(The number after each year shows how many Director's Cup points were earned by that sport in that year.)
Baseball
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 78)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 83)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 314)
Brian O'Connor will get a chance to go against his old team. Irish baseball isn't much of a power, though; they're probably a notch or two below Pittsburgh and less likely than the Panthers to initially threaten to make the ACC tournament. It might be interesting to see how they can recruit against other Midwestern teams that are stuck in Midwestern conferences, though. UVA shouldn't find them to be a major threat to the upper echelons of the conference.
Men's basketball
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 125 (UVA 25)
Notre Dame hoops wasn't really a thing in the 90s, but made a reappearance on the national scene under Mike Brey, and it might've gotten even farther if it hadn't been overshadowed by an expanding and improving Big East. Instead they became sort of an "oh yeah, also them too" kind of team when talking about how deep the Big East was, after teams like Syracuse and Louisville got mentioned. Now they'll be sort of the same deal in the ACC: strong, almost always tourney-worthy, a step or two shy of being a national contender.
Women's basketball
2008-2009: 25 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 64 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 90 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 90 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 83 (UVA 0)
Totals: 352 (UVA 75)
There's a lot less parity in women's hoops than in men's, and ND has taken advantage of that, lately emerging as challengers to Tennessee and UConn and making three Final Fours in a row. In fact, they recently became the first team to beat both of those schools in the same tournament. They should be the ACC's top program instantly.
Men's cross country
2008-2009: 36 (UVA 48)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 24 (UVA 40)
2011-2012: 26 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 46 (UVA 61.5)
Totals: 132 (UVA 194.5)
Women's cross country
2008-2009: 16 (UVA 22)
2009-2010: 28 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 32)
2011-2012: 30 (UVA 34)
2012-2013: 60 (UVA 0)
Totals: 134 (UVA 131)
For what it's worth, Notre Dame is a perennial winner of the National Catholic Championship, which invites about 35 schools every year. They have a solid CC program that should at least be a contender in the ACC, with outside chances at a championship.
Football
2008-2009: 45 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 85 (UVA 0)
Totals: 200 (UVA 25)
Since Notre Dame isn't a football member of the ACC per se, it seems potentially not worth the discussion here. But then, we'll play them more often than we ever play NC State or Clemson, so why not? Anyway, I didn't have to explain Syracuse lacrosse to you and I don't have to explain Notre Dame football either. This whole ACC deal might not have ever gotten done if ND hadn't agreed to always play a partial ACC schedule; it's pretty important for the ACC to have five televised ND games every two years.
Men's golf
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 46.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 65)
2010-2011: 21 (UVA 27.5)
2011-2012: 40 (UVA 51.5)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 39)
Totals: 61 (UVA 229.5)
Women's golf
2008-2009: 27 (UVA 70.5)
2009-2010: 24 (UVA 63)
2010-2011: 52 (UVA 80)
2011-2012: 28 (UVA 80)
2012-2013: 29 (UVA 42)
Totals: 160 (UVA 335.5)
I'm not terribly well qualified to talk about golf; you can draw conclusions from the numbers above just as well as I can.
Men's lacrosse
2008-2009: 25 (UVA 83)
2009-2010: 90 (UVA 83)
2010-2011: 60 (UVA 100)
2011-2012: 83 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 60 (UVA 0)
Totals: 315 (UVA 326)
It seems like Notre Dame is still a newcomer to lacrosse's elite scene, and maybe they kind of are. But it's been four years since they failed to get past the first round, and they've been a semi-regular participant in the Final Four the last couple years. Adding ND to the ACC will help ensure the conference stays at the very top of the lacrosse world, especially with a new Maryland-based threat from the Big Ten.
Women's lacrosse
2008-2009: 60 (UVA 25)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 60)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 70)
Totals: 135 (UVA 205)
ND's women's team isn't quite as accomplished as Syracuse's, and they have a Midwestern recruiting rival in Northwestern that might make it hard for them to move into the elite. But they're still a solid team that should add to the ACC's degree of difficulty.
Men's soccer
2008-2009: 50 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 50 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 64 (UVA 50)
Totals: 114 (UVA 250)
Unlike with the other two schools, the ACC is getting a pretty well-accomplished soccer program in the Irish. They're coming off a Big East championship season - during which they also beat Duke and Clemson, mid-level ACC teams - and they tend to advance a round or two in the NCAAs each year. They should be at least a respectable addition to the conference, if not a strong contender at times.
Women's soccer
2008-2009: 90 (UVA 64)
2009-2010: 83 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 100 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 73)
2012-2013: 73 (UVA 64)
Totals: 371 (UVA 329)
The Irish have one of the elite women's soccer programs in the country; only North Carolina has been to more championship games, and ND took home the title in 2010. Putting them in the same conference as UNC in this sport is, well, it's kinda like putting Duke and UNC in the same basketball conference, only with more geographical separation. Even more so, really; men's hoops is a fairly large oligarchy, whereas there's no question in women's soccer that it's UNC, then ND, then the rest of the country.
Softball
2008-2009: 50 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 50 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 25 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 200 (UVA 25)
For softball, the ACC is good, not great; Florida State went 18-2 in conference play this year and wasn't rewarded with a regional. The jump for Notre Dame to the ACC isn't a huge one. ND has been making the tournament with semi-ease and then not making it out of the regional for several years now; their performance in the ACC should be much the same. UVA is near the bottom, looking way up, so Notre Dame will be more of a concern for the UNCs of the world that hover near the middle-top and the tournament bubble.
Men's swimming and diving
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 69)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 67.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 70.5)
2011-2012: 46 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 33 (UVA 47)
Totals: 79 (UVA 314)
Women's swimming and diving
2008-2009: 43 (UVA 64.5)
2009-2010: 30 (UVA 69)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 63)
2011-2012: 51.5 (UVA 57)
2012-2013: 58.5 (UVA 56)
Totals: 183 (UVA 309.5)
As should be evident from the numbers above, ND's women's swim teams have generally been better than the men; the men, however, are on the rise, and broke through two years ago to claim the Big East championship. Neither team has finished lower than second in the past two seasons. UVA still has a better team, as long as we can find a worthy successor to Mark Bernardino, but the Irish present a threat.
Men's tennis
2008-2009: 25 (UVA 73)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 83)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 90)
2011-2012: 50 (UVA 90)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 100)
Totals: 175 (UVA 436)
I mean, UVA hasn't lost a men's tennis contest in the ACC in something like six years. Notre Dame has a decent outfit but UVA is the class of the conference in this sport, and ND won't be changing that.
Women's tennis
2008-2009: 83 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 83 (UVA 50)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 50 (UVA 64)
2012-2013: 50 (UVA 64)
Totals: 316 (UVA 292)
These matches, on the other hand, should be pretty tight. Our women's team is good, and very competitive in the conference, but doesn't rise to the level of the men's team; ND made a couple Final Fours a few years ago and should slot in somewhere near the top of the ACC as well. They knocked off 5th-placed (in the ACC) Georgia Tech twice in the past season, and easily handled NC State in the opening round of the tournament.
Men's track and field (outdoor)
2008-2009: 24.5 (UVA 24.5)
2009-2010: 5 (UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 46)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 15)
2012-2013: (UVA 0)
Totals: 5 (UVA 135)
Women's track and field (outdoor)
2008-2009: 50 (UVA 36.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 44)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 80.5)
Track is not ND's strong suit, but then, neither is it ours except in fits and starts. UVA is much closer to changing that and fielding strong teams that regularly place athletes in the national meet than Notre Dame is.
Women's volleyball
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 50 (UVA 0)
One of ND's weaker programs nationally, the volleyball team makes occasional appearances at the tournament and doesn't generally advance. That'll still put them at least in the middle-to-top of the ACC, and it'll be a while before UVA can consider competing with them.
Overall profile
Enrollment (undergrad):
1. Florida State: 31,800
2. Maryland: 26,800
3. NC State: 26,200
4. Virginia Tech: 23,900
5. North Carolina: 18,600
6. Pittsburgh: 18,400
7. Clemson: 16,600
8. Virginia: 15,800
9. Syracuse: 14,800
10. Georgia Tech: 14,500
11. Miami: 10,300
12. Boston College: 9,100
13. Notre Dame: 8,400
14. Duke: 6,500
15. Wake Forest: 4,800
Academic rank (USN&WR):
1. Duke (#8)
2. Notre Dame (#17)
3. Virginia (#24)
4. Wake Forest (#27)
5. North Carolina (#30)
6. Boston College (#31)
7. Georgia Tech (#36)
8. Miami (#44)
9(t). Syracuse (#58)
9(t). Maryland (#58)
9(t). Pittsburgh (#58)
12. Clemson (#68)
13. Virginia Tech (#72)
14. Florida State (#97)
15. NC State (#106)
Director's Cup average:**
1. North Carolina: 6.2
2. Florida State: 9
3. Virginia: 10.6
4. Duke: 12
5. Notre Dame: 18.4
6. Maryland: 28.8
7. Virginia Tech: 40
8. Clemson: 50.8
9. Syracuse: 54
10. Miami: 56.4
11. Georgia Tech: 59.6
12. NC State: 60.2
13. Boston College: 67.6
14. Wake Forest: 70.8
15. Pittsburgh: 113.6
**average finish in the last five years, including 2013.
When you think about it, having five teams that averaged in the Director's Cup top 20 in the past five years is pretty good. It leaves less than four each to be scattered among the other four major conferences. I think a world-class university should excel in everything it does, athletics included, and there are really only three schools in the ACC that can make a strong claim that they do. (And one of them is muddling their way through a no-show class scandal with tutors who wrote papers for players and getting caught agents crawling around the place being buddies with "Coach Black Santa." So.)
Anyway, Notre Dame. Their academic prowess is well-known and their Director's Cup standings have been moving in the right direction as well, from 27th in 2010 to 9th in 2013. People talk about how the ACC will add Louisville at just the right time, but basketball and football fame can be fleeting if they don't work to maintain their grasp and there's another whole season to go. ND has their whole program moving upwards just as they hit the ACC.
Sports we play that they don't
Men:
Wrestling
Women:
Field hockey
Sports they play that we don't
Men:
Fencing
Ice hockey
Women:
Fencing
With 23 teams, UVA offers more varsity sports than most other schools. I haven't counted, but I would guess maybe only 15 or so D-I schools offer that many or more. We're talking Michigan, Ohio State, UCLA, Texas, that kind of school. (Actually, I just looked it up and UCLA only has 22 if you don't count "sand volleyball.") Anyway, with 24 sports, ND is one of those schools; they have 12 for men and 12 for women. The big one is hockey (and it's a little surprising there's no women's team.) There's also fencing, which I think will make them the only ACC team to have that sport. We've got wrestling and field hockey; I'm a little surprised that a Midwestern school has no wrestling and that a rich kids' school has no field hockey.
Common sports
(The number after each year shows how many Director's Cup points were earned by that sport in that year.)
Baseball
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 78)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 83)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 314)
Brian O'Connor will get a chance to go against his old team. Irish baseball isn't much of a power, though; they're probably a notch or two below Pittsburgh and less likely than the Panthers to initially threaten to make the ACC tournament. It might be interesting to see how they can recruit against other Midwestern teams that are stuck in Midwestern conferences, though. UVA shouldn't find them to be a major threat to the upper echelons of the conference.
Men's basketball
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 125 (UVA 25)
Notre Dame hoops wasn't really a thing in the 90s, but made a reappearance on the national scene under Mike Brey, and it might've gotten even farther if it hadn't been overshadowed by an expanding and improving Big East. Instead they became sort of an "oh yeah, also them too" kind of team when talking about how deep the Big East was, after teams like Syracuse and Louisville got mentioned. Now they'll be sort of the same deal in the ACC: strong, almost always tourney-worthy, a step or two shy of being a national contender.
Women's basketball
2008-2009: 25 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 64 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 90 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 90 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 83 (UVA 0)
Totals: 352 (UVA 75)
There's a lot less parity in women's hoops than in men's, and ND has taken advantage of that, lately emerging as challengers to Tennessee and UConn and making three Final Fours in a row. In fact, they recently became the first team to beat both of those schools in the same tournament. They should be the ACC's top program instantly.
Men's cross country
2008-2009: 36 (UVA 48)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 24 (UVA 40)
2011-2012: 26 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 46 (UVA 61.5)
Totals: 132 (UVA 194.5)
Women's cross country
2008-2009: 16 (UVA 22)
2009-2010: 28 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 32)
2011-2012: 30 (UVA 34)
2012-2013: 60 (UVA 0)
Totals: 134 (UVA 131)
For what it's worth, Notre Dame is a perennial winner of the National Catholic Championship, which invites about 35 schools every year. They have a solid CC program that should at least be a contender in the ACC, with outside chances at a championship.
Football
2008-2009: 45 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 85 (UVA 0)
Totals: 200 (UVA 25)
Since Notre Dame isn't a football member of the ACC per se, it seems potentially not worth the discussion here. But then, we'll play them more often than we ever play NC State or Clemson, so why not? Anyway, I didn't have to explain Syracuse lacrosse to you and I don't have to explain Notre Dame football either. This whole ACC deal might not have ever gotten done if ND hadn't agreed to always play a partial ACC schedule; it's pretty important for the ACC to have five televised ND games every two years.
Men's golf
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 46.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 65)
2010-2011: 21 (UVA 27.5)
2011-2012: 40 (UVA 51.5)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 39)
Totals: 61 (UVA 229.5)
Women's golf
2008-2009: 27 (UVA 70.5)
2009-2010: 24 (UVA 63)
2010-2011: 52 (UVA 80)
2011-2012: 28 (UVA 80)
2012-2013: 29 (UVA 42)
Totals: 160 (UVA 335.5)
I'm not terribly well qualified to talk about golf; you can draw conclusions from the numbers above just as well as I can.
Men's lacrosse
2008-2009: 25 (UVA 83)
2009-2010: 90 (UVA 83)
2010-2011: 60 (UVA 100)
2011-2012: 83 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 60 (UVA 0)
Totals: 315 (UVA 326)
It seems like Notre Dame is still a newcomer to lacrosse's elite scene, and maybe they kind of are. But it's been four years since they failed to get past the first round, and they've been a semi-regular participant in the Final Four the last couple years. Adding ND to the ACC will help ensure the conference stays at the very top of the lacrosse world, especially with a new Maryland-based threat from the Big Ten.
Women's lacrosse
2008-2009: 60 (UVA 25)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 60)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 70)
Totals: 135 (UVA 205)
ND's women's team isn't quite as accomplished as Syracuse's, and they have a Midwestern recruiting rival in Northwestern that might make it hard for them to move into the elite. But they're still a solid team that should add to the ACC's degree of difficulty.
Men's soccer
2008-2009: 50 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 50 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 64 (UVA 50)
Totals: 114 (UVA 250)
Unlike with the other two schools, the ACC is getting a pretty well-accomplished soccer program in the Irish. They're coming off a Big East championship season - during which they also beat Duke and Clemson, mid-level ACC teams - and they tend to advance a round or two in the NCAAs each year. They should be at least a respectable addition to the conference, if not a strong contender at times.
Women's soccer
2008-2009: 90 (UVA 64)
2009-2010: 83 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 100 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 73)
2012-2013: 73 (UVA 64)
Totals: 371 (UVA 329)
The Irish have one of the elite women's soccer programs in the country; only North Carolina has been to more championship games, and ND took home the title in 2010. Putting them in the same conference as UNC in this sport is, well, it's kinda like putting Duke and UNC in the same basketball conference, only with more geographical separation. Even more so, really; men's hoops is a fairly large oligarchy, whereas there's no question in women's soccer that it's UNC, then ND, then the rest of the country.
Softball
2008-2009: 50 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 50 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 25 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 200 (UVA 25)
For softball, the ACC is good, not great; Florida State went 18-2 in conference play this year and wasn't rewarded with a regional. The jump for Notre Dame to the ACC isn't a huge one. ND has been making the tournament with semi-ease and then not making it out of the regional for several years now; their performance in the ACC should be much the same. UVA is near the bottom, looking way up, so Notre Dame will be more of a concern for the UNCs of the world that hover near the middle-top and the tournament bubble.
Men's swimming and diving
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 69)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 67.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 70.5)
2011-2012: 46 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 33 (UVA 47)
Totals: 79 (UVA 314)
Women's swimming and diving
2008-2009: 43 (UVA 64.5)
2009-2010: 30 (UVA 69)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 63)
2011-2012: 51.5 (UVA 57)
2012-2013: 58.5 (UVA 56)
Totals: 183 (UVA 309.5)
As should be evident from the numbers above, ND's women's swim teams have generally been better than the men; the men, however, are on the rise, and broke through two years ago to claim the Big East championship. Neither team has finished lower than second in the past two seasons. UVA still has a better team, as long as we can find a worthy successor to Mark Bernardino, but the Irish present a threat.
Men's tennis
2008-2009: 25 (UVA 73)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 83)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 90)
2011-2012: 50 (UVA 90)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 100)
Totals: 175 (UVA 436)
I mean, UVA hasn't lost a men's tennis contest in the ACC in something like six years. Notre Dame has a decent outfit but UVA is the class of the conference in this sport, and ND won't be changing that.
Women's tennis
2008-2009: 83 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 83 (UVA 50)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 50 (UVA 64)
2012-2013: 50 (UVA 64)
Totals: 316 (UVA 292)
These matches, on the other hand, should be pretty tight. Our women's team is good, and very competitive in the conference, but doesn't rise to the level of the men's team; ND made a couple Final Fours a few years ago and should slot in somewhere near the top of the ACC as well. They knocked off 5th-placed (in the ACC) Georgia Tech twice in the past season, and easily handled NC State in the opening round of the tournament.
Men's track and field (outdoor)
2008-2009: 24.5 (UVA 24.5)
2009-2010: 5 (UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 46)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 15)
2012-2013: (UVA 0)
Totals: 5 (UVA 135)
Women's track and field (outdoor)
2008-2009: 50 (UVA 36.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 44)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 80.5)
Track is not ND's strong suit, but then, neither is it ours except in fits and starts. UVA is much closer to changing that and fielding strong teams that regularly place athletes in the national meet than Notre Dame is.
Women's volleyball
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 50 (UVA 0)
One of ND's weaker programs nationally, the volleyball team makes occasional appearances at the tournament and doesn't generally advance. That'll still put them at least in the middle-to-top of the ACC, and it'll be a while before UVA can consider competing with them.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
the school: Pittsburgh
Continuing the deep-dive look at the ACC's newest members, we move on to the team that will join UVA in the Coastal Conference and become a yearly opponent.
Overall profile
Enrollment (undergrad):
1. Florida State: 31,800
2. Maryland: 26,800
3. NC State: 26,200
4. Virginia Tech: 23,900
5. North Carolina: 18,600
6. Pittsburgh: 18,400
7. Clemson: 16,600
8. Virginia: 15,800
9. Syracuse: 14,800
10. Georgia Tech: 14,500
11. Miami: 10,300
12. Boston College: 9,100
13. Notre Dame: 8,400
14. Duke: 6,500
15. Wake Forest: 4,800
Academic rank (USN&WR):
1. Duke (#8)
2. Notre Dame (#17)
3. Virginia (#24)
4. Wake Forest (#27)
5. North Carolina (#30)
6. Boston College (#31)
7. Georgia Tech (#36)
8. Miami (#44)
9(t). Syracuse (#58)
9(t). Maryland (#58)
9(t). Pittsburgh (#58)
12. Clemson (#68)
13. Virginia Tech (#72)
14. Florida State (#97)
15. NC State (#106)
Director's Cup average:**
1. North Carolina: 6.2
2. Florida State: 9
3. Virginia: 10.6
4. Duke: 12
5. Notre Dame: 18.4
6. Maryland: 28.8
7. Virginia Tech: 40
8. Clemson: 50.8
9. Syracuse: 54
10. Miami: 56.4
11. Georgia Tech: 59.6
12. NC State: 60.2
13. Boston College: 67.6
14. Wake Forest: 70.8
15. Pittsburgh: 113.6
**average finish in the last five years, including 2013.
Pitt is about 4,000 students bigger than Syracuse, but academically right in the same area. They're a private school that behaves like a public one (funding from the state, lower tuition for instate students) thanks to the weird way the Pennsylvania higher education system is set up; otherwise, their profile is remarkably similar to Syracuse. The differences on the athletic fields are much more pronounced, however. Pitt will become the only ACC team to finish outside the top 100 in Director's Cup standings at any time in the last five years; worse yet, the only time in the past five years they finished inside the top 100 was in 2008-2009, when they were 93rd. That's worse than all but one of Wake Forest's showings. Thus, it's the Panthers that stand to gain the most from ACC membership of any of the three additions.
Sports we play that they don't
Men:
Golf
Lacrosse
Tennis
Women:
Field hockey
Golf
Lacrosse
Rowing
Sports they play that we don't
Men:
None
Women:
Gymnastics
Pitt has a much more balanced profile of offerings than Cuse does, but like Cuse, they skip a number of sports that UVA is good at. Lax and men's tennis come to mind, and crew and field hockey on the women's side. Gymnastics is the only Pitt sport not offered at UVA.
Common sports
(The number after each year shows how many Director's Cup points were earned by that sport in that year.)
Baseball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 78)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 83)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 314)
Pittsburgh has never found itself at the bottom of the Big East standings; in fact, they usually end up somewhere between the middle and the top. But they haven't earned any national tournament berths because when they do have a good record, it's built on an inferior OOC schedule. They were 42-17 this year - their best record in this time frame - but had the 202nd-best strength of schedule. They've been competitive in the Big East - whether that translates to the ACC will be very much in question, because they really haven't played a team as good as those at the top of the ACC in the last five years. They'll at least be better than BC, though.
Men's basketball:
2008-2009: 73 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 50 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 198 (UVA 25)
One of the school's calling cards, but less successful of late than in the past and slowly earning the reputation of a tournament underachiever. They earned 1 seeds in 2009 and 2011, but that didn't get them past the Elite Eight, and then only in 2009. Still, they're a tough team under Jamie Dixon and they consider it a major disappointment if they miss the tournament.
Women's basketball:
2008-2009: 64 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 64 (UVA 75)
Had a good run in the mid-2000s, but a three-year string of losing seasons led to a coaching change this past offseason. Like UVA, rebuilding and looking uphill in a tough conference, and probably have farther to go than we do.
Men's cross country:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 48)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 40)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 61.5)
Totals: 0 (UVA 194.5)
Women's cross country:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 22)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 32)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 34)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 131)
Both cross-country teams run in the bottom levels of the Big East, and will continue to do so in the ACC.
Football:
2008-2009: 25 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 60 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 180 (UVA 25)
Between Pitt and Syracuse, the Panthers are the team more likely to find some early success in the ACC. They have a five-year bowl streak going, although the last three are trips to the Compass Bowl in Birmingham, Alabama. As with Syracuse, it might be harder in the ACC to find six wins than it was in the Big East, but the Panthers are moving to what right now is the easier side of the conference.
Men's soccer:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 50)
Totals: 0 (UVA 250)
Pitt might very easily be the very bottom of the barrel in ACC soccer. In the recent five years they won seven Big East games, three against Seton Hall. That makes something like 30-some losses (I didn't bother to look out for ties.)
Women's soccer:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 64)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 73)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 329)
The women are slightly more competitive, but the story's still the same. The ACC is a monster conference in women's soccer, and the Pitt ladies will probably get steamrolled for a while.
Softball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 25)
Similarly to UVA, sort of generically bad, but with lower high points (as in, we once made the NCAA tournament and they didn't.) They usually have a losing record in Big East play and probably will in the ACC, too.
Men's swimming and diving:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 69)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 67.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 70.5)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 47)
Totals: 0 (UVA 314)
Women's swimming and diving:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 64.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 69)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 63)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 57)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 56)
Totals: 0 (UVA 309.5)
Pitt used to really dominate Big East swimming, but that was ten or more years ago; they typically roll in about 3rd or 4th in the 11-team Big East meet these days. They've been a regular dual-meet opponent of ours as well, and UVA has always won without dominating. I suspect if I looked a little deeper into the lineups I might find that UVA hasn't been throwing the A-team out there; an experienced swim coach like Bernardino knows what kind of minimum lineup he can set in order to shuffle things around a little and still win. At any rate, if UVA is knocked off its lofty pedestal in ACC swimming, it probably won't be Pitt that does it. Neither will they free-fall to the bottom of the rankings.
Women's tennis:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 50)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 64)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 292)
Nothing very notable about this team, and unlikely to give UVA a difficult time or to make many waves in ACC competition.
Men's track and field (outdoor):
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 24.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 46)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 15)
2012-2013: 5 (UVA 0)
Totals: 5 (UVA 135)
Women's track and field (outdoor):
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 36.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 44)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 80.5)
Occasionally send a participant to the national championship meet. Bout all that can be said.
Women's volleyball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 0)
Will enter the league ahead of UVA in the pecking order, but then, most teams would. Their lack of entries into the NCAA tournament probably won't be rectified by joining the ACC, but they won't embarrass themselves either.
Wrestling:
2008-2009: 36 (UVA 40)
2009-2010: 48 (UVA 60)
2010-2011: 40 (UVA 50.5)
2011-2012: 60 (UVA 45.5)
2012-2013: 59 (UVA 53)
Totals: 243 (UVA 249)
Pitt's wrestling team is good and getting better, with some top-15 finishes at the national championships. They're close to where Virginia Tech finishes, and Tech is the usual ACC champion, with UVA coming in 2nd in recent years. Pitt will come into the ACC and instantly be the most likely team to dethrone the Hokies; wrestling will easily be their most likely path to an ACC championship.
Pitt's campus is smack in the middle of a large northern city, with minimal if any room for outward growth. That has about exactly the effect you'd expect on their athletics. With the exception of football - for which they borrow the Steelers' stadium - and five points in track this spring, not one of their outdoor sports has earned a Director's Cup point in however many years. Everything they do well is indoors, and they typically earn all the points they're going to earn during the winter season, after scraping a few from football. They have potential to be a major force in ACC wrestling and will definitely add to the ACC profile in hoops, and they'll do alright in football, too. I don't see them having an upper-echelon baseball team (and they have one of those obnoxious even-the-dirt-is-turf fields) but they ought to provide some competition for the likes of Duke, Tech, and Maryland for the bottom seeds in the ACC tourney. Most of the rest of their programs, though, won't be competitive at least until the ACC money starts to take effect.
Overall profile
Enrollment (undergrad):
1. Florida State: 31,800
2. Maryland: 26,800
3. NC State: 26,200
4. Virginia Tech: 23,900
5. North Carolina: 18,600
6. Pittsburgh: 18,400
7. Clemson: 16,600
8. Virginia: 15,800
9. Syracuse: 14,800
10. Georgia Tech: 14,500
11. Miami: 10,300
12. Boston College: 9,100
13. Notre Dame: 8,400
14. Duke: 6,500
15. Wake Forest: 4,800
Academic rank (USN&WR):
1. Duke (#8)
2. Notre Dame (#17)
3. Virginia (#24)
4. Wake Forest (#27)
5. North Carolina (#30)
6. Boston College (#31)
7. Georgia Tech (#36)
8. Miami (#44)
9(t). Syracuse (#58)
9(t). Maryland (#58)
9(t). Pittsburgh (#58)
12. Clemson (#68)
13. Virginia Tech (#72)
14. Florida State (#97)
15. NC State (#106)
Director's Cup average:**
1. North Carolina: 6.2
2. Florida State: 9
3. Virginia: 10.6
4. Duke: 12
5. Notre Dame: 18.4
6. Maryland: 28.8
7. Virginia Tech: 40
8. Clemson: 50.8
9. Syracuse: 54
10. Miami: 56.4
11. Georgia Tech: 59.6
12. NC State: 60.2
13. Boston College: 67.6
14. Wake Forest: 70.8
15. Pittsburgh: 113.6
**average finish in the last five years, including 2013.
Pitt is about 4,000 students bigger than Syracuse, but academically right in the same area. They're a private school that behaves like a public one (funding from the state, lower tuition for instate students) thanks to the weird way the Pennsylvania higher education system is set up; otherwise, their profile is remarkably similar to Syracuse. The differences on the athletic fields are much more pronounced, however. Pitt will become the only ACC team to finish outside the top 100 in Director's Cup standings at any time in the last five years; worse yet, the only time in the past five years they finished inside the top 100 was in 2008-2009, when they were 93rd. That's worse than all but one of Wake Forest's showings. Thus, it's the Panthers that stand to gain the most from ACC membership of any of the three additions.
Sports we play that they don't
Men:
Golf
Lacrosse
Tennis
Women:
Field hockey
Golf
Lacrosse
Rowing
Sports they play that we don't
Men:
None
Women:
Gymnastics
Pitt has a much more balanced profile of offerings than Cuse does, but like Cuse, they skip a number of sports that UVA is good at. Lax and men's tennis come to mind, and crew and field hockey on the women's side. Gymnastics is the only Pitt sport not offered at UVA.
Common sports
(The number after each year shows how many Director's Cup points were earned by that sport in that year.)
Baseball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 78)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 83)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 314)
Pittsburgh has never found itself at the bottom of the Big East standings; in fact, they usually end up somewhere between the middle and the top. But they haven't earned any national tournament berths because when they do have a good record, it's built on an inferior OOC schedule. They were 42-17 this year - their best record in this time frame - but had the 202nd-best strength of schedule. They've been competitive in the Big East - whether that translates to the ACC will be very much in question, because they really haven't played a team as good as those at the top of the ACC in the last five years. They'll at least be better than BC, though.
Men's basketball:
2008-2009: 73 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 50 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 198 (UVA 25)
One of the school's calling cards, but less successful of late than in the past and slowly earning the reputation of a tournament underachiever. They earned 1 seeds in 2009 and 2011, but that didn't get them past the Elite Eight, and then only in 2009. Still, they're a tough team under Jamie Dixon and they consider it a major disappointment if they miss the tournament.
Women's basketball:
2008-2009: 64 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 64 (UVA 75)
Had a good run in the mid-2000s, but a three-year string of losing seasons led to a coaching change this past offseason. Like UVA, rebuilding and looking uphill in a tough conference, and probably have farther to go than we do.
Men's cross country:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 48)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 40)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 61.5)
Totals: 0 (UVA 194.5)
Women's cross country:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 22)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 32)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 34)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 131)
Both cross-country teams run in the bottom levels of the Big East, and will continue to do so in the ACC.
Football:
2008-2009: 25 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 60 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 180 (UVA 25)
Between Pitt and Syracuse, the Panthers are the team more likely to find some early success in the ACC. They have a five-year bowl streak going, although the last three are trips to the Compass Bowl in Birmingham, Alabama. As with Syracuse, it might be harder in the ACC to find six wins than it was in the Big East, but the Panthers are moving to what right now is the easier side of the conference.
Men's soccer:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 50)
Totals: 0 (UVA 250)
Pitt might very easily be the very bottom of the barrel in ACC soccer. In the recent five years they won seven Big East games, three against Seton Hall. That makes something like 30-some losses (I didn't bother to look out for ties.)
Women's soccer:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 64)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 73)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 329)
The women are slightly more competitive, but the story's still the same. The ACC is a monster conference in women's soccer, and the Pitt ladies will probably get steamrolled for a while.
Softball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 25)
Similarly to UVA, sort of generically bad, but with lower high points (as in, we once made the NCAA tournament and they didn't.) They usually have a losing record in Big East play and probably will in the ACC, too.
Men's swimming and diving:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 69)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 67.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 70.5)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 47)
Totals: 0 (UVA 314)
Women's swimming and diving:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 64.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 69)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 63)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 57)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 56)
Totals: 0 (UVA 309.5)
Pitt used to really dominate Big East swimming, but that was ten or more years ago; they typically roll in about 3rd or 4th in the 11-team Big East meet these days. They've been a regular dual-meet opponent of ours as well, and UVA has always won without dominating. I suspect if I looked a little deeper into the lineups I might find that UVA hasn't been throwing the A-team out there; an experienced swim coach like Bernardino knows what kind of minimum lineup he can set in order to shuffle things around a little and still win. At any rate, if UVA is knocked off its lofty pedestal in ACC swimming, it probably won't be Pitt that does it. Neither will they free-fall to the bottom of the rankings.
Women's tennis:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 50)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 64)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 292)
Nothing very notable about this team, and unlikely to give UVA a difficult time or to make many waves in ACC competition.
Men's track and field (outdoor):
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 24.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 46)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 15)
2012-2013: 5 (UVA 0)
Totals: 5 (UVA 135)
Women's track and field (outdoor):
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 36.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 44)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 80.5)
Occasionally send a participant to the national championship meet. Bout all that can be said.
Women's volleyball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 0)
Will enter the league ahead of UVA in the pecking order, but then, most teams would. Their lack of entries into the NCAA tournament probably won't be rectified by joining the ACC, but they won't embarrass themselves either.
Wrestling:
2008-2009: 36 (UVA 40)
2009-2010: 48 (UVA 60)
2010-2011: 40 (UVA 50.5)
2011-2012: 60 (UVA 45.5)
2012-2013: 59 (UVA 53)
Totals: 243 (UVA 249)
Pitt's wrestling team is good and getting better, with some top-15 finishes at the national championships. They're close to where Virginia Tech finishes, and Tech is the usual ACC champion, with UVA coming in 2nd in recent years. Pitt will come into the ACC and instantly be the most likely team to dethrone the Hokies; wrestling will easily be their most likely path to an ACC championship.
Pitt's campus is smack in the middle of a large northern city, with minimal if any room for outward growth. That has about exactly the effect you'd expect on their athletics. With the exception of football - for which they borrow the Steelers' stadium - and five points in track this spring, not one of their outdoor sports has earned a Director's Cup point in however many years. Everything they do well is indoors, and they typically earn all the points they're going to earn during the winter season, after scraping a few from football. They have potential to be a major force in ACC wrestling and will definitely add to the ACC profile in hoops, and they'll do alright in football, too. I don't see them having an upper-echelon baseball team (and they have one of those obnoxious even-the-dirt-is-turf fields) but they ought to provide some competition for the likes of Duke, Tech, and Maryland for the bottom seeds in the ACC tourney. Most of the rest of their programs, though, won't be competitive at least until the ACC money starts to take effect.
Monday, July 1, 2013
the school: Syracuse
Today is July 1, 2013. If you've temporarily forgotten the importance of the day, it's the first of a Brave New ACC that includes three new members: Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Notre Dame. (If you wanted to forget, apologies. Understandable, but realities demand that a Brave New World requires a Brave New ACC.)
Since recruit profiles are a standard around here, I thought it only fitting to do the same for the new conference recruits as well. This week, we'll take a detailed look at each of the new additions to the conference and how well they'll compete in each sport that they sponsor. And since we always do the recruit ones in order that they committed, the same is true of the schools. Syracuse and Pitt "committed" on the same day, but then, Syracuse actually was set to join eight or nine years ago, when the ACC "pulled their offer" and invited VT instead. So we do the Orange first.
Overall profile
Enrollment (undergrad):
1. Florida State: 31,800
2. Maryland: 26,800
3. NC State: 26,200
4. Virginia Tech: 23,900
5. North Carolina: 18,600
6. Pittsburgh: 18,400
7. Clemson: 16,600
8. Virginia: 15,800
9. Syracuse: 14,800
10. Georgia Tech: 14,500
11. Miami: 10,300
12. Boston College: 9,100
13. Notre Dame: 8,400
14. Duke: 6,500
15. Wake Forest: 4,800
Academic rank (USN&WR):
1. Duke (#8)
2. Notre Dame (#17)
3. Virginia (#24)
4. Wake Forest (#27)
5. North Carolina (#30)
6. Boston College (#31)
7. Georgia Tech (#36)
8. Miami (#44)
9(t). Syracuse (#58)
9(t). Maryland (#58)
9(t). Pittsburgh (#58)
12. Clemson (#68)
13. Virginia Tech (#72)
14. Florida State (#97)
15. NC State (#106)
Director's Cup average:**
1. North Carolina: 6.2
2. Florida State: 9
3. Virginia: 10.6
4. Duke: 12
5. Notre Dame: 18.4
6. Maryland: 28.8
7. Virginia Tech: 40
8. Clemson: 50.8
9. Syracuse: 54
10. Miami: 56.4
11. Georgia Tech: 59.6
12. NC State: 60.2
13. Boston College: 67.6
14. Wake Forest: 70.8
15. Pittsburgh: 115.6
**average finish in the last five years, including 2013.
Overall, Syracuse fits very neatly into the average ACC profile, which is likely part of the reason they were originally a prime candidate for invitation in the first round of expansion. In terms of size, UVA is the median school in the conference; Syracuse is just slightly below. They're also just slightly below the median in the academic rankings, a spot of no shame really, and the same is true for their Director's Cup placement. Come to think of it, these guys are 9th out of 15 in all three categories, which should hold roughly true when Maryland is swapped out for Louisville as well. They're sort of the like the least-interesting-number paradox in their rankings here.
Sports we play that they don't
Men:
Baseball
Golf
Swimming
Tennis
Wrestling
Women:
Golf
Swimming
Sports they play that we don't
Men:
Rowing
Women:
Ice hockey
Men's rowing isn't really an NCAA sport, but the Cuse does lend more support to their men's club than UVA does. At least as far as giving them a space on the official website. Syracuse is quite a bit Title IX-skewed, with only seven men's programs and eleven for women - and really, six men's programs because rowing isn't NCAA-sponsored.
In particular, there are three things that we do particularly well that they don't at all: baseball, swimming, and men's tennis. The women's ice hockey program is fairly new, despite the fact that upstate New York is as much a hockey hotbed as a lacrosse one. Anyway, hockey isn't an ACC sport.
Common sports
(The number after each year shows how many Director's Cup points were earned by that sport in that year.)
Men's basketball
2008-2009: 64 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 64 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 73 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 83 (UVA 0)
Total: 334 (UVA 25)
Syracuse's hoops team needs little introduction. Under Jim Boeheim, who's coached there since 1976, that's been one of that school's major calling cards. Actually, the five-year cutoff here just misses out on a two-season NIT run, but whatever. Since then they've earned two #1 seeds in the tournament and made the Final Four this year - ironically, in their worst-seeded year of any of these five (a 4 seed.) Their addition makes the ACC significantly tougher. The Orange are simply on a higher plane here than UVA is, until proven otherwise.
Women's basketball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 25 (UVA 75)
On the other hand, the women's teams ought to compete on a much more even keel. Perhaps to drive home the point, UVA and Cuse played in San Juan, PR, this past season, and the final score was a one-point Cuse win. UVA hasn't sniffed the NCAA tournament in three years, while Cuse just got there for the first time in quite a while this season. Before that they were WNIT-level, though almost always with a strong performance there. It's fair to say, though, that the Syracuse team is on the upswing while UVA's has some recovery work to do, as the Hoos didn't play after the ACC tournament this year.
Men's cross country:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 48)
2009-2010: 48 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 48 (UVA 40)
2011-2012: 45 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 60 (UVA 61.5)
Totals: 201 (UVA 194.5)
This is one of the sports that the NCAA sets up with regional qualifiers (golf being another example) and Syracuse is in a different one than UVA. So, while they'll be new faces at the ACC meets, the road to NCAA qualification is different. Syracuse won the Big East championship here in their final year and went on to finish 15th at the NCAAs; UVA was a place above them at 14th. Like UVA, the Orange should be a tough competitor in the ACC, but again like UVA, might have trouble getting over the hump to earn a conference championship.
Women's cross country:
2008-2009: 18 (UVA 22)
2009-2010: 38 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 60 (UVA 32)
2011-2012: 40 (UVA 34)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 156 (UVA 133)
Similar to UVA, the women's program is a little less strong than the men's. Both teams can usually send runners to the national meet, but not as many as the men do, and both failed to make it there this year.
Field hockey:
2008-2009: 83 (UVA 60)
2009-2010: 60 (UVA 83)
2010-2011: 60 (UVA 83)
2011-2012: 60 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 83 (UVA 60)
Totals: 346 (UVA 286)
In terms of Director's Cup points, field hockey is typically a cash cow sport for both schools. Syracuse's addition makes this a seven-team conference, added to UVA, Wake, BC, Duke, Maryland, and UNC. The latter two are the thorn in our side, having shared most of the recent national championships between themselves, while Wake had a three-year run from 2002-2004. UVA typically always makes the four-team ACC tournament and then loses to either Maryland or UNC, having never won an ACC championship. Syracuse will join the conference at just about that level, and while that'll make it hard for Wake, BC, and Duke to find their way into the tournament, UVA will find the tournament an even tougher road than before.
Football:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 45 (UVA 0)
Totals: 90 (UVA 25)
Part of the reason football is so frustrating is that it's not that hard to earn Director's Cup points. All you have to do is make a bowl game. You don't even have to win it. Half the teams in the country are earning a cool and easy 25 points and half of those teams are breezing their way to 45 points and we're playing in la-la loser land. The other thing is, though, that making a bowl might be harder for Syracuse now that their schedule will get a degree of difficulty boost. Tying for the Big East title this past year was worth the Pinstripe Bowl, which is a pretty good indicator of the conference's quality, Louisville aside. The Pinstripe, in fact, is where the Cuse has gone in the two recent years they've been to a bowl - the fruits of Doug Marrone's efforts in reviving the program after the disastrous Greg Robinson tenure. With Marrone off to coach the Buffalo Bills, though, the program under Scott Shafer may or may not continue to gain ground. It'll be tough, playing FSU and Clemson every year.
Men's lacrosse:
2008-2009: 100 (UVA 83)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 83)
2010-2011: 60 (UVA 100)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 90 (UVA 0)
Totals: 300 (UVA 326)
I mean, do you really need this part explained to you? The only thing worth mentioning here that you shouldn't already know is that UVA was the only ACC team to put Syracuse on their regular schedule, so as good as Syracuse is at this stuff, their addition is actually a net plus for us, since we're the only team that doesn't have to add them to the schedule.
Women's lacrosse:
2008-2009: 60 (UVA 25)
2009-2010: 83 (UVA 60)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 90 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 83 (UVA 70)
Totals: 316 (UVA 205)
They're almost as good at this, too. And the gap between our men's team and our women's is larger than theirs. DC scores of 83 represent years a team went to the final four, and 90s mean they lost in the championship game. So other than the one year where they klutzed out of the NCAA tournament without an invite (which can happen to anyone amirite?) the women's team at Syracuse is a formidable opponent with a formidable history.
Rowing:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 80)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 63)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 100)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 75)
Totals: 0 (UVA 418)
Syracuse crew is not a major player on the national scene, having last been invited to the NCAA championships in 2005. They're not a threat to UVA's ACC dominance in this sport.
Men's soccer:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 64 (UVA 50)
Totals: 64 (UVA 250)
Historically, Syracuse's soccer team has been from mediocre to total garbage. From 2009-2011, the team amassed an 8-37-6 record. Awful. Then this year, they went on a surprise NCAA tournament run, upsetting 15-1 Cornell in the first round and 14th-seeded VCU in the second before losing to eventual national runner-up Georgetown on penalty kicks. Whether they can continue that kind of showing remains to be seen, but this is really the reverse of basketball: until Cuse proves otherwise, UVA will be the higher-echelon team.
Women's soccer:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 64)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 73)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 329)
The ACC is a quality conference in both the men's and women's version of this sport, and at present, the top of the conference is viciously competitive on the women's side. Seeds 2 through 5 in the women's ACC tournament had conference records of 6-3, and seed 6 was 5-3. Syracuse women's soccer, which is slowly clawing its way from lousy to medium-lousy, is walking into a lion's den. They won't be tipping the balance of power in the ACC any time soon.
Softball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 25 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 100 (UVA 25)
They're better than UVA, usually, and get to the tournament more often than not, but it's going to be hard for them as a northern team to walk into a mostly southern conference (after playing in an almost entirely northern one) and compete immediately for championships. They'll be another hurdle for a UVA team that doesn't usually perform very well, though.
Women's tennis:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 50)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 64)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 192)
Cuse tends to perform very well in conference tennis play but has been decent at best outside of Big East opponents, and usually not quite decent. They often got steamrolled by ACC opponents whenever they met. While the women's tennis team at UVA isn't the powerhouse the men's team is, they're a higher-level team within the ACC and good enough that Syracuse won't be a major obstacle.
Men's track and field (outdoor):
2008-2009: 5 (UVA 24.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 46)
2011-2012: 15 (UVA 15)
2012-2013: 13 (UVA 0)
Totals: 33 (UVA 135)
Women's track and field (outdoor):
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 36.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 44)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 9 (UVA 0)
Totals: 9 (UVA 80.5)
The men's track team can usually scrape together a couple qualifiers for the NCAAs; the women usually cannot. Neither are threats to win the ACC championship any time soon, and UVA, despite this being one of our more up-and-down sports, will almost always be a better team.
Women's volleyball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 0)
Our volleyball team is typically awful, and the Director's Cup goose eggs that Syracuse puts up right next to ours shouldn't be construed as them being just as bad. They're better; just never, it seems, quite good enough to get an NCAA bid. The top of the ACC has some good teams, but Cuse should be able to find their way to the upper half of the standings in this conference.
Syracuse celebrated their first-ever finish in the top 40 of the Director's Cup standings this year. They're highly competitive in a few sports (hoops and lax coming to mind, as well as field hockey) but only marginally competitive at best in others, and their soccer and rowing programs are lame. Fielding only six NCAA men's sports hurts them in the standings, too. About two-thirds of the difference between UVA and Cuse in the Director's Cup is accounted for by us being good to great in several sports they're missing.
******************************************************
Were there going to be a weekend review this week, this item would've been there, but since there isn't one, Mark Bernardino's retirement will have to crowd this space a little. That is a huge bummer for one of UVA's elite programs. The swim team hasn't won any national titles under Bernardino, but that's sort of praise by faint damnation. They've owned the ACC for over a decade now. Possibly the best line I saw in the article announcing his retirement is that UVA has sent a swimmer to the Olympics for every Olympics since 1996, four of them gold medalists. Craig Littlepage has done a nice job selecting coaches for the most part, but whoever replaces Bernardino has some enormous shoes to fill.
Since recruit profiles are a standard around here, I thought it only fitting to do the same for the new conference recruits as well. This week, we'll take a detailed look at each of the new additions to the conference and how well they'll compete in each sport that they sponsor. And since we always do the recruit ones in order that they committed, the same is true of the schools. Syracuse and Pitt "committed" on the same day, but then, Syracuse actually was set to join eight or nine years ago, when the ACC "pulled their offer" and invited VT instead. So we do the Orange first.
Overall profile
Enrollment (undergrad):
1. Florida State: 31,800
2. Maryland: 26,800
3. NC State: 26,200
4. Virginia Tech: 23,900
5. North Carolina: 18,600
6. Pittsburgh: 18,400
7. Clemson: 16,600
8. Virginia: 15,800
9. Syracuse: 14,800
10. Georgia Tech: 14,500
11. Miami: 10,300
12. Boston College: 9,100
13. Notre Dame: 8,400
14. Duke: 6,500
15. Wake Forest: 4,800
Academic rank (USN&WR):
1. Duke (#8)
2. Notre Dame (#17)
3. Virginia (#24)
4. Wake Forest (#27)
5. North Carolina (#30)
6. Boston College (#31)
7. Georgia Tech (#36)
8. Miami (#44)
9(t). Syracuse (#58)
9(t). Maryland (#58)
9(t). Pittsburgh (#58)
12. Clemson (#68)
13. Virginia Tech (#72)
14. Florida State (#97)
15. NC State (#106)
Director's Cup average:**
1. North Carolina: 6.2
2. Florida State: 9
3. Virginia: 10.6
4. Duke: 12
5. Notre Dame: 18.4
6. Maryland: 28.8
7. Virginia Tech: 40
8. Clemson: 50.8
9. Syracuse: 54
10. Miami: 56.4
11. Georgia Tech: 59.6
12. NC State: 60.2
13. Boston College: 67.6
14. Wake Forest: 70.8
15. Pittsburgh: 115.6
**average finish in the last five years, including 2013.
Overall, Syracuse fits very neatly into the average ACC profile, which is likely part of the reason they were originally a prime candidate for invitation in the first round of expansion. In terms of size, UVA is the median school in the conference; Syracuse is just slightly below. They're also just slightly below the median in the academic rankings, a spot of no shame really, and the same is true for their Director's Cup placement. Come to think of it, these guys are 9th out of 15 in all three categories, which should hold roughly true when Maryland is swapped out for Louisville as well. They're sort of the like the least-interesting-number paradox in their rankings here.
Sports we play that they don't
Men:
Baseball
Golf
Swimming
Tennis
Wrestling
Women:
Golf
Swimming
Sports they play that we don't
Men:
Rowing
Women:
Ice hockey
Men's rowing isn't really an NCAA sport, but the Cuse does lend more support to their men's club than UVA does. At least as far as giving them a space on the official website. Syracuse is quite a bit Title IX-skewed, with only seven men's programs and eleven for women - and really, six men's programs because rowing isn't NCAA-sponsored.
In particular, there are three things that we do particularly well that they don't at all: baseball, swimming, and men's tennis. The women's ice hockey program is fairly new, despite the fact that upstate New York is as much a hockey hotbed as a lacrosse one. Anyway, hockey isn't an ACC sport.
Common sports
(The number after each year shows how many Director's Cup points were earned by that sport in that year.)
Men's basketball
2008-2009: 64 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 64 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 73 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 83 (UVA 0)
Total: 334 (UVA 25)
Syracuse's hoops team needs little introduction. Under Jim Boeheim, who's coached there since 1976, that's been one of that school's major calling cards. Actually, the five-year cutoff here just misses out on a two-season NIT run, but whatever. Since then they've earned two #1 seeds in the tournament and made the Final Four this year - ironically, in their worst-seeded year of any of these five (a 4 seed.) Their addition makes the ACC significantly tougher. The Orange are simply on a higher plane here than UVA is, until proven otherwise.
Women's basketball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)
Totals: 25 (UVA 75)
On the other hand, the women's teams ought to compete on a much more even keel. Perhaps to drive home the point, UVA and Cuse played in San Juan, PR, this past season, and the final score was a one-point Cuse win. UVA hasn't sniffed the NCAA tournament in three years, while Cuse just got there for the first time in quite a while this season. Before that they were WNIT-level, though almost always with a strong performance there. It's fair to say, though, that the Syracuse team is on the upswing while UVA's has some recovery work to do, as the Hoos didn't play after the ACC tournament this year.
Men's cross country:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 48)
2009-2010: 48 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 48 (UVA 40)
2011-2012: 45 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 60 (UVA 61.5)
Totals: 201 (UVA 194.5)
This is one of the sports that the NCAA sets up with regional qualifiers (golf being another example) and Syracuse is in a different one than UVA. So, while they'll be new faces at the ACC meets, the road to NCAA qualification is different. Syracuse won the Big East championship here in their final year and went on to finish 15th at the NCAAs; UVA was a place above them at 14th. Like UVA, the Orange should be a tough competitor in the ACC, but again like UVA, might have trouble getting over the hump to earn a conference championship.
Women's cross country:
2008-2009: 18 (UVA 22)
2009-2010: 38 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 60 (UVA 32)
2011-2012: 40 (UVA 34)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 156 (UVA 133)
Similar to UVA, the women's program is a little less strong than the men's. Both teams can usually send runners to the national meet, but not as many as the men do, and both failed to make it there this year.
Field hockey:
2008-2009: 83 (UVA 60)
2009-2010: 60 (UVA 83)
2010-2011: 60 (UVA 83)
2011-2012: 60 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 83 (UVA 60)
Totals: 346 (UVA 286)
In terms of Director's Cup points, field hockey is typically a cash cow sport for both schools. Syracuse's addition makes this a seven-team conference, added to UVA, Wake, BC, Duke, Maryland, and UNC. The latter two are the thorn in our side, having shared most of the recent national championships between themselves, while Wake had a three-year run from 2002-2004. UVA typically always makes the four-team ACC tournament and then loses to either Maryland or UNC, having never won an ACC championship. Syracuse will join the conference at just about that level, and while that'll make it hard for Wake, BC, and Duke to find their way into the tournament, UVA will find the tournament an even tougher road than before.
Football:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 45 (UVA 0)
Totals: 90 (UVA 25)
Part of the reason football is so frustrating is that it's not that hard to earn Director's Cup points. All you have to do is make a bowl game. You don't even have to win it. Half the teams in the country are earning a cool and easy 25 points and half of those teams are breezing their way to 45 points and we're playing in la-la loser land. The other thing is, though, that making a bowl might be harder for Syracuse now that their schedule will get a degree of difficulty boost. Tying for the Big East title this past year was worth the Pinstripe Bowl, which is a pretty good indicator of the conference's quality, Louisville aside. The Pinstripe, in fact, is where the Cuse has gone in the two recent years they've been to a bowl - the fruits of Doug Marrone's efforts in reviving the program after the disastrous Greg Robinson tenure. With Marrone off to coach the Buffalo Bills, though, the program under Scott Shafer may or may not continue to gain ground. It'll be tough, playing FSU and Clemson every year.
Men's lacrosse:
2008-2009: 100 (UVA 83)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 83)
2010-2011: 60 (UVA 100)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 90 (UVA 0)
Totals: 300 (UVA 326)
I mean, do you really need this part explained to you? The only thing worth mentioning here that you shouldn't already know is that UVA was the only ACC team to put Syracuse on their regular schedule, so as good as Syracuse is at this stuff, their addition is actually a net plus for us, since we're the only team that doesn't have to add them to the schedule.
Women's lacrosse:
2008-2009: 60 (UVA 25)
2009-2010: 83 (UVA 60)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 90 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 83 (UVA 70)
Totals: 316 (UVA 205)
They're almost as good at this, too. And the gap between our men's team and our women's is larger than theirs. DC scores of 83 represent years a team went to the final four, and 90s mean they lost in the championship game. So other than the one year where they klutzed out of the NCAA tournament without an invite (which can happen to anyone amirite?) the women's team at Syracuse is a formidable opponent with a formidable history.
Rowing:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 80)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 63)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 100)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 75)
Totals: 0 (UVA 418)
Syracuse crew is not a major player on the national scene, having last been invited to the NCAA championships in 2005. They're not a threat to UVA's ACC dominance in this sport.
Men's soccer:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 64 (UVA 50)
Totals: 64 (UVA 250)
Historically, Syracuse's soccer team has been from mediocre to total garbage. From 2009-2011, the team amassed an 8-37-6 record. Awful. Then this year, they went on a surprise NCAA tournament run, upsetting 15-1 Cornell in the first round and 14th-seeded VCU in the second before losing to eventual national runner-up Georgetown on penalty kicks. Whether they can continue that kind of showing remains to be seen, but this is really the reverse of basketball: until Cuse proves otherwise, UVA will be the higher-echelon team.
Women's soccer:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 64)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 73)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 329)
The ACC is a quality conference in both the men's and women's version of this sport, and at present, the top of the conference is viciously competitive on the women's side. Seeds 2 through 5 in the women's ACC tournament had conference records of 6-3, and seed 6 was 5-3. Syracuse women's soccer, which is slowly clawing its way from lousy to medium-lousy, is walking into a lion's den. They won't be tipping the balance of power in the ACC any time soon.
Softball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 25 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 25 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 100 (UVA 25)
They're better than UVA, usually, and get to the tournament more often than not, but it's going to be hard for them as a northern team to walk into a mostly southern conference (after playing in an almost entirely northern one) and compete immediately for championships. They'll be another hurdle for a UVA team that doesn't usually perform very well, though.
Women's tennis:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 50)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 64)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)
Totals: 0 (UVA 192)
Cuse tends to perform very well in conference tennis play but has been decent at best outside of Big East opponents, and usually not quite decent. They often got steamrolled by ACC opponents whenever they met. While the women's tennis team at UVA isn't the powerhouse the men's team is, they're a higher-level team within the ACC and good enough that Syracuse won't be a major obstacle.
Men's track and field (outdoor):
2008-2009: 5 (UVA 24.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 46)
2011-2012: 15 (UVA 15)
2012-2013: 13 (UVA 0)
Totals: 33 (UVA 135)
Women's track and field (outdoor):
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 36.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 44)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 9 (UVA 0)
Totals: 9 (UVA 80.5)
The men's track team can usually scrape together a couple qualifiers for the NCAAs; the women usually cannot. Neither are threats to win the ACC championship any time soon, and UVA, despite this being one of our more up-and-down sports, will almost always be a better team.
Women's volleyball:
2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)
Totals: 0 (UVA 0)
Our volleyball team is typically awful, and the Director's Cup goose eggs that Syracuse puts up right next to ours shouldn't be construed as them being just as bad. They're better; just never, it seems, quite good enough to get an NCAA bid. The top of the ACC has some good teams, but Cuse should be able to find their way to the upper half of the standings in this conference.
Syracuse celebrated their first-ever finish in the top 40 of the Director's Cup standings this year. They're highly competitive in a few sports (hoops and lax coming to mind, as well as field hockey) but only marginally competitive at best in others, and their soccer and rowing programs are lame. Fielding only six NCAA men's sports hurts them in the standings, too. About two-thirds of the difference between UVA and Cuse in the Director's Cup is accounted for by us being good to great in several sports they're missing.
******************************************************
Were there going to be a weekend review this week, this item would've been there, but since there isn't one, Mark Bernardino's retirement will have to crowd this space a little. That is a huge bummer for one of UVA's elite programs. The swim team hasn't won any national titles under Bernardino, but that's sort of praise by faint damnation. They've owned the ACC for over a decade now. Possibly the best line I saw in the article announcing his retirement is that UVA has sent a swimmer to the Olympics for every Olympics since 1996, four of them gold medalists. Craig Littlepage has done a nice job selecting coaches for the most part, but whoever replaces Bernardino has some enormous shoes to fill.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)