Yeah, I know, I get it: losing at basketball to VT is crap, and will always be crap regardless of any extenuating circumstance at all. Also, there were higher expectations for this season than to start it off 2-3 in the ACC with losses in what should've been the easier road games on the slate. Also also, despite the Tony = Defense label they've earned over the past few years, this team has yet to hold an ACC opponent under 1 point per possession.
I could go on. Rocky start to January, is the point. I mean, we're a bit spoiled here. 4-3 in the ACC is not the worst thing that can happen to your basketball team. Dave Leitao won four ACC games in all of 2009. Last year UVA won as many ACC games as Leitao won in '06, '08, and '09 combined, so falling short of that standard is something you should kinda expect every so often.
Still, by the standards set the past two years, it's a rocky start, and there are more than a few reasons for it. And yet I can't help but enjoy it. Why? Cause this is the ACC's rightful way of life.
Dean Smith (I think) is credited with saying that every road win in the ACC is an upset. He wasn't aw-shucksing his team. He was talking about the ACC as he knew it - and how it should be. Certain teams in the ACC's history have had less trouble than others in winning on the road, of course, and Smith coached one of them. But the NFL and its "any given Sunday" mantra have had nothing on ACC basketball.
At least for the longest time. The early part of this decade was rough on the conference and its reputation for being a powerhouse and an impossible gauntlet of competition. In 1998, Florida State went 6-10 in the conference, lost in the first round, and made the NCAA tournament anyway - and promptly justified the committee's faith by upsetting #5 TCU (27-5, by the way) in the first round. That's conference respect. Fast forward to 2013, when UVA can go 11-7 in the conference, beat eventual 5-seed Wisconsin on the road, and hit the bricks for the NIT. That's, just, ouch.
A winning record used to be a punched ticket. A losing record could still get you in. Maryland went 7-9 in conference play in 2004 and wound up a four seed. Back when ships were wood and men were iron, the conference schedule was a minefield and conference tournament seeding was completely wide open.
That sort of abruptly stopped in 2011; since that season, six teams with winning ACC records have been left out of the tourney. '11 BC and VT; '12 Miami; '13 UVA; '14 Clemson; '15 Miami. I don't mind saying that UVA's meteoric rise has coincided with an ACC that provided a path to do so. Simply put, some games were gimmes if you were good enough, which would've been unthinkable in the past.
Now take a look at the state of the league this year. Boston College is pathetic and will stay that way all year, but they're one of only three teams under a KenPom pythag rating of 0.7. The last time that count was so small was 2010, when it was zero. And keep in mind, the league didn't expand to 15 until 2014, meaning that for three years the league had fewer teams than it does now, and yet more bad teams. In 2013, six teams (half the league!) were under 0.7, which surely didn't help UVA's cause any on Selection Sunday. And four, including 9-9 FSU (ranked just below Wright State in the national ranks), were under 0.6. Just last year, you still had seven teams (again, almost half the league) under that 0.7 mark.
In an environment like that, is it any wonder UVA kept blowing fools out? Oh, sure, the occasional good team got drop-kicked into tomorrow as well, just ask Syracuse on senior night, but for the most part, UVA blew out the bad teams and played the good ones pretty close.
Now, suddenly, the ACC is back to being a deathtrap on any particular night. UVA's record is frankly bizarre. Four wins against teams with a combined 18-11 conference record - including three who sit at 5-2. Three losses, against teams with a combined 7-13 conference record. All road losses and home wins. You can find examples of this all over the place, like NC State's blowout of Pitt despite the former being 1-6 and the latter being 5-2.
It's tough to have top-to-bottom excellence in a league with 15 teams, but the ACC is close - only two teams you could call gimme games, and I'd better be careful about saying that too strongly because UVA plays one of them on the road Tuesday. Joey Brackets has eight ACC teams in the field and two more on the cusp. ACC basketball is good again, in all the right ways.
Me, I love it. It assuredly means more losses for UVA, but the wins are a bit more meaningful. And the race will be the best it's been in a long time. I'd sure like to see the Hoos tighten up on defense and stop throwing silly skip passes that don't have a snowball's chance of reaching their target, but I'm also planning on enjoying the tightened-up competition. It's the ACC as God intended.
Showing posts with label acc in general. Show all posts
Showing posts with label acc in general. Show all posts
Monday, January 25, 2016
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
2014 hoops preview: ACC returners
Admit it: you saw that header and went OH GOODY. And, "why can't it be basketball season RIGHT NOW?", followed by a prayer of thanks to all the baby angels for Tony Bennett. I know how you roll.
Well, you can't have actual basketball for another three-ish weeks, but you can have previews. I won't be doing full-fledged team previews anymore, so I've got an idea or two spinning in the hopper about how to preview the ACC instead. This is a basic look at the returning and departed players from the conference.
Using KenPom (what else?) O-ratings, I slapped together a number I'm calling Impact Score. It's.... not totally scientifically rigorous, but it's kinda neat anyway and useful enough. All it is, is this:
(O-rating - 100) * Minutes %age * (Possession %age / 0.2)
That assumes that the average player has an O-rating of 100, meaning he generates a point for every one of "his" possessions. Multiply the difference by the percentage of available minutes he played. Then multiply again by a proportion generated by his possession percentage, i.e., the percentage of his team's possessions that he ends while he's on the floor (say, by scoring, or turning the ball over.) This should be around 20%, what with there being five guys on the floor and all. Higher, and he's having a proportionally greater impact, and vice versa.
Example: A player with an O-rating of 110, who plays 20 minutes a game** and ends 22% of his team's possessions will have an Impact Score of 5.5.
It's not perfect, but it can be illustrative at times. C.J. Fair, widely considered a top player in the league, and voted to the first team last year, had an O-rating under 100, and thus a negative IS. Sure, he scored a ton - and he needed five zillion shots to do it. The guy was the quintessential volume scorer. It's no accident he went undrafted while Joe Harris got a guaranteed contract. IS suggests that Syracuse will be better off without Fair.
This is, by the way, purely for the offensive side of the ball, in case you hadn't noticed. Akil Mitchell is just incredibly pedestrian in this scoring system, but obviously, that wasn't the end of the court where he'll be missed. For this reason, I've added up each team's IS's but warn you that it's only mildly instructive to do so. It's really about the players.
**I realize 20 mpg is not precisely the same as 50% of available minutes. Just roll with it for simplicity's sake.
Here are the total scores for each team from 2013-14:
Duke: 90.43
Louisville: 78.73
Pittsburgh: 58.93
Syracuse: 53.41
Notre Dame: 48.56
Boston College: 40.58
Virginia: 39.70
NC State: 32.57
North Carolina: 32.34
Florida State: 26.16
Clemson: 17.26
Miami: 16.76
Wake Forest: 7.04
Georgia Tech: 2.86
Virginia Tech: -13.71
Obviously, that doesn't correlate too well with actual success, but it does work reasonably hand-in-hand with each team's O-rating. BC didn't finish in the same hemisphere as UVA in real life, but their KenPom O-rating was 30th in the country to UVA's 21st. So the similar team IS's make sense viewed in that lens.
Now for the teams in order of returning IS:
Duke: 41.11
Louisville: 38.66
Notre Dame: 37.00
Pittsburgh: 30.32
Virginia: 30.06
Syracuse: 27.01
Boston College: 26.83
North Carolina: 26.31
Clemson: 10.44
Florida State: 9.54
NC State: 0.52
Miami: -3.61
Georgia Tech: -9.97
Virginia Tech: -10.17
Wake Forest: -14.50
Yes, VT committed addition by subtraction, by losing a couple players to transfers, particularly Official Total Stiff, Trevor Thompson, who took his lousy shooting and turnover machinery to Ohio State. Elsewhere in the state, UVA is among the teams with the highest percentage of quality returning players. Only Carolina and Notre Dame fare better there - though teams like Duke and Louisville bring back enough talent to be called favorites.
For reference, before we go team by team, here's the top 20 players from 2013-14, whether returning or not (and for that matter, ignoring teams that are no longer here):
1. T.J. Warren (NCSt.) - 19.69
2. Marcus Paige (UNC) - 19.55
3. Pat Connaughton (ND) - 19.32
4. Rodney Hood (Duke) - 18.24
5. Olivier Hanlan (BC) - 16.22
6. Russ Smith (UL) - 15.82
7. Quinn Cook (Duke) - 15.59
8. Trevor Cooney (SU) - 15.39
9. Rion Brown (Mia.) - 15.25
10. Tyler Ennis (SU) - 14.73
11. Coron Williams (WF) - 14.72
12. Lamar Patterson (Pitt) - 14.55
13. Montrezl Harrell (UL) - 14.46
14. Jabari Parker (Duke) - 14.21
15. Talib Zanna (Pitt) - 14.06
16. Okaro White (FSU) - 13.49
17. K.J. McDaniels (CU) - 13.43
18. Jerian Grant (ND) - 13.36
19. Luke Hancock (UL) - 13.06
20. Amile Jefferson (Duke) - 12.97
21. Malcolm Brogdon (UVA) - 12.64
(ok i lied that's 21)
Remember, this isn't the 20 best players, it's the 20 most impactful, as a combination of offensive efficiency and high usage.
Just for S&Gs, the bottom 10:
Madison Jones (WF): -9.65
Chris Bolden (GT): -7.26
Trevor Thompson (VT): -6.75
Joey Van Zegeren (VT): -5.97
Adonis Filer (CU): -5.39
Nate Britt (UNC): -5.08
Devin Wilson (VT): -4.81
Davon Reed (Mia.): -4.80
Kyle Washington (NCSt.): -4.41
Jarquez Smith (FSU): -3.87
All is not lost for these guys, of course. Some are in fact legitimately bad (or just not ACC-level) but Britt was a pretty hot-stuff recruit (they always are at UNC) and Wilson's game passed the eye test and he probably shouldn't be blamed for having been leaned on so hard by a horrendous team.
BOSTON COLLEGE
Key losses: Ryan Anderson (10.46), Joe Rahon (3.23)
Key returners: Olivier Hanlan (16.22), Lonnie Jackson (3.46), Patrick Heckmann (2.67), Eddie Odio (2.33), Garland Owens (2.28)
Losing Anderson to transfer (Arizona) hurts the Eagles, but they get back one of the conference's better scorers and certainly one of the most heavily-relied-upon players in the country in Hanlan, plus an assortment of useful supporting cast members.
CLEMSON
Key losses: K.J. McDaniels (13.43), Adonis Filer (-5.39)
Key returners: Rod Hall (5.49), Damarcus Harrison (4.75), Landry Nnoko (4.29)
McDaniels is a huge loss, but it's balanced by also losing Adonis Filer, the fifth-lowest ranked player in the league; Filer transferred to Florida Atlantic. Clemson is left without a star player for now, but some good pieces remain, and freshman Donte Grantham should be an impact player.
DUKE
Key losses: Rodney Hood (18.24), Jabari Parker (14.21), Andre Dawkins (8.61), Tyler Thornton (7.44)
Key returners: Quinn Cook (15.59), Amile Jefferson (12.97), Rasheed Sulaimon (10.59)
Duke loses enough players to fill out the starting lineup of an ACC contender, but nobody's feeling too sorry for them. Somehow they'll cope. Top freshmen who you'll get sick of hearing about include Tyus Jones, Jahlil Okafor, and Justise Winslow, all one-and-done possibilities.
FLORIDA STATE
Key losses: Okaro White (13.49), Ian Miller (6.84), Robert Gilchrist (-3.72)
Key returners: Aaron Thomas (7.48), Boris Bojanovsky (5.04), Devon Bookert (3.33)
FSU is one of the more slammed teams by graduation, but their returning players are all pretty young with a lot of room to grow, and Gilchrist, while not a total stiff on offense, could be hacked with impunity. FSU isn't in terrible shape, but they'll be a remade team for sure.
GEORGIA TECH
Key losses: Daniel Miller (9.66), Trae Golden (5.63), Kammeon Holsey (2.96),
Key returners: Marcus Georges-Hunt (2.74), Corey Heyward (-3.40), Chris Bolden (-7.26)
This is one of the ugliest situations in the league. GT was already bad, and Georges-Hunt is the only returning player of much worth at all. They've taken some transfers, notably ex-Terp Charles Mitchell, and incoming freshman Tadric Jackson comes in with plenty of hype, but generally their returning players just aren't very good.
LOUISVILLE
Key losses: Russ Smith (15.82), Luke Hancock (13.06), Stephan Van Treese (7.52)
Key returners: Montrezl Harrell (14.46), Wayne Blackshear (8.74), Terry Rozier (7.06), Chris Jones (6.07)
Harrell gets all the pub, but Louisville is rightly considered a top contender because of a pretty deep supporting cast that also returns. It's rare you can lose so much and still bring back so much too - and the incoming freshman class is very deep, with no fewer than five four-star players in it.
MIAMI
Key losses: Rion Brown (15.25), Erik Swoope (5.43), James Kelly (3.83)
Key returners: Manu Lecomte (1.44)
The cupboard's going to be about as bare as that implies. Of a nine-man rotation, Miami lost six, including Kelly to a transfer to Marshall. The Canes will have to lean heavily on an incoming class that includes a pair of touted guards in James Palmer and Ja'Quan Newton, and they'll have K-State transfer Angel Rodriguez getting eligible as well. Rodriguez is probably the main reason the Canes aren't pegged even lower than they are by the experts.
NORTH CAROLINA
Key losses: James Michael McAdoo (3.70), Leslie McDonald (2.33)
Key returners: Marcus Paige (19.55), Brice Johnson (8.37), Kennedy Meeks (5.62), Nate Britt (-5.08)
UNC is the team least affected by attrition in our little analysis here; the losses of McDonald and the wildly overrated McAdoo shouldn't hurt them much, if at all. Marcus Paige is a preseason favorite for POY, and the Heels have their usual crop of ridiculously talented freshmen coming in. That includes top-20 five-stars Theo Pinson and Justin Jackson, and if UNC can't get Nate Britt going, four-star PG Joel Berry can give him a push.
NC STATE
Key losses: T.J. Warren (19.69), Jordan Vandenberg (7.70)
Key returners: Ralston Turner (7.44), Lennard Freeman (3.54), Kyle Washington (-4.41)
Trying to replace Warren will be a unique challenge, but this should be a more well-rounded team this year. It was awfully damn young last year, and the four-star freshman twins Caleb and Cody Martin have Pack fans pretty excited. NC State could defy the idea that losing a ton of impactful minutes means a drop in production and success.
NOTRE DAME
Key losses: Eric Atkins (11.33)
Key returners: Pat Connaughton (19.32), Jerian Grant (13.36), Demetrius Jackson (3.14)
It's astounding, the fact that Grant has such a high IS even after missing a huge chunk of the season with academic issues. It's also fairly misleading; he was absolutely crushing it on offense, but, obviously against the weaker part of the schedule, and would've almost certainly come back to earth. (Especially with two games against UVA.) Still, that's probably an accurate score, considering he probably won't pile up an O-rating of 132 over a full season, but will also play a lot of minute. So it balances out.
PITTSBURGH
Key losses: Lamar Patterson (14.55), Talib Zanna (14.06)
Key returners: James Robinson (11.26), Michael Young (4.48), Durand Johnson (4.27), Cameron Wright (3.28)
Pitt only loses two players - but they're doozies. This is another team that will have to overhaul itself, big time, but also has the tools to do it. Several players were quietly putting up very efficient seasons, but were overshadowed by Pitt's big three. Now that the big three is down to one, there's a lot of opportunity, and little reason to think Pitt will take a major tumble.
SYRACUSE
Key losses: Tyler Ennis (14.73), Jerami Grant (12.37), C.J. Fair (-1.37)
Key returners: Trevor Cooney (15.39), Rakeem Christmas (10.02), Michael Gbinije (3.12)
People look at Syracuse's losses and think "three key players out the door" - I say, two. Fair can join UNC's McAdoo in the overrated bin. Ennis will be a significant loss, as will Grant; the latter should be somewhat replaceable by top-20 recruit Chris McCullough.
VIRGINIA
Key losses: Joe Harris (10.68)
Key returners: Malcolm Brogdon (12.64), London Perrantes (8.07), Anthony Gill (6.61)
You know all this already, I just wanted to put this down on the same page as everything else for a frame of reference. In case you're wondering, nobody else on the team rated over 1.70, which was Tobey.
VIRGINIA TECH
Key losses: C.J. Barksdale (5.20), Marshall Wood (-2.27), Trevor Thompson (-6.75)
Key returners: Will Johnston (1.21), Devin Wilson (-4.81), Joey van Zegeren (-5.97)
Because of Buzz Williams, who represents one of the biggest coaching upgrades in the ACC in a long time, VT is a wild card. But still probably not very good, despite being the only team to add by subtraction - a really tough feat, requiring one to start from a position of horrendous weakness. Some players such as Wilson can probably be counted on to improve, and it's likely Tech won't be the slack-jawed disaster of last season. That just means the conference's cellar will be shored up a little.
WAKE FOREST
Key losses: Coron Williams (14.72), Travis McKie (8.17)
Key returners: Codi Miller-McIntyre (0.94), Devin Thomas (-3.52), Madison Jones (-9.65)
By that list of losses, you'd think Wake wasn't half bad last year; they were way more than half bad because Coron Williams was the best player nobody ever heard of, and nobody ever heard of him because he was criminally underused. With a competent coach and a respectable recruiting class, Wake might well be improved this year, but they also still have the official worst player in the conference. Jones has to cut down on the almost 40% turnover rate to lose that title.
****************************************
You've already seen last year's best and worst; let's split that up now into the conference's top 20 returners and top 20 departers - and the bottom 10 too.
Top 20 losses:
1. T.J. Warren (NCSt.) - 19.69
2. Rodney Hood (Duke) - 18.24
3. Russ Smith (UL) - 15.82
4. Rion Brown (Mia.) - 15.25
5. Tyler Ennis (SU) - 14.73
6. Coron Williams (WF) - 14.72
7. Lamar Patterson (Pitt) - 14.55
8. Jabari Parker (Duke) - 14.21
9. Talib Zanna (Pitt) - 14.06
10. Okaro White (FSU) -13.49
11. K.J. McDaniels (CU) - 13.43
12. Luke Hancock (UL) - 13.06
13. Jerami Grant (SU) - 12.37
14. Eric Atkins (ND) - 11.33
15. Joe Harris (UVA) - 10.68
16. Ryan Anderson (BC) - 10.46
17. Daniel Miller (GT) - 9.66
18. Andre Dawkins (Duke) - 8.61
19. Travis McKie (WF) - 8.17
20. Jordan Vandenberg (NCSt.) - 7.70
Top 20 returnees:
1. Marcus Paige (UNC) - 19.55
2. Pat Connaughton (ND) - 19.32
3. Olivier Hanlan (BC) - 16.22
4. Quinn Cook (Duke) - 15.59
5. Trevor Cooney (SU) - 15.39
6. Montrezl Harrell (UL) - 14.46
7. Jerian Grant (ND) - 13.36
8. Amile Jefferson (Duke) - 12.97
9. Malcolm Brogdon (UVA) - 12.64
10. James Robinson (Pitt) - 11.26
11. Rasheed Sulaimon (Duke) - 10.59
12. Rakeem Christmas (SU) - 10.02
13. Wayne Blackshear (UL) - 8.74
14. Brice Johnson (UNC) - 8.37
15. London Perrantes (UVA) - 8.07
16. Aaron Thomas (FSU) - 7.48
17. Ralston Turner (NCSt.) - 7.44
18. Terry Rozier (UL) - 7.06
19. Anthony Gill (UVA) - 6.61
20. Chris Jones (UL) - 6.07
Bottom 10 losses:
1. Trevor Thompson (VT): -6.75
2. Adonis Filer (CU): -5.39
3. Robert Gilchrist (FSU): -3.72
4. Arnaud William Adala Moto (WF): -2.83
5. Garrius Adams (Mia.): -2.66
6. Jason Morris (GT): -2.56
7. Ibrahim Djambo (CU): -2.40
8. Marshall Wood (VT): -2.27
9. Solomon Poole (GT): -2.17
10. Teven Jones (UVA): -2.03
Bottom 10 returnees:
1. Madison Jones (WF): -9.65
2. Chris Bolden (GT): -7.26
3. Joey van Zegeren (VT): -5.97
4. Nate Britt (UNC): -5.08
5. Devin Wilson (VT): -4.81
6. Davon Reed (Mia.): -4.80
7. Kyle Washington (NCSt.): -4.41
8. Jarquez Smith (FSU): -3.87
9. Josh Smith (CU): -3.86
10. Devin Thomas (WF): -3.52
A final imploration once again applies, to not take this as fully predictive, since it's strictly an offense-only tool. But it's a fun exercise, and in some cases, awfully illuminating.
Next week, what you've really been waiting for: our own players themselves. Short version: Everyone is amazing, and Tony Bennett is amazingest.
Well, you can't have actual basketball for another three-ish weeks, but you can have previews. I won't be doing full-fledged team previews anymore, so I've got an idea or two spinning in the hopper about how to preview the ACC instead. This is a basic look at the returning and departed players from the conference.
Using KenPom (what else?) O-ratings, I slapped together a number I'm calling Impact Score. It's.... not totally scientifically rigorous, but it's kinda neat anyway and useful enough. All it is, is this:
(O-rating - 100) * Minutes %age * (Possession %age / 0.2)
That assumes that the average player has an O-rating of 100, meaning he generates a point for every one of "his" possessions. Multiply the difference by the percentage of available minutes he played. Then multiply again by a proportion generated by his possession percentage, i.e., the percentage of his team's possessions that he ends while he's on the floor (say, by scoring, or turning the ball over.) This should be around 20%, what with there being five guys on the floor and all. Higher, and he's having a proportionally greater impact, and vice versa.
Example: A player with an O-rating of 110, who plays 20 minutes a game** and ends 22% of his team's possessions will have an Impact Score of 5.5.
It's not perfect, but it can be illustrative at times. C.J. Fair, widely considered a top player in the league, and voted to the first team last year, had an O-rating under 100, and thus a negative IS. Sure, he scored a ton - and he needed five zillion shots to do it. The guy was the quintessential volume scorer. It's no accident he went undrafted while Joe Harris got a guaranteed contract. IS suggests that Syracuse will be better off without Fair.
This is, by the way, purely for the offensive side of the ball, in case you hadn't noticed. Akil Mitchell is just incredibly pedestrian in this scoring system, but obviously, that wasn't the end of the court where he'll be missed. For this reason, I've added up each team's IS's but warn you that it's only mildly instructive to do so. It's really about the players.
**I realize 20 mpg is not precisely the same as 50% of available minutes. Just roll with it for simplicity's sake.
Here are the total scores for each team from 2013-14:
Duke: 90.43
Louisville: 78.73
Pittsburgh: 58.93
Syracuse: 53.41
Notre Dame: 48.56
Boston College: 40.58
Virginia: 39.70
NC State: 32.57
North Carolina: 32.34
Florida State: 26.16
Clemson: 17.26
Miami: 16.76
Wake Forest: 7.04
Georgia Tech: 2.86
Virginia Tech: -13.71
Obviously, that doesn't correlate too well with actual success, but it does work reasonably hand-in-hand with each team's O-rating. BC didn't finish in the same hemisphere as UVA in real life, but their KenPom O-rating was 30th in the country to UVA's 21st. So the similar team IS's make sense viewed in that lens.
Now for the teams in order of returning IS:
Duke: 41.11
Louisville: 38.66
Notre Dame: 37.00
Pittsburgh: 30.32
Virginia: 30.06
Syracuse: 27.01
Boston College: 26.83
North Carolina: 26.31
Clemson: 10.44
Florida State: 9.54
NC State: 0.52
Miami: -3.61
Georgia Tech: -9.97
Virginia Tech: -10.17
Wake Forest: -14.50
Yes, VT committed addition by subtraction, by losing a couple players to transfers, particularly Official Total Stiff, Trevor Thompson, who took his lousy shooting and turnover machinery to Ohio State. Elsewhere in the state, UVA is among the teams with the highest percentage of quality returning players. Only Carolina and Notre Dame fare better there - though teams like Duke and Louisville bring back enough talent to be called favorites.
For reference, before we go team by team, here's the top 20 players from 2013-14, whether returning or not (and for that matter, ignoring teams that are no longer here):
1. T.J. Warren (NCSt.) - 19.69
2. Marcus Paige (UNC) - 19.55
3. Pat Connaughton (ND) - 19.32
4. Rodney Hood (Duke) - 18.24
5. Olivier Hanlan (BC) - 16.22
6. Russ Smith (UL) - 15.82
7. Quinn Cook (Duke) - 15.59
8. Trevor Cooney (SU) - 15.39
9. Rion Brown (Mia.) - 15.25
10. Tyler Ennis (SU) - 14.73
11. Coron Williams (WF) - 14.72
12. Lamar Patterson (Pitt) - 14.55
13. Montrezl Harrell (UL) - 14.46
14. Jabari Parker (Duke) - 14.21
15. Talib Zanna (Pitt) - 14.06
16. Okaro White (FSU) - 13.49
17. K.J. McDaniels (CU) - 13.43
18. Jerian Grant (ND) - 13.36
19. Luke Hancock (UL) - 13.06
20. Amile Jefferson (Duke) - 12.97
21. Malcolm Brogdon (UVA) - 12.64
(ok i lied that's 21)
Remember, this isn't the 20 best players, it's the 20 most impactful, as a combination of offensive efficiency and high usage.
Just for S&Gs, the bottom 10:
Madison Jones (WF): -9.65
Chris Bolden (GT): -7.26
Trevor Thompson (VT): -6.75
Joey Van Zegeren (VT): -5.97
Adonis Filer (CU): -5.39
Nate Britt (UNC): -5.08
Devin Wilson (VT): -4.81
Davon Reed (Mia.): -4.80
Kyle Washington (NCSt.): -4.41
Jarquez Smith (FSU): -3.87
All is not lost for these guys, of course. Some are in fact legitimately bad (or just not ACC-level) but Britt was a pretty hot-stuff recruit (they always are at UNC) and Wilson's game passed the eye test and he probably shouldn't be blamed for having been leaned on so hard by a horrendous team.
BOSTON COLLEGE
Key losses: Ryan Anderson (10.46), Joe Rahon (3.23)
Key returners: Olivier Hanlan (16.22), Lonnie Jackson (3.46), Patrick Heckmann (2.67), Eddie Odio (2.33), Garland Owens (2.28)
Losing Anderson to transfer (Arizona) hurts the Eagles, but they get back one of the conference's better scorers and certainly one of the most heavily-relied-upon players in the country in Hanlan, plus an assortment of useful supporting cast members.
CLEMSON
Key losses: K.J. McDaniels (13.43), Adonis Filer (-5.39)
Key returners: Rod Hall (5.49), Damarcus Harrison (4.75), Landry Nnoko (4.29)
McDaniels is a huge loss, but it's balanced by also losing Adonis Filer, the fifth-lowest ranked player in the league; Filer transferred to Florida Atlantic. Clemson is left without a star player for now, but some good pieces remain, and freshman Donte Grantham should be an impact player.
DUKE
Key losses: Rodney Hood (18.24), Jabari Parker (14.21), Andre Dawkins (8.61), Tyler Thornton (7.44)
Key returners: Quinn Cook (15.59), Amile Jefferson (12.97), Rasheed Sulaimon (10.59)
Duke loses enough players to fill out the starting lineup of an ACC contender, but nobody's feeling too sorry for them. Somehow they'll cope. Top freshmen who you'll get sick of hearing about include Tyus Jones, Jahlil Okafor, and Justise Winslow, all one-and-done possibilities.
FLORIDA STATE
Key losses: Okaro White (13.49), Ian Miller (6.84), Robert Gilchrist (-3.72)
Key returners: Aaron Thomas (7.48), Boris Bojanovsky (5.04), Devon Bookert (3.33)
FSU is one of the more slammed teams by graduation, but their returning players are all pretty young with a lot of room to grow, and Gilchrist, while not a total stiff on offense, could be hacked with impunity. FSU isn't in terrible shape, but they'll be a remade team for sure.
GEORGIA TECH
Key losses: Daniel Miller (9.66), Trae Golden (5.63), Kammeon Holsey (2.96),
Key returners: Marcus Georges-Hunt (2.74), Corey Heyward (-3.40), Chris Bolden (-7.26)
This is one of the ugliest situations in the league. GT was already bad, and Georges-Hunt is the only returning player of much worth at all. They've taken some transfers, notably ex-Terp Charles Mitchell, and incoming freshman Tadric Jackson comes in with plenty of hype, but generally their returning players just aren't very good.
LOUISVILLE
Key losses: Russ Smith (15.82), Luke Hancock (13.06), Stephan Van Treese (7.52)
Key returners: Montrezl Harrell (14.46), Wayne Blackshear (8.74), Terry Rozier (7.06), Chris Jones (6.07)
Harrell gets all the pub, but Louisville is rightly considered a top contender because of a pretty deep supporting cast that also returns. It's rare you can lose so much and still bring back so much too - and the incoming freshman class is very deep, with no fewer than five four-star players in it.
MIAMI
Key losses: Rion Brown (15.25), Erik Swoope (5.43), James Kelly (3.83)
Key returners: Manu Lecomte (1.44)
The cupboard's going to be about as bare as that implies. Of a nine-man rotation, Miami lost six, including Kelly to a transfer to Marshall. The Canes will have to lean heavily on an incoming class that includes a pair of touted guards in James Palmer and Ja'Quan Newton, and they'll have K-State transfer Angel Rodriguez getting eligible as well. Rodriguez is probably the main reason the Canes aren't pegged even lower than they are by the experts.
NORTH CAROLINA
Key losses: James Michael McAdoo (3.70), Leslie McDonald (2.33)
Key returners: Marcus Paige (19.55), Brice Johnson (8.37), Kennedy Meeks (5.62), Nate Britt (-5.08)
UNC is the team least affected by attrition in our little analysis here; the losses of McDonald and the wildly overrated McAdoo shouldn't hurt them much, if at all. Marcus Paige is a preseason favorite for POY, and the Heels have their usual crop of ridiculously talented freshmen coming in. That includes top-20 five-stars Theo Pinson and Justin Jackson, and if UNC can't get Nate Britt going, four-star PG Joel Berry can give him a push.
NC STATE
Key losses: T.J. Warren (19.69), Jordan Vandenberg (7.70)
Key returners: Ralston Turner (7.44), Lennard Freeman (3.54), Kyle Washington (-4.41)
Trying to replace Warren will be a unique challenge, but this should be a more well-rounded team this year. It was awfully damn young last year, and the four-star freshman twins Caleb and Cody Martin have Pack fans pretty excited. NC State could defy the idea that losing a ton of impactful minutes means a drop in production and success.
NOTRE DAME
Key losses: Eric Atkins (11.33)
Key returners: Pat Connaughton (19.32), Jerian Grant (13.36), Demetrius Jackson (3.14)
It's astounding, the fact that Grant has such a high IS even after missing a huge chunk of the season with academic issues. It's also fairly misleading; he was absolutely crushing it on offense, but, obviously against the weaker part of the schedule, and would've almost certainly come back to earth. (Especially with two games against UVA.) Still, that's probably an accurate score, considering he probably won't pile up an O-rating of 132 over a full season, but will also play a lot of minute. So it balances out.
PITTSBURGH
Key losses: Lamar Patterson (14.55), Talib Zanna (14.06)
Key returners: James Robinson (11.26), Michael Young (4.48), Durand Johnson (4.27), Cameron Wright (3.28)
Pitt only loses two players - but they're doozies. This is another team that will have to overhaul itself, big time, but also has the tools to do it. Several players were quietly putting up very efficient seasons, but were overshadowed by Pitt's big three. Now that the big three is down to one, there's a lot of opportunity, and little reason to think Pitt will take a major tumble.
SYRACUSE
Key losses: Tyler Ennis (14.73), Jerami Grant (12.37), C.J. Fair (-1.37)
Key returners: Trevor Cooney (15.39), Rakeem Christmas (10.02), Michael Gbinije (3.12)
People look at Syracuse's losses and think "three key players out the door" - I say, two. Fair can join UNC's McAdoo in the overrated bin. Ennis will be a significant loss, as will Grant; the latter should be somewhat replaceable by top-20 recruit Chris McCullough.
VIRGINIA
Key losses: Joe Harris (10.68)
Key returners: Malcolm Brogdon (12.64), London Perrantes (8.07), Anthony Gill (6.61)
You know all this already, I just wanted to put this down on the same page as everything else for a frame of reference. In case you're wondering, nobody else on the team rated over 1.70, which was Tobey.
VIRGINIA TECH
Key losses: C.J. Barksdale (5.20), Marshall Wood (-2.27), Trevor Thompson (-6.75)
Key returners: Will Johnston (1.21), Devin Wilson (-4.81), Joey van Zegeren (-5.97)
Because of Buzz Williams, who represents one of the biggest coaching upgrades in the ACC in a long time, VT is a wild card. But still probably not very good, despite being the only team to add by subtraction - a really tough feat, requiring one to start from a position of horrendous weakness. Some players such as Wilson can probably be counted on to improve, and it's likely Tech won't be the slack-jawed disaster of last season. That just means the conference's cellar will be shored up a little.
WAKE FOREST
Key losses: Coron Williams (14.72), Travis McKie (8.17)
Key returners: Codi Miller-McIntyre (0.94), Devin Thomas (-3.52), Madison Jones (-9.65)
By that list of losses, you'd think Wake wasn't half bad last year; they were way more than half bad because Coron Williams was the best player nobody ever heard of, and nobody ever heard of him because he was criminally underused. With a competent coach and a respectable recruiting class, Wake might well be improved this year, but they also still have the official worst player in the conference. Jones has to cut down on the almost 40% turnover rate to lose that title.
****************************************
You've already seen last year's best and worst; let's split that up now into the conference's top 20 returners and top 20 departers - and the bottom 10 too.
Top 20 losses:
1. T.J. Warren (NCSt.) - 19.69
2. Rodney Hood (Duke) - 18.24
3. Russ Smith (UL) - 15.82
4. Rion Brown (Mia.) - 15.25
5. Tyler Ennis (SU) - 14.73
6. Coron Williams (WF) - 14.72
7. Lamar Patterson (Pitt) - 14.55
8. Jabari Parker (Duke) - 14.21
9. Talib Zanna (Pitt) - 14.06
10. Okaro White (FSU) -13.49
11. K.J. McDaniels (CU) - 13.43
12. Luke Hancock (UL) - 13.06
13. Jerami Grant (SU) - 12.37
14. Eric Atkins (ND) - 11.33
15. Joe Harris (UVA) - 10.68
16. Ryan Anderson (BC) - 10.46
17. Daniel Miller (GT) - 9.66
18. Andre Dawkins (Duke) - 8.61
19. Travis McKie (WF) - 8.17
20. Jordan Vandenberg (NCSt.) - 7.70
Top 20 returnees:
1. Marcus Paige (UNC) - 19.55
2. Pat Connaughton (ND) - 19.32
3. Olivier Hanlan (BC) - 16.22
4. Quinn Cook (Duke) - 15.59
5. Trevor Cooney (SU) - 15.39
6. Montrezl Harrell (UL) - 14.46
7. Jerian Grant (ND) - 13.36
8. Amile Jefferson (Duke) - 12.97
9. Malcolm Brogdon (UVA) - 12.64
10. James Robinson (Pitt) - 11.26
11. Rasheed Sulaimon (Duke) - 10.59
12. Rakeem Christmas (SU) - 10.02
13. Wayne Blackshear (UL) - 8.74
14. Brice Johnson (UNC) - 8.37
15. London Perrantes (UVA) - 8.07
16. Aaron Thomas (FSU) - 7.48
17. Ralston Turner (NCSt.) - 7.44
18. Terry Rozier (UL) - 7.06
19. Anthony Gill (UVA) - 6.61
20. Chris Jones (UL) - 6.07
Bottom 10 losses:
1. Trevor Thompson (VT): -6.75
2. Adonis Filer (CU): -5.39
3. Robert Gilchrist (FSU): -3.72
4. Arnaud William Adala Moto (WF): -2.83
5. Garrius Adams (Mia.): -2.66
6. Jason Morris (GT): -2.56
7. Ibrahim Djambo (CU): -2.40
8. Marshall Wood (VT): -2.27
9. Solomon Poole (GT): -2.17
10. Teven Jones (UVA): -2.03
Bottom 10 returnees:
1. Madison Jones (WF): -9.65
2. Chris Bolden (GT): -7.26
3. Joey van Zegeren (VT): -5.97
4. Nate Britt (UNC): -5.08
5. Devin Wilson (VT): -4.81
6. Davon Reed (Mia.): -4.80
7. Kyle Washington (NCSt.): -4.41
8. Jarquez Smith (FSU): -3.87
9. Josh Smith (CU): -3.86
10. Devin Thomas (WF): -3.52
A final imploration once again applies, to not take this as fully predictive, since it's strictly an offense-only tool. But it's a fun exercise, and in some cases, awfully illuminating.
Next week, what you've really been waiting for: our own players themselves. Short version: Everyone is amazing, and Tony Bennett is amazingest.
Monday, September 15, 2014
weekend review
Firstly, some quick wrap-up deals of the rest of the ACC:
-- In retrospect, betting on ECU should've been the easiest thing in the world to do - VT rolled into a classic letdown game against an opponent that always gives them fits. Michael Brewer attempted 56 passes, not including sacks, of which there were quite a few. Tech's pass defense sprung some leaks, as did the hands of their wide receivers. I don't think it means a lot going forward, except to give us at least one very nice weekend this year.
-- Georgia Tech's defense looks as bad as expected - failure to hold a 35-10 lead against Georgia Southern is a huge red flag. I'm looking toward that game as one of UVA's most winnable remaining matchups.
-- Wake Forest ran for -25 yards against Utah State. I'll be surprised if the Deacs win so much as two more games all year. That is the worst team in recent ACC memory.
-- Holy crap you guys. Boston College, on the other hand, ran for 452 yards on USC, and held the Trojans to 20. I feared I had overrated BC somewhat when they lost to Pitt, but if they keep that stuff up they'll give Louisville and Cuse a really hard time for 3rd in the Atlantic.
***************************************
-- David Teel agrees with me that UVA needs to throw its chips down on Greyson Lambert.
-- So does Andrew Ramspacher of the CDP. Actually, it'd be news if you could ever find someone these days saying, no, we really need to continue this platoon thing. A few message board kooks, that's it. The truly interesting thing there, though, is the special teams stats. It's early in the year, so there's always that caveat, but then, did you notice it wasn't UVA who lost because of a muffed punt? Having a dedicated special teams coach who actually knows what he's doing is a major improvement.
-- Continuing that trend, Ian Frye was ACC specialist of the week. Nice. Definitely earned it by going 3-for-3 on field goals, none of which were easy chip shots. (Don't think that 47-yarder would've been a successful 48-yarder, though.)
-- Actually, there is one place that doesn't agree with me on the quarterback thing, and that's the official depth chart, which still has the diabolical OR. I'm willing to make much less of a deal of that this week, though. I still have no idea what the hell London thinks about quarterbacks, but this week the benefit of the doubt is granted, and the assumption is that Lambert is basically the guy while the suspicion is that London won't be able to resist tossing Johns in there for a series or two.
-- Another attempt is being made at a Commonwealth Something featuring UVA and VT going at it in all sports, and of course UVA will win this thing because there are other sports besides football. The men's soccer team struck the first blow last week. And hey, speaking of which, they'll be on ESPNUVA this Sunday at 12 noon. The undefeated ladies will be on the same channel the following week (9/28, that is) against FSU.
***************************************
Senior Seasons - the weekly look at interesting high school results:
Greater Johnstown 36, Bishop McCort 7 - Kareem Gibson picked off a pass and had a 60-yard catch to set up a touchdown. Johnstown is 3-0.
St. Ignatius (OH) 42, St. Joseph's Prep 34 - Olamide Zacchaeus ran for two touchdowns in the loss. St. Joseph's is 1-2.
Kettle Run 55, Millbrook 24 - David Eldrige returned a pick for a touchdown and scored another on a 67-yard reception. Kettle Run is 1-1.
Gonzaga 38, Georgetown Prep 3 - Nick Johns was 10-14 for 159 yards and was pulled early in the blowout win. Gonzaga is 3-0.
Good Counsel 23, Calvert Hall 0 - Myles Robinson had a quiet night with one rushing yard and 2 catches for 13 yards. OLGC is 3-0.
Raritan 41, Manasquan 34 (Tanner Cowley) - Manasquan is 0-1.
Wayne 34, Lakota West 29 (C.J. Stalker) - Lakota West is 1-2.
Cathedral Prep 24, McDowell 10 (James Trucilla) - Cathedral Prep is 3-0.
Plymouth-Whitemarsh 35, Norristown 6 (Ryan Bischoff) - P-W is 1-2.
Benjamin Franklin 39, Philadelphia Northeast 20 (Gladimir Paul) - Northeast is 0-3.
South Aiken 35, Glenn Hills 14 (Rasool Clemons) - South Aiken is 1-2.
Friendship Collegiate 52, Woodrow Wilson 44 (Kareem McDonald) - Wilson is 1-2.
Atlee 56, Patrick Henry 0 (Eli Hanback) - Patrick Henry is 0-2.
Western Branch 55, Hickory 14 (Richard Burney) - Hickory is 0-2.
Ocean Lakes 42, Kellam 3 (Jahvoni Simmons) - Ocean Lakes is 2-0.
-- In retrospect, betting on ECU should've been the easiest thing in the world to do - VT rolled into a classic letdown game against an opponent that always gives them fits. Michael Brewer attempted 56 passes, not including sacks, of which there were quite a few. Tech's pass defense sprung some leaks, as did the hands of their wide receivers. I don't think it means a lot going forward, except to give us at least one very nice weekend this year.
-- Georgia Tech's defense looks as bad as expected - failure to hold a 35-10 lead against Georgia Southern is a huge red flag. I'm looking toward that game as one of UVA's most winnable remaining matchups.
-- Wake Forest ran for -25 yards against Utah State. I'll be surprised if the Deacs win so much as two more games all year. That is the worst team in recent ACC memory.
-- Holy crap you guys. Boston College, on the other hand, ran for 452 yards on USC, and held the Trojans to 20. I feared I had overrated BC somewhat when they lost to Pitt, but if they keep that stuff up they'll give Louisville and Cuse a really hard time for 3rd in the Atlantic.
***************************************
-- David Teel agrees with me that UVA needs to throw its chips down on Greyson Lambert.
-- So does Andrew Ramspacher of the CDP. Actually, it'd be news if you could ever find someone these days saying, no, we really need to continue this platoon thing. A few message board kooks, that's it. The truly interesting thing there, though, is the special teams stats. It's early in the year, so there's always that caveat, but then, did you notice it wasn't UVA who lost because of a muffed punt? Having a dedicated special teams coach who actually knows what he's doing is a major improvement.
-- Continuing that trend, Ian Frye was ACC specialist of the week. Nice. Definitely earned it by going 3-for-3 on field goals, none of which were easy chip shots. (Don't think that 47-yarder would've been a successful 48-yarder, though.)
-- Actually, there is one place that doesn't agree with me on the quarterback thing, and that's the official depth chart, which still has the diabolical OR. I'm willing to make much less of a deal of that this week, though. I still have no idea what the hell London thinks about quarterbacks, but this week the benefit of the doubt is granted, and the assumption is that Lambert is basically the guy while the suspicion is that London won't be able to resist tossing Johns in there for a series or two.
-- Another attempt is being made at a Commonwealth Something featuring UVA and VT going at it in all sports, and of course UVA will win this thing because there are other sports besides football. The men's soccer team struck the first blow last week. And hey, speaking of which, they'll be on ESPNUVA this Sunday at 12 noon. The undefeated ladies will be on the same channel the following week (9/28, that is) against FSU.
***************************************
Senior Seasons - the weekly look at interesting high school results:
Greater Johnstown 36, Bishop McCort 7 - Kareem Gibson picked off a pass and had a 60-yard catch to set up a touchdown. Johnstown is 3-0.
St. Ignatius (OH) 42, St. Joseph's Prep 34 - Olamide Zacchaeus ran for two touchdowns in the loss. St. Joseph's is 1-2.
Kettle Run 55, Millbrook 24 - David Eldrige returned a pick for a touchdown and scored another on a 67-yard reception. Kettle Run is 1-1.
Gonzaga 38, Georgetown Prep 3 - Nick Johns was 10-14 for 159 yards and was pulled early in the blowout win. Gonzaga is 3-0.
Good Counsel 23, Calvert Hall 0 - Myles Robinson had a quiet night with one rushing yard and 2 catches for 13 yards. OLGC is 3-0.
Raritan 41, Manasquan 34 (Tanner Cowley) - Manasquan is 0-1.
Wayne 34, Lakota West 29 (C.J. Stalker) - Lakota West is 1-2.
Cathedral Prep 24, McDowell 10 (James Trucilla) - Cathedral Prep is 3-0.
Plymouth-Whitemarsh 35, Norristown 6 (Ryan Bischoff) - P-W is 1-2.
Benjamin Franklin 39, Philadelphia Northeast 20 (Gladimir Paul) - Northeast is 0-3.
South Aiken 35, Glenn Hills 14 (Rasool Clemons) - South Aiken is 1-2.
Friendship Collegiate 52, Woodrow Wilson 44 (Kareem McDonald) - Wilson is 1-2.
Atlee 56, Patrick Henry 0 (Eli Hanback) - Patrick Henry is 0-2.
Western Branch 55, Hickory 14 (Richard Burney) - Hickory is 0-2.
Ocean Lakes 42, Kellam 3 (Jahvoni Simmons) - Ocean Lakes is 2-0.
Monday, August 25, 2014
full-fledged 2014 ACC preview
Whew. All 13 opposing-team previews are out - finally - after busting my butt all weekend on that stuff. Because of that I'm letting myself brag again: if you can find a more in-depth free preview, lemme know so I can beat it next year. I mean, sure, Phil Steele kicks my ass, but you gotta pay him for the privilege.
We're not all the way done, though, because it's time to put the whole thing together. I liked how this worked last year so I'm only making a few tweaks. Your table of contents is:
-- Positional rankings
-- Cumulative rankings
-- Schedule rankings
-- Hot-seat coaches
-- Bowl predictions
For reference, here are the links to the individual previews:
Boston College
Clemson
Duke
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Miami
North Carolina
NC State
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest
Time to get crackin'.
Positional rankings
-- Quarterback:
1. Florida State - Jameis Winston
2. Duke - Anthony Boone
3. North Carolina - Marquise Williams
4. Clemson - Cole Stoudt
5. Syracuse - Terrel Hunt
6. NC State - Jacoby Brissett
7. Pittsburgh - Chad Voytik
8. Boston College - Tyler Murphy
9. Miami - Brad Kaaya
10. Virginia - Greyson Lambert
11. Louisville - Will Gardner
12. Georgia Tech - Justin Thomas
13. Virginia Tech - Michael Brewer
14. Wake Forest - John Wolford
Yeesh. Do you realize that 10 of 14 ACC teams will be breaking in a new starting quarterback this year? And that doesn't even count UNC, which still has an OR on the QB depth chart and apparently plans to either platoon Marquise Williams and Mitch Trubisky, or hide their intentions as long as they can. If Trubisky starts for UNC this weekend, there'll be three freshman starters in the ACC, to go with five redshirt sophomores.
This is a long way of saying that half of this ranking is voodoo magic. OK, Jameis Winston goes up top. A little bonus for returning starters, and then a huge helping of my own opinion. Chad Voytik? Brad Kaaya? Greyson Lambert? Who knows, man. With all but the very top and the very bottom, almost just pull 'em out of a hat.
-- Pass catchers (WR/TE)
1. Pittsburgh - Tyler Boyd, Manasseh Garner
2. Duke - Jamison Crowder, Max McCaffrey
3. Louisville - DeVante Parker, Eli Rogers
4. Florida State - Rashad Greene, Nick O'Leary
5. North Carolina - Quinshad Davis, Ryan Switzer
6. Miami - Phillip Dorsett, Stacy Coley
7. Clemson - Charone Peake, Mike Williams
8. Syracuse - Ashton Broyld, Jarrod West
9. Virginia Tech - Joshua Stanford, Willie Byrn
10. NC State - Bryan Underwood, Jumichael Ramos
11. Georgia Tech - DeAndre Smelter, Micheal Summers
12. Virginia - Darius Jennings, Keeon Johnson
13. Boston College - Bobby Swigert, Shakim Phillips
14. Wake Forest - Matt James, E.J. Scott
Another tough ranking, and here it's a matter of philosophy. Do you like a team with a proven big-time star but little depth, or do you prefer a team with a couple of decent players but some five-star freshmen waiting in the wings? To make things worse, there aren't many impact tight ends in the conference, a situation only exacerbated when Duke lost Braxton Deaver for the season.
We'll go with the big-timers on top, since Tyler Boyd and Jamison Crowder are clearly the top two receivers in the conference, and they have at least one dependable secondary target to take some of the defensive edge off the coverage. I'll just have to accept the possibility that teams like Clemson and FSU will use their freshman talent to make me look silly by November.
-- Running backs
1. Miami - Duke Johnson, Gus Edwards
2. Pittsburgh - James Conner, Isaac Bennett
3. Florida State - Karlos Williams, Dalvin Cook
4. Louisville - Dominique Brown, Michael Dyer
5. Virginia - Kevin Parks, Taquan Mizzell
6. North Carolina - T.J. Logan, Elijah Hood
7. Duke - Shaq Powell, Josh Snead
8. Syracuse - Prince-Tyson Gulley, George Morris
9. Virginia Tech - Trey Edmunds, J.C. Coleman
10. Georgia Tech - Zach Laskey, Tony Zenon
11. NC State - Shadrach Thornton, Tony Creecy
12. Clemson - D.J. Howard, C.J. Davidson
13. Boston College - Myles Willis, Tyler Rouse
14. Wake Forest - Orville Reynolds, Dominique Gibson
This might the skill position where the ACC is deepest. A couple star receivers, but not too many - maybe wait til November to see who else emerges. But at running back, Duke Johnson is a superstar if healthy and Karlos Williams might turn out to be one too. Pitt boasts two quality, proven backs, one of whom is completely huge. Michael Dyer is a former MVP of the BCS CG and he's not even the best on his team right now. Kevin Parks ground out 1,000 yards last year, and the possibilities for Elijah Hood are through the roof. I enjoy this state of affairs, because a dominant running back is my favorite thing in football. Last year I underestimated things, for example by putting eventual 2,000-yard rusher Andre Williams of BC 10th. Nice work. This year I'm sippin' on the Kool-Aid.
-- Offensive line
1. Florida State - LT Cameron Erving
2. Boston College - C Andy Gallik
3. Louisville - LG John Miller
4. Duke - RG Laken Tomlinson
5. Syracuse - LT Sean Hickey
6. Clemson - C Ryan Norton
7. Miami - LG Jon Feliciano
8. Virginia Tech - LG David Wang
9. NC State - RT Tyson Chandler
10. North Carolina - RG Landon Turner
11. Pittsburgh - LG Matt Rotheram
12. Georgia Tech - RG Shaquille Mason
13. Virginia - RG Conner Davis
14. Wake Forest - RT Dylan Intemann
What struck me in going through the O-line rankings was how many of the ACC's lines have guards as their experienced anchors. Not too many big-time left tackles. That's nice for the running games, I suppose - it's probably also nice for the ACC's defensive ends.
Also: thank heavens for Wake Forest, because I look at some of these lines in this league and then I look at ours and I go: well crap. BC and FSU don't start a single player who isn't a senior. Isn't that kind of the goal? Our injury-riddled mess is saved from the cellar by the fact that Wake is starting a true freshman at center. That was the tiebreaker right there. But anyone consumed with optimism over our O-line, well, should probably take a look at the upper echelons of those rankings to see what things look like if you've been doing it right.
-- Defensive line
1. Clemson - Vic Beasley
2. Virginia Tech - Luther Maddy
3. NC State - Thomas Teal
4. Virginia - Eli Harold
5. Florida State - Mario Edwards
6. Boston College - Connor Wujciak
7. Miami - Anthony Chickillo
8. Syracuse - Robert Welsh
9. North Carolina - Norkeithus Otis
10. Louisville - B.J. Dubose
11. Pittsburgh - Shakir Soto
12. Georgia Tech - Adam Gotsis
13. Duke - Jamal Bruce
14. Wake Forest - Zachary Allen
If there's a saving grace for UVA's offensive line, it's the state of defensive lines in the conference. Lots of graduation means lots of inexperience up and down the coast, and frankly, just some plain bad defensive lines here. Again, Wake is stinking up the joint. Duke is full of career backups. GT would be worse than both of those two if not for the star power of Adam Gotsis, who will probably be quadruple-teamed on every play. It gives the Hoos, with Eli Harold and David Dean, and major potential in Andrew Brown, a chance to shine.
Up top, Clemson gets the nod not only because Vic Beasley is disgustingly good, but the line is completely loaded down with seniors, and Grady Jarrett is almost as good as Beasley. The Clemson-Wake Forest game - oh dear God.
-- Linebackers
1. Virginia - Henry Coley
2. Clemson - Stephone Anthony
3. Syracuse - Cameron Lynch
4. Louisville - Lorenzo Mauldin
5. North Carolina - Travis Hughes
6. Georgia Tech - Quayshawn Nealy
7. Pittsburgh - Anthony Gonzalez
8. Boston College - Steven Daniels
9. Florida State - Terrance Smith
10. Duke - David Helton
11. Wake Forest - Brandon Chubb
12. Miami - Denzel Perryman
13. NC State - Brandon Pittman
14. Virginia Tech - Deon Clarke
Well, well. This is not the orange glasses talking here; I legitimately think UVA has the best linebackers in the conference. Only a small handful of teams can claim they return two top-producing LBs the way UVA does, and when they do they're not the tackle monsters Coley and Romero are; those two got into way too many backfields to ignore what they do. Clemson's Stephone Anthony is probably the best individual 'backer in the ACC, and there are some solid players up and down the list. Even Wake gets in on the act, finally getting out of the cellar and leaving that to VT(!), where inexperience abounds.
The sudden proliferation of 4-2-5 nickel defenses in the ACC admittedly clouds up the evaluation a little bit here. Something like five or six teams are headed that way, and that's just who's announced it; there's probably more coaches figuring they'll be in a nickel at least two-thirds of the time. Why cover a tight end or a slot receiver with a linebacker when you can use an extra safety? Sometimes it's as simple as renaming the Sam the Rover or something like that, but that also tends to make a smaller player out of that position, too. At any rate, teams are not developing the linebacker depth that they used to.
Duke, by the way, lost something like six spots in this ranking when Kelby Brown was lost for the season. David Helton is a solid player but that's a huge loss regardless.
-- Secondaries
1. Virginia Tech - Kendall Fuller
2. Wake Forest - Ryan Janvion
3. Florida State - Nate Andrews
4. Boston College - Sean Sylvia
5. Duke - Jeremy Cash
6. North Carolina - Tim Scott
7. Louisville - Terrell Floyd
8. Virginia - Anthony Harris
9. Miami - Tracy Howard
10. Syracuse - Durell Eskridge
11. NC State - Jarvis Byrd
12. Georgia Tech - Isaiah Johnson
13. Clemson - Robert Smith
14. Pittsburgh - Ray Vinopal
Finally, Wake gets their day in the sun. That is a very impressive secondary they run, and most years it'd be the best in the conference without any doubt. Unfortunately, VT's is even better. You have two extremely experienced safeties and two ballhawking cornerbacks, with depth behind them to boot. It's probably the best unit of any kind in the conference, and makes a strong case for the same on a national level.
As for UVA's ranking, Demetrious Nicholson's complete absence from the depth chart - which may or may not stretch into December - is worth a bump downwards. More production in the form of INTs from someone like Maurice Canady would've helped. There's depth, and a hell of a lot of intrigue with Quin Blanding lining up as a starter, but athletic abilities aside, freshman safeties have a tendency to run really fast in the wrong direction. The conference is hardly bereft of quality defensive backs, so it's hard to justify moving us any higher for now.
Cumulative rankings
-- Atlantic offense
1. Florida State
2. Louisville
3. Syracuse
4. Clemson
5. Boston College
6. NC State
7. Wake Forest
-- Coastal offense
1. Duke
2. Pittsburgh
3. Miami
4. North Carolina
5. Virginia Tech
6. Virginia
7. Georgia Tech
-- Conference offense
1. Florida State
2. Duke
3. Louisville
4. Pittsburgh
5. Miami
6. North Carolina
7. Syracuse
8. Clemson
9. Boston College
10. NC State
11. Virginia Tech
12. Virginia
13. Georgia Tech
14. Wake Forest
I think it's a little odd that Pitt ended up with the Coastal's 2nd best offense, ranking above Miami, UNC, Clemson, etc. You can move them down a few spots if, for example, you like Brad Kaaya better than Chad Voytik. I'm not offended if you do, but do keep in mind Tyler Boyd as well. Clemson is down that far primarily because there's so little proven talent at WR and RB, particularly the latter. I already did mention that their WRs could make me look dumb, but the RBs look rather less dynamic.
-- Atlantic defense
1. Clemson
2. Florida State
3. Boston College
4. Louisville
5. Syracuse
6. NC State
7. Wake Forest
-- Coastal defense
1. Virginia
2. Virginia Tech
3. North Carolina
4. Duke
5. Miami
6. Georgia Tech
7. Pittsburgh
-- Conference defense
1. Virginia
2. Clemson
3. Florida State
4. Virginia Tech
5. Boston College
6. North Carolina
7. Louisville
8. Syracuse
9. NC State
10. Wake Forest
11. Duke
12. Miami
13. Georgia Tech
14. Pittsburgh
Call me a homer, call me what you will. I admit that the flaw in the methodology here is that if you have one really good unit or one really bad one, you're probably gonna look better or worse than you should. Hence Wake, whose massive defensive flaws up front won't be entirely covered up by their secondary, and VT, who can probably cover up their linebackers (and Bud Foster will probably have them crapping thunder by October anyway but whatever.) And none of this takes into account coaching.
Still, it's UVA with the top linebackers, last year's national INT leader, depth in the secondary, a solid and improving defensive line, and two elite recruits jumping right in. There's very little separation in the top five anyway. Also, it's interesting that the four worst defenses are all Coastal teams - now you know why nobody can figure out who's supposed to win the damn thing.
-- Atlantic overall
1. Florida State
2. Louisville
3. Clemson
4. Syracuse
5. Boston College
6. NC State
7. Wake Forest
-- Coastal overall
1. Duke
2. North Carolina
3. Miami
4. Virginia
5. Pittsburgh
6. Virginia Tech
7. Georgia Tech
-- Conference overall
1. Florida State
2. Louisville
3. Duke
4. North Carolina
5. Clemson
6. Syracuse
7. Miami
8. Virginia
9. Pittsburgh
10. Boston College
11. Virginia Tech
12. NC State
13. Georgia Tech
14. Wake Forest
Yes, VT looks awfully odd down there on the bottom, below that crappy 2-10 team from last year. I can't help that Texas Tech's 3rd-string QB is now their starter. Just know that coaching matters, this doesn't take into account coaching, and if they had even middling linebackers (they probably will by October; that's where that coaching stuff comes in) they'd jump to 3rd in the division.
However, I am willing to draw the following conclusions from this:
- Louisville could unseat Clemson as FSU's primary challenger, more easily than people might think. It's close, though.
- Duke is still pretty good, and won't be a flash in the pan. But defense wins championships, so I've got UNC as the actual favorite in the Coastal.
- GT is primed for a huge fall. It won't be purty.
- If Wake so much as wins four games, Dave Clawson should be COY.
- Miami is probably not as good as people think. Not bad, but not ready for the ACC CG.
Schedule rankings
For these, I'll simply build on the above, and use the point totals - not the rankings, but the point totals, which is to say, FSU's rankings add up to 26 - to divine the toughest and easiest conference schedules. A multiplier of 0.75 is applied to road games and 1.25 to home games. This is just simple math. Easiest schedules listed first.
1. Florida State
2. Duke
3. Virginia Tech
4. North Carolina
5. NC State
6. Louisville
7. Pittsburgh
8. Clemson
9. Boston College
10. Georgia Tech
11. Syracuse
12. Virginia
13. Wake Forest
14. Miami
- All the more reason not to like Miami as a contender - crossovers against Louisville and FSU.
- And all the more reason not to see Duke as a flash in the pan.
- I swear VT has incriminating pictures of people in the ACC scheduling department - look who got Wake Forest this year.
- FSU gets the easiest schedule simply because they're the only Atlantic team not to have to play FSU.
Hot seat coaches
Broken down into three groups: safe, safe-ish, and look out below. First, the guys with job security:
Steve Addazio - BC
Frank Beamer - VT
Paul Chryst - Pitt
Dave Clawson - Wake
David Cutcliffe - Duke
Dave Doeren - NC State
Larry Fedora - UNC
Jimbo Fisher - FSU
Al Golden - Miami
Bobby Petrino - Louisville
Scott Shafer - Syracuse
Dabo Swinney - Clemson
OK, so, that's most of the conference. Many of them (Addazio, Chryst, Clawson, Doeren, Fedora, Petrino, Shafer) are too new to be in much danger no matter what happens. Beamer's got a few years of mediocrity cushion before the natives get too restless. Golden steered the program through scandal and has improved every year. Addazio got a team to a bowl game that didn't think they could buy tickets to one. Fisher won a trophy of some kind, which should buy him a few years; ordinarily, the FSU coach just sort of occupies a perpetually warm seat just because. Of these, Swinney is probably the closest to anything like a hot seat, but he's had plenty of success lately.
One coach resides in the land where he's probably not out the door after this year, but can't afford a bad season or the headhunters will start gearing up: Paul Johnson. A really bad season could see him canned; he's burned through a couple DCs now, and the program has trended pretty flat, if not a bit downward.
So I think you can figure out the rest on your own. The Syracuse newspaper wasn't wrong when they wrote that there was only one real hot-seat coach in the ACC this year.
Bowl predictions
That brings us to brass tacks. Real reputation-on-the-line stuff. First, the actual predicted order of finish, or, how I'd vote in a preseason media poll:
-- Atlantic
1. Florida State
2. Clemson
3. Louisville
4. Syracuse
5. Boston College
6. NC State
7. Wake Forest
-- Coastal
1. North Carolina
2. Duke
3. Virginia Tech
4. Miami
5. Pittsburgh
6. Virginia
7. Georgia Tech
Most of the deviation from the rankings above has to do with 1. schedule strength and 2. coaching.
And finally, the bowls - not forgetting that Notre Dame gets to piggyback:
Sugar Bowl: Florida State (playoff)
Orange Bowl: Clemson
ex-Citrus: Louisville
ex-Tangerine (RA): Notre Dame
ex-Tire: North Carolina
Pinstripe: Syracuse
Sun: Miami
Military: Virginia Tech
QL: NC State**
Independence: Boston College
St. Petersburg: Pittsburgh
No bowl: Virginia, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech
**This is the bowl game in Detroit. I believe it's actually supposed to be announced Tuesday (today, that is, when you're most likely to be reading this) but the bowl has a name which I'd probably irritate my employer by saying out loud before that happens.
Coming this week: actual UVA previews!
We're not all the way done, though, because it's time to put the whole thing together. I liked how this worked last year so I'm only making a few tweaks. Your table of contents is:
-- Positional rankings
-- Cumulative rankings
-- Schedule rankings
-- Hot-seat coaches
-- Bowl predictions
For reference, here are the links to the individual previews:
Boston College
Clemson
Duke
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Miami
North Carolina
NC State
Pittsburgh
Syracuse
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest
Time to get crackin'.
Positional rankings
-- Quarterback:
1. Florida State - Jameis Winston
2. Duke - Anthony Boone
3. North Carolina - Marquise Williams
4. Clemson - Cole Stoudt
5. Syracuse - Terrel Hunt
6. NC State - Jacoby Brissett
7. Pittsburgh - Chad Voytik
8. Boston College - Tyler Murphy
9. Miami - Brad Kaaya
10. Virginia - Greyson Lambert
11. Louisville - Will Gardner
12. Georgia Tech - Justin Thomas
13. Virginia Tech - Michael Brewer
14. Wake Forest - John Wolford
Yeesh. Do you realize that 10 of 14 ACC teams will be breaking in a new starting quarterback this year? And that doesn't even count UNC, which still has an OR on the QB depth chart and apparently plans to either platoon Marquise Williams and Mitch Trubisky, or hide their intentions as long as they can. If Trubisky starts for UNC this weekend, there'll be three freshman starters in the ACC, to go with five redshirt sophomores.
This is a long way of saying that half of this ranking is voodoo magic. OK, Jameis Winston goes up top. A little bonus for returning starters, and then a huge helping of my own opinion. Chad Voytik? Brad Kaaya? Greyson Lambert? Who knows, man. With all but the very top and the very bottom, almost just pull 'em out of a hat.
-- Pass catchers (WR/TE)
1. Pittsburgh - Tyler Boyd, Manasseh Garner
2. Duke - Jamison Crowder, Max McCaffrey
3. Louisville - DeVante Parker, Eli Rogers
4. Florida State - Rashad Greene, Nick O'Leary
5. North Carolina - Quinshad Davis, Ryan Switzer
6. Miami - Phillip Dorsett, Stacy Coley
7. Clemson - Charone Peake, Mike Williams
8. Syracuse - Ashton Broyld, Jarrod West
9. Virginia Tech - Joshua Stanford, Willie Byrn
10. NC State - Bryan Underwood, Jumichael Ramos
11. Georgia Tech - DeAndre Smelter, Micheal Summers
12. Virginia - Darius Jennings, Keeon Johnson
13. Boston College - Bobby Swigert, Shakim Phillips
14. Wake Forest - Matt James, E.J. Scott
Another tough ranking, and here it's a matter of philosophy. Do you like a team with a proven big-time star but little depth, or do you prefer a team with a couple of decent players but some five-star freshmen waiting in the wings? To make things worse, there aren't many impact tight ends in the conference, a situation only exacerbated when Duke lost Braxton Deaver for the season.
We'll go with the big-timers on top, since Tyler Boyd and Jamison Crowder are clearly the top two receivers in the conference, and they have at least one dependable secondary target to take some of the defensive edge off the coverage. I'll just have to accept the possibility that teams like Clemson and FSU will use their freshman talent to make me look silly by November.
-- Running backs
1. Miami - Duke Johnson, Gus Edwards
2. Pittsburgh - James Conner, Isaac Bennett
3. Florida State - Karlos Williams, Dalvin Cook
4. Louisville - Dominique Brown, Michael Dyer
5. Virginia - Kevin Parks, Taquan Mizzell
6. North Carolina - T.J. Logan, Elijah Hood
7. Duke - Shaq Powell, Josh Snead
8. Syracuse - Prince-Tyson Gulley, George Morris
9. Virginia Tech - Trey Edmunds, J.C. Coleman
10. Georgia Tech - Zach Laskey, Tony Zenon
11. NC State - Shadrach Thornton, Tony Creecy
12. Clemson - D.J. Howard, C.J. Davidson
13. Boston College - Myles Willis, Tyler Rouse
14. Wake Forest - Orville Reynolds, Dominique Gibson
This might the skill position where the ACC is deepest. A couple star receivers, but not too many - maybe wait til November to see who else emerges. But at running back, Duke Johnson is a superstar if healthy and Karlos Williams might turn out to be one too. Pitt boasts two quality, proven backs, one of whom is completely huge. Michael Dyer is a former MVP of the BCS CG and he's not even the best on his team right now. Kevin Parks ground out 1,000 yards last year, and the possibilities for Elijah Hood are through the roof. I enjoy this state of affairs, because a dominant running back is my favorite thing in football. Last year I underestimated things, for example by putting eventual 2,000-yard rusher Andre Williams of BC 10th. Nice work. This year I'm sippin' on the Kool-Aid.
-- Offensive line
1. Florida State - LT Cameron Erving
2. Boston College - C Andy Gallik
3. Louisville - LG John Miller
4. Duke - RG Laken Tomlinson
5. Syracuse - LT Sean Hickey
6. Clemson - C Ryan Norton
7. Miami - LG Jon Feliciano
8. Virginia Tech - LG David Wang
9. NC State - RT Tyson Chandler
10. North Carolina - RG Landon Turner
11. Pittsburgh - LG Matt Rotheram
12. Georgia Tech - RG Shaquille Mason
13. Virginia - RG Conner Davis
14. Wake Forest - RT Dylan Intemann
What struck me in going through the O-line rankings was how many of the ACC's lines have guards as their experienced anchors. Not too many big-time left tackles. That's nice for the running games, I suppose - it's probably also nice for the ACC's defensive ends.
Also: thank heavens for Wake Forest, because I look at some of these lines in this league and then I look at ours and I go: well crap. BC and FSU don't start a single player who isn't a senior. Isn't that kind of the goal? Our injury-riddled mess is saved from the cellar by the fact that Wake is starting a true freshman at center. That was the tiebreaker right there. But anyone consumed with optimism over our O-line, well, should probably take a look at the upper echelons of those rankings to see what things look like if you've been doing it right.
-- Defensive line
1. Clemson - Vic Beasley
2. Virginia Tech - Luther Maddy
3. NC State - Thomas Teal
4. Virginia - Eli Harold
5. Florida State - Mario Edwards
6. Boston College - Connor Wujciak
7. Miami - Anthony Chickillo
8. Syracuse - Robert Welsh
9. North Carolina - Norkeithus Otis
10. Louisville - B.J. Dubose
11. Pittsburgh - Shakir Soto
12. Georgia Tech - Adam Gotsis
13. Duke - Jamal Bruce
14. Wake Forest - Zachary Allen
If there's a saving grace for UVA's offensive line, it's the state of defensive lines in the conference. Lots of graduation means lots of inexperience up and down the coast, and frankly, just some plain bad defensive lines here. Again, Wake is stinking up the joint. Duke is full of career backups. GT would be worse than both of those two if not for the star power of Adam Gotsis, who will probably be quadruple-teamed on every play. It gives the Hoos, with Eli Harold and David Dean, and major potential in Andrew Brown, a chance to shine.
Up top, Clemson gets the nod not only because Vic Beasley is disgustingly good, but the line is completely loaded down with seniors, and Grady Jarrett is almost as good as Beasley. The Clemson-Wake Forest game - oh dear God.
-- Linebackers
1. Virginia - Henry Coley
2. Clemson - Stephone Anthony
3. Syracuse - Cameron Lynch
4. Louisville - Lorenzo Mauldin
5. North Carolina - Travis Hughes
6. Georgia Tech - Quayshawn Nealy
7. Pittsburgh - Anthony Gonzalez
8. Boston College - Steven Daniels
9. Florida State - Terrance Smith
10. Duke - David Helton
11. Wake Forest - Brandon Chubb
12. Miami - Denzel Perryman
13. NC State - Brandon Pittman
14. Virginia Tech - Deon Clarke
Well, well. This is not the orange glasses talking here; I legitimately think UVA has the best linebackers in the conference. Only a small handful of teams can claim they return two top-producing LBs the way UVA does, and when they do they're not the tackle monsters Coley and Romero are; those two got into way too many backfields to ignore what they do. Clemson's Stephone Anthony is probably the best individual 'backer in the ACC, and there are some solid players up and down the list. Even Wake gets in on the act, finally getting out of the cellar and leaving that to VT(!), where inexperience abounds.
The sudden proliferation of 4-2-5 nickel defenses in the ACC admittedly clouds up the evaluation a little bit here. Something like five or six teams are headed that way, and that's just who's announced it; there's probably more coaches figuring they'll be in a nickel at least two-thirds of the time. Why cover a tight end or a slot receiver with a linebacker when you can use an extra safety? Sometimes it's as simple as renaming the Sam the Rover or something like that, but that also tends to make a smaller player out of that position, too. At any rate, teams are not developing the linebacker depth that they used to.
Duke, by the way, lost something like six spots in this ranking when Kelby Brown was lost for the season. David Helton is a solid player but that's a huge loss regardless.
-- Secondaries
1. Virginia Tech - Kendall Fuller
2. Wake Forest - Ryan Janvion
3. Florida State - Nate Andrews
4. Boston College - Sean Sylvia
5. Duke - Jeremy Cash
6. North Carolina - Tim Scott
7. Louisville - Terrell Floyd
8. Virginia - Anthony Harris
9. Miami - Tracy Howard
10. Syracuse - Durell Eskridge
11. NC State - Jarvis Byrd
12. Georgia Tech - Isaiah Johnson
13. Clemson - Robert Smith
14. Pittsburgh - Ray Vinopal
Finally, Wake gets their day in the sun. That is a very impressive secondary they run, and most years it'd be the best in the conference without any doubt. Unfortunately, VT's is even better. You have two extremely experienced safeties and two ballhawking cornerbacks, with depth behind them to boot. It's probably the best unit of any kind in the conference, and makes a strong case for the same on a national level.
As for UVA's ranking, Demetrious Nicholson's complete absence from the depth chart - which may or may not stretch into December - is worth a bump downwards. More production in the form of INTs from someone like Maurice Canady would've helped. There's depth, and a hell of a lot of intrigue with Quin Blanding lining up as a starter, but athletic abilities aside, freshman safeties have a tendency to run really fast in the wrong direction. The conference is hardly bereft of quality defensive backs, so it's hard to justify moving us any higher for now.
Cumulative rankings
-- Atlantic offense
1. Florida State
2. Louisville
3. Syracuse
4. Clemson
5. Boston College
6. NC State
7. Wake Forest
-- Coastal offense
1. Duke
2. Pittsburgh
3. Miami
4. North Carolina
5. Virginia Tech
6. Virginia
7. Georgia Tech
-- Conference offense
1. Florida State
2. Duke
3. Louisville
4. Pittsburgh
5. Miami
6. North Carolina
7. Syracuse
8. Clemson
9. Boston College
10. NC State
11. Virginia Tech
12. Virginia
13. Georgia Tech
14. Wake Forest
I think it's a little odd that Pitt ended up with the Coastal's 2nd best offense, ranking above Miami, UNC, Clemson, etc. You can move them down a few spots if, for example, you like Brad Kaaya better than Chad Voytik. I'm not offended if you do, but do keep in mind Tyler Boyd as well. Clemson is down that far primarily because there's so little proven talent at WR and RB, particularly the latter. I already did mention that their WRs could make me look dumb, but the RBs look rather less dynamic.
-- Atlantic defense
1. Clemson
2. Florida State
3. Boston College
4. Louisville
5. Syracuse
6. NC State
7. Wake Forest
-- Coastal defense
1. Virginia
2. Virginia Tech
3. North Carolina
4. Duke
5. Miami
6. Georgia Tech
7. Pittsburgh
-- Conference defense
1. Virginia
2. Clemson
3. Florida State
4. Virginia Tech
5. Boston College
6. North Carolina
7. Louisville
8. Syracuse
9. NC State
10. Wake Forest
11. Duke
12. Miami
13. Georgia Tech
14. Pittsburgh
Call me a homer, call me what you will. I admit that the flaw in the methodology here is that if you have one really good unit or one really bad one, you're probably gonna look better or worse than you should. Hence Wake, whose massive defensive flaws up front won't be entirely covered up by their secondary, and VT, who can probably cover up their linebackers (and Bud Foster will probably have them crapping thunder by October anyway but whatever.) And none of this takes into account coaching.
Still, it's UVA with the top linebackers, last year's national INT leader, depth in the secondary, a solid and improving defensive line, and two elite recruits jumping right in. There's very little separation in the top five anyway. Also, it's interesting that the four worst defenses are all Coastal teams - now you know why nobody can figure out who's supposed to win the damn thing.
-- Atlantic overall
1. Florida State
2. Louisville
3. Clemson
4. Syracuse
5. Boston College
6. NC State
7. Wake Forest
-- Coastal overall
1. Duke
2. North Carolina
3. Miami
4. Virginia
5. Pittsburgh
6. Virginia Tech
7. Georgia Tech
-- Conference overall
1. Florida State
2. Louisville
3. Duke
4. North Carolina
5. Clemson
6. Syracuse
7. Miami
8. Virginia
9. Pittsburgh
10. Boston College
11. Virginia Tech
12. NC State
13. Georgia Tech
14. Wake Forest
Yes, VT looks awfully odd down there on the bottom, below that crappy 2-10 team from last year. I can't help that Texas Tech's 3rd-string QB is now their starter. Just know that coaching matters, this doesn't take into account coaching, and if they had even middling linebackers (they probably will by October; that's where that coaching stuff comes in) they'd jump to 3rd in the division.
However, I am willing to draw the following conclusions from this:
- Louisville could unseat Clemson as FSU's primary challenger, more easily than people might think. It's close, though.
- Duke is still pretty good, and won't be a flash in the pan. But defense wins championships, so I've got UNC as the actual favorite in the Coastal.
- GT is primed for a huge fall. It won't be purty.
- If Wake so much as wins four games, Dave Clawson should be COY.
- Miami is probably not as good as people think. Not bad, but not ready for the ACC CG.
Schedule rankings
For these, I'll simply build on the above, and use the point totals - not the rankings, but the point totals, which is to say, FSU's rankings add up to 26 - to divine the toughest and easiest conference schedules. A multiplier of 0.75 is applied to road games and 1.25 to home games. This is just simple math. Easiest schedules listed first.
1. Florida State
2. Duke
3. Virginia Tech
4. North Carolina
5. NC State
6. Louisville
7. Pittsburgh
8. Clemson
9. Boston College
10. Georgia Tech
11. Syracuse
12. Virginia
13. Wake Forest
14. Miami
- All the more reason not to like Miami as a contender - crossovers against Louisville and FSU.
- And all the more reason not to see Duke as a flash in the pan.
- I swear VT has incriminating pictures of people in the ACC scheduling department - look who got Wake Forest this year.
- FSU gets the easiest schedule simply because they're the only Atlantic team not to have to play FSU.
Hot seat coaches
Broken down into three groups: safe, safe-ish, and look out below. First, the guys with job security:
Steve Addazio - BC
Frank Beamer - VT
Paul Chryst - Pitt
Dave Clawson - Wake
David Cutcliffe - Duke
Dave Doeren - NC State
Larry Fedora - UNC
Jimbo Fisher - FSU
Al Golden - Miami
Bobby Petrino - Louisville
Scott Shafer - Syracuse
Dabo Swinney - Clemson
OK, so, that's most of the conference. Many of them (Addazio, Chryst, Clawson, Doeren, Fedora, Petrino, Shafer) are too new to be in much danger no matter what happens. Beamer's got a few years of mediocrity cushion before the natives get too restless. Golden steered the program through scandal and has improved every year. Addazio got a team to a bowl game that didn't think they could buy tickets to one. Fisher won a trophy of some kind, which should buy him a few years; ordinarily, the FSU coach just sort of occupies a perpetually warm seat just because. Of these, Swinney is probably the closest to anything like a hot seat, but he's had plenty of success lately.
One coach resides in the land where he's probably not out the door after this year, but can't afford a bad season or the headhunters will start gearing up: Paul Johnson. A really bad season could see him canned; he's burned through a couple DCs now, and the program has trended pretty flat, if not a bit downward.
So I think you can figure out the rest on your own. The Syracuse newspaper wasn't wrong when they wrote that there was only one real hot-seat coach in the ACC this year.
Bowl predictions
That brings us to brass tacks. Real reputation-on-the-line stuff. First, the actual predicted order of finish, or, how I'd vote in a preseason media poll:
-- Atlantic
1. Florida State
2. Clemson
3. Louisville
4. Syracuse
5. Boston College
6. NC State
7. Wake Forest
-- Coastal
1. North Carolina
2. Duke
3. Virginia Tech
4. Miami
5. Pittsburgh
6. Virginia
7. Georgia Tech
Most of the deviation from the rankings above has to do with 1. schedule strength and 2. coaching.
And finally, the bowls - not forgetting that Notre Dame gets to piggyback:
Sugar Bowl: Florida State (playoff)
Orange Bowl: Clemson
ex-Citrus: Louisville
ex-Tangerine (RA): Notre Dame
ex-Tire: North Carolina
Pinstripe: Syracuse
Sun: Miami
Military: Virginia Tech
QL: NC State**
Independence: Boston College
St. Petersburg: Pittsburgh
No bowl: Virginia, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech
**This is the bowl game in Detroit. I believe it's actually supposed to be announced Tuesday (today, that is, when you're most likely to be reading this) but the bowl has a name which I'd probably irritate my employer by saying out loud before that happens.
Coming this week: actual UVA previews!
Monday, July 21, 2014
kickoff
ACC media days are going on, so I think it's time to say goodbye to the offseason. Not that it lasted very long. What would you rather be, a UVA fan where the offseason lasted a month, or a Tech fan where it lasts eight?
I can start writing football previews as soon as the last piece of media days comes out - the preseason all-ACC team. So I think the first one will be Wednesday. Being that I save UVA's for last, the football kickoff around these parts will only be a few odds and ends of thoughts today.
-- The football roster is out. It came out after the basketball roster, which would be a bit odd except I'm never fully capable of accounting for the behavior of the athletic department, especially when it comes to football and/or public relations. (I'd guess the football roster release is timed for media days, but hell if I know.)
Anyway, the main thing to check for: Missing names. And there are a few. We knew of some transfers already: Jake McGee, Kye Morgan, and Demeitre Brim, to Florida, Stony Brook, and Central Florida, respectively. Not seen on the roster, with no explanation as yet: Tyrell Chavis, C.J. Moore, Marco Jones, and Anthony Cooper.
The impact to UVA's roster is mainly theoretical, as none had ever played much if at all. Chavis's career was imperiled from the word go, for reasons which have been purposely kept out of the public eye. Moore fell out of favor with the new defensive staff. Cooper and Jones represent a fair bit of missed opportunity, particularly Cooper, about whom fans will always wonder why he got immediately moved to safety, buried, and never got a shot at receiver.
That much attrition puts the roster at 81 scholarship players, so, with 18 seniors and a smallish 2014 class (i.e. plenty of room to work in some early enrollees from '15) it's possible, in an ideal non-hot-seat-coach world, to barrel past the limit of 25 players with no problem. The actual problem might be finding enough players - good players, not guys we stole from Liberty - to fill the class. Between attrition, plenty of room, and the difficulties of the trail, any coaching change this year will crush our depth something fierce.
-- As if there weren't enough attrition, this little gem came out of media days too: "Mike London says LT Jay Whitmire will "likely" miss the start of the season due to back issues." Oh, goody. Can't wait to see what the O-line looks like without its best veteran. There's a reason I harangue on the depth issues there.
-- You've also got the preseason team poll coming out today. Florida State took 109 of 112 first-place votes in the Atlantic Conference; guess which was the only team not to get any first-place votes in the Coastal?
It's easy to say we're really blowing a big opportunity here, what with such parity existing in the Coastal, but I'm looking a little deeper. There are 112 voters and we got 142 points in the poll. Math skillz tell me that somewhere between 5 and 30 voters picked UVA not-last in the division - and five would mean those five picked us second, so it's probably much closer to 30. Another step or two of logic tells us this about the ballots of those that didn't put UVA in the cellar: those people think a 2-10 team is better than another team that somebody thought is the best in the division. Pitt and Georgia Tech are both someone's champion, and likely enough, someone's worse-than-UVA. That's parity alright.
Also, UNC got the second-most #1 votes but is 4th; VT got the 4th-most #1 votes but also is the only Coastal team picked to unseat FSU as ACC champ.
-- I've updated the depth chart by class and will do so again if and when a fall-camp depth chart is published.
I can start writing football previews as soon as the last piece of media days comes out - the preseason all-ACC team. So I think the first one will be Wednesday. Being that I save UVA's for last, the football kickoff around these parts will only be a few odds and ends of thoughts today.
-- The football roster is out. It came out after the basketball roster, which would be a bit odd except I'm never fully capable of accounting for the behavior of the athletic department, especially when it comes to football and/or public relations. (I'd guess the football roster release is timed for media days, but hell if I know.)
Anyway, the main thing to check for: Missing names. And there are a few. We knew of some transfers already: Jake McGee, Kye Morgan, and Demeitre Brim, to Florida, Stony Brook, and Central Florida, respectively. Not seen on the roster, with no explanation as yet: Tyrell Chavis, C.J. Moore, Marco Jones, and Anthony Cooper.
The impact to UVA's roster is mainly theoretical, as none had ever played much if at all. Chavis's career was imperiled from the word go, for reasons which have been purposely kept out of the public eye. Moore fell out of favor with the new defensive staff. Cooper and Jones represent a fair bit of missed opportunity, particularly Cooper, about whom fans will always wonder why he got immediately moved to safety, buried, and never got a shot at receiver.
That much attrition puts the roster at 81 scholarship players, so, with 18 seniors and a smallish 2014 class (i.e. plenty of room to work in some early enrollees from '15) it's possible, in an ideal non-hot-seat-coach world, to barrel past the limit of 25 players with no problem. The actual problem might be finding enough players - good players, not guys we stole from Liberty - to fill the class. Between attrition, plenty of room, and the difficulties of the trail, any coaching change this year will crush our depth something fierce.
-- As if there weren't enough attrition, this little gem came out of media days too: "Mike London says LT Jay Whitmire will "likely" miss the start of the season due to back issues." Oh, goody. Can't wait to see what the O-line looks like without its best veteran. There's a reason I harangue on the depth issues there.
-- You've also got the preseason team poll coming out today. Florida State took 109 of 112 first-place votes in the Atlantic Conference; guess which was the only team not to get any first-place votes in the Coastal?
It's easy to say we're really blowing a big opportunity here, what with such parity existing in the Coastal, but I'm looking a little deeper. There are 112 voters and we got 142 points in the poll. Math skillz tell me that somewhere between 5 and 30 voters picked UVA not-last in the division - and five would mean those five picked us second, so it's probably much closer to 30. Another step or two of logic tells us this about the ballots of those that didn't put UVA in the cellar: those people think a 2-10 team is better than another team that somebody thought is the best in the division. Pitt and Georgia Tech are both someone's champion, and likely enough, someone's worse-than-UVA. That's parity alright.
Also, UNC got the second-most #1 votes but is 4th; VT got the 4th-most #1 votes but also is the only Coastal team picked to unseat FSU as ACC champ.
-- I've updated the depth chart by class and will do so again if and when a fall-camp depth chart is published.
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
the school: Louisville
That sound you heard on the first of July was that of a door hitting a turtle in the butt. Conference realignment, except for a few stragglers next year (mainly Navy joining the AAC) drags itself to a welcome (though likely temporary) halt with Maryland making their move to the Midwest official and a Midwesternish / Southernish school taking their place.
I'm sort of warming to the idea of Louisville in the ACC, because personally I've always thought of the ACC as mainly a southern conference rather than an eastern one. So while I find Notre Dame's presence still a bit unsettling, a school in the state of Kentucky seems to work.
Like last year with the three new additions, we need to profile this one, especially since they're UVa's default rival for no other reason than they're Maryland's replacement. I don't care for this, by the way. It's nothing personal, Louisvillians. You guys seem so darn happy to be here, I can't begrudge it, and who can blame you when this is basically a lifeboat to the big time? It's just that I'm a little annoyed at the laziness of the league; Louisville is not a school for whom I can work up as healthy a hatred as I had (have) for Maryland, and would prefer they juggle things a bit to make the rivalries a little more traditional. That said, I think this is a very temporary situation, at least in football. Do not be surprised if, by the end of the year, a new scheduling model comes out.
I digress, though. Last year we looked at each newcomer's prowess through the lens of the Director's Cup, and we'll do the same again. As an added bonus, we'll also compare to Maryland. It's only natural, really. There's a feeling, in general, that Louisville is actually an upgrade athletically, so we'll find out if it's true.
First, the general profile. 16,151
Enrollment (undergrad):
1. Florida State - 31,851
x. Maryland - 26,826
2. NC State - 25,176
3. Virginia Tech - 22,824
4. North Carolina - 18,579
5. Pittsburgh - 18,427
6. Clemson - 16,931
7. Louisville - 16,151
8. Virginia - 16,087
9. Syracuse - 15,097
10. Georgia Tech - 14,558
11. Miami - 11,044
12. Boston College - 9,110
13. Notre Dame - 8,475
14. Duke - 6,495
15. Wake Forest - 4,815
The ACC loses a large flagship institution, which is going to a conference comprised of almost nothing but large flagship institutions. Louisville is no flagship, but is practically UVa's twin in terms of size.
Academic rank (USN&WR):
1. Duke - #7
2. Notre Dame - #18
3(t). Virginia - #23
3(t). Wake Forest - #23
5. North Carolina - #30
6. Boston College - #31
7. Georgia Tech - #36
8. Miami - #47
9(t). Clemson - #62
9(t). Syracuse - #62
9(t). Pittsburgh - #62
x. Maryland - #62
12. Virginia Tech - #69
13. Florida State - #91
14. NC State - #101
15. Louisville - #161
So about that. Louisville was originally considered sort of an outside option at best, because of academic rankings that fall a long way outside of the usual standard for ACC schools. The words "commuter school" have been bandied about, and while there's likely a ring of truth to that, it's largely unfair. (Louisville claims about 6,000 residents of its dorms and various on-campus living, which is probably not very different from UVa.) Cooler heads eventually prevailed - ones more interested in the preservation of the conference than preservation of conference-killing standards - and Louisville's ranking ceased to be a factor. (Look, it's not like UVa is any less of a school for being in a conference with one in the triple digits.) For the record, UConn (widely considered to be the other "finalist") fits in somewhere between Miami and the four-way tie - but then, Louisville hasn't been banned from the NCAA tournament for never graduating its basketball players. So there's more than one side to the academics coin.
Directors' Cup average:**
1. Florida State - 8.4
2. North Carolina - 8.6
3. Virginia - 9.8
4. Duke - 10.4
5. Notre Dame - 14.8
x. Maryland - 29.6
6. Louisville - 35
7. Virginia Tech - 38.2
8. Syracuse - 52
9. Clemson - 52.2
10. NC State - 53.6
11. Miami - 60.6
12. Boston College - 65.6
13. Georgia Tech - 67.8
14. Wake Forest - 77.4
15. Pittsburgh - 112.2
**average finish in the last five years, including 2014
In terms of straight average, Louisville comes in a little less than Maryland, but it's not like the difference is huge. Maryland took a drop recently that coincides a bit with chopping programs and losing money (the ACC has been withholding revenue-sharing from them to pay for their exit fee) while Louisville has been very steadily in the 30s the last four years, and #41 in 2010. They got to #30 this year, just nipping Maryland at #32. Anywhere in the top 40 or so, you can pat yourself on the back for a pretty strong program in general. If the general conjecture is true, both Maryland and Louisville should see a bump in their performance in a few years; the fact that the Cardinals have been doing this without the benefit of major-conference money is reasonably impressive, and they were the only top-40 team outside the big five conferences this year.
Sports we play that they don't
Men:
Lacrosse
Wrestling
Women:
none
Sports they play that we don't
Men:
none
Women:
none
Pretty simple list here, and if I hadn't standardized it the last three times I did this, I wouldn't have done it here, either. Our women's sports are exactly the same as theirs. Our men play lacrosse and rasslin', and there exists a small bit of hope that the extra money coming into the Louisville program will be incentive enough to fix that issue when it comes to lacrosse.
Common sports
**Note: The numbers after each year are the Director's Cup points scored in that season.
Men's cross country
2009-2010: 28 (Md. 0; UVA 45)
2010-2011: 18 (Md. 0; UVA 40)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 61.5)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 63)
Totals: 46; 0; 209.5
Women's cross country
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 32)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 34)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 69)
Totals: 0; 0; 180
We begin with a sport where there won't be much threat to whatever it is that UVa's doing. Maryland's cross-country teams always ran at the back of the ACC pack - and they no longer have a men's team - and Louisville will be an improvement, but no threat to win ACC titles.
Field hockey
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 90; UVa 83)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 100; UVA 83)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 100; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 83; UVA 60)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 83; UVA 25)
Totals: 0; 456; 251
Interesting dynamic here, really. Maryland is by far the most successful team of the past decade-plus. In the last ten years they've missed the final four once and won five national titles. UVA is something of a perennial bridesmaid in the ACC. We don't have a single ACC title in the history of the competition; someone, usually Maryland or UNC but sometimes Duke, is always getting in the way.
Louisville, on the other hand, is essentially an NIT-level team. In men's lacrosse, think Fairfield or Drexel, except without even the rare tournament appearance. They're constantly losing to UConn or ODU in their conference semifinals. They'll probably be at least respectable to start. In the long-term, a move to the obvious "it" conference could give them that boost they need to get over the hump; within the first couple of years, though, the likely upshot is that UVA's path to a conference championship just got a little easier. (But then, so did UNC's.)
Football
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (Md. 50; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 63 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 60 (Md. 25; UVA 0)
Totals: 193; 75; 25
Always a little bit of a sleeping giant, Louisville rode Charlie Strong damn near to the top of the football world, culminating in that big Sugar Bowl win over Florida and following that up with a 12-1 season last year. Strong in turn rode that success to another pinnacle of the football world with a bid to coach at Texas, and so Louisville brought back a guy who they'd had a lot of success with, but whose name became total mud since he'd left: Bobby Petrino. Dude's a sleaze, but he was also 41-9 at Louisville.
This matters, since UVa will have to play them for the foreseeable future. Louisville enters the Atlantic Conference and only makes it tougher at the top, adding themselves to the mix with FSU and Clemson. Whether Randy Edsall was going to make Maryland a threat in the conference is now a moot point; the Cardinals are an upgrade in any case.
Men's soccer
2009-2010: 25 (Md. 73; UVA 100)
2010-2011: 90 (Md. 73; UVA 25)
2011-2012: 73 (Md. 64; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 73 (Md. 83; UVA 50)
2013-2014: 50 (Md. 90; UVA 83)
Totals: 311; 383; 283
The numbers tell the story here. Traditionally, Maryland is among the strongest teams in men's college soccer, but Louisville is no slouch at all. UVA, Maryland, Louisville; all three have made appearances in the national championship game in the past five years, and in that time the teams have combined for five Colleg Cup appearances. The ACC merely replaces one top team with another.
Women's soccer
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 64; UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 50; UVA 64)
2011-2012: 64 (Md. 64; UVA 73)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 50; UVA 64)
2013-2014: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 83)
Totals: 89; 228; 348
In the women's game, though, things are a little different; they're more like field hockey here. Again, the ACC is the undisputed 800-pound gorilla of the sport, and Louisville's Big East/AAC results have been up and down. Maryland could usually hold their own in the conference but wasn't a major contender; Louisville will probably be a downgrade. Since the last three years saw UVa blow the Terps out of the conference tournament, the change isn't likely to make it any easier to win the conference title for ourselves.
Volleyball
2009-2010: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
Totals: 200; 0; 0
Louisville volleyball had a habit of blowing through the Big East like a knife through wet paper and then bowing out of the NCAAs in the first or second round. This still makes them a hell of a lot better than our team, which is only just working its way onto the plus side of the standings, and also a hell of a lot better than Maryland's team, which hasn't even made it that far. It is a long climb to an ACC title for UVA, and getting longer with the addition of another contender.
Men's basketball
2009-2010: 25 (Md. 50; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 83 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 100 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 64 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
Totals: 297; 50; 89
Um, Rick Pitino, y'all. Let's just add him to a conference with Coach K and Jim Boeheim and Tony Bennett and Roy Williams and Jamie Dixon. Maryland was - is - spinning its wheels under Mark Turgeon, so the ACC just got a heck of a lot tougher. Well, for the Georgia Techs of the world, anyway. I'd like to think that it's Louisville that has to contend with the defending ACC champs, not the other way around.
Women's basketball
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
2010-2011: 64 (Md. 50; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 73; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 90 (Md. 64; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 73 (Md. 83; UVA 0)
Totals: 277; 187; 25
On the other hand, it's the Hoos that are spinning their wheels on this side of the sport. Louisville and Maryland both are perennial top-25 teams - or better - so there's not much change from UVA's perspective. We had a way to go before we could hope to contend, and still do.
Men's swimming and diving
2009-2010: 51 (Md. 0; UVA 67.5)
2010-2011: 57 (Md. 0; UVA 70.5)
2011-2012: 59 (Md. 0; UVA 60)
2012-2013: 66 (Md. 0; UVA 47)
2013-2014: 66 (Md. 0; UVA 48)
Totals: 309; 0; 293
Women's swimming and diving
2009-2010: 52.5 (Md. 48.5; UVA 69)
2010-2011: 26 (Md. 52; UVA 63)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 38; UVA 57)
2012-2013: 52 (Md. 0; UVA 56)
2013-2014: 60 (Md. 0; UVA 66)
Totals: 240.5; 138.5; 311
Maryland axed their swimming programs a couple years ago, so the upshot here will be to add a team back to the mix. And a pretty good one, on both ends. Our men's team finished a miserable fourth at the ACC championships this year, which I don't have to tell you is the proverbial UNACCEPTABLE, and bringing in Louisville adds a potent challenger to the mix.
Baseball
2009-2010: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 83)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 73 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
2013-2014: 73 (Md. 64; UVA 90)
Totals: 246; 64; 326
Maryland's surprising super regional run notwithstanding, this is a huge and relatively high-profile upgrade. There aren't cross-division rivals in baseball, so we really have no idea whether we'll even play Louisville right away, but they'll certainly make the pathetic Atlantic rather more worthwhile. The Cardinals have put in an appearance in Omaha each of the last two seasons; they've never won there, but this move to the ACC can only help them - and the conference.
Men's golf
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 65.25)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 27.5)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 51.5)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 39)
2013-2014: 21.5 (Md. 0; UVA 33.5)
Totals: 21.5; 0; 216.75
Women's golf
2009-2010: 33 (Md. 21; UVA 63)
2010-2011: 40 (Md. 0; UVA 80)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 24; UVA 80)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 42)
2013-2014: 20.5 (Md. 0; UVA 61.5)
Totals: 93.5; 45; 326.5
Our men's team isn't a big contender, typically finishing mid-pack in the conference tournament and scraping a few national points here and there. The women's team, quietly, is one of the better ones in the country; not quite a major contender for the national championship, but they're generally in strong contention for ACC titles. Maryland is none of the above and Louisville is a bit better, but not going to be a big deal.
Women's lacrosse
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 100; UVA 60)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 90; UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 83; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 90; UVA 70)
2013-2014: 53 (Md. 100; UVA 83)
Totals: 53; 463; 263
Again, like field hockey, the ACC is taking a pretty big downgrade here. Maryland is a powerhouse, and working on a six-year Final Four streak. Louisville's team is relatively new, playing their first season in 2008. They've been a mediocre Big East team most of their existence, with the exception of one horrible year in 2012 and one really good one this year. If they carry that success forward, they'll present a challenge, but the ACC is a much different beast than the Big East, even without Maryland.
Rowing
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 63)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 100)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 75)
2013-2014: 40 (Md. 0; UVA 75)
Totals: 40; 0; 413
Nothing to see here. Maryland has no team, so there'll be one extra boat at the ACC championships; regardless, nobody's touching UVA any time soon.
Softball
2009-2010: 50 (Md. 25; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (Md. 25; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 25; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
Totals: 200; 75; 0
Like rowing, but the other way around. UVA went 8-43 this year with half a roster. Yes, that's the nadir, one hopes, but Louisville is too good a team for us to care where they land in the conference. (Near the top, most likely, but not quite championship material.)
Men's tennis
2009-2010: 64 (Md. 0; UVA 83)
2010-2011: 50 (Md. 50; UVA 90)
2011-2012: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 90)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 100)
2013-2014: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 83)
Totals: 164; 50; 446
Back to not caring where in the hierarchy they land, so long as it's behind us. Louisville has a respectable tennis team, but it's about to join the fight for second place. Actually, playing in a conference will be somewhat new to them; the Big East had a conference tournament but its teams didn't really play each other during the season. Louisville's been playing against ACC teams more than Big East teams, and the Cardinals more or less split those matches.
Women's tennis
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 50)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 25; UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 73)
Totals: 0; 25; 315
Men's track and field
2009-2010: 56 (Md. 0; UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 46 (Md. 25.5; UVA 46)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 15)
2012-2013: 13 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
Totals: 115; 25.5; 135.5
Women's track and field
2009-2010: 36 (Md. 42.5; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 27 (Md. 0; UVA 44)
2011-2012: 22 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 9; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 61.5 (Md. 35; UVA 18)
Totals: 146.5; 86.5; 62
Consistent success in this sport has eluded Louisville, the same as it's eluded UVA and Maryland, and it's going to be hard to predict anything here other than that Louisville probably will be better than Maryland was and won't be a huge threat to win any ACC titles.
************************************************
Yes, I took an extended break for the Fourth, there, and I'll do it again next week, too. Part of it was, I was totally going to write a weekend review yesterday and then I realized, most of the stuff I wanted to write about was from Jeff White's column. So just read that instead.
Summer break for me starts this Friday, but I'll write stuff Wednesday and Thursday, and then Thursday and Friday next week.
I'm sort of warming to the idea of Louisville in the ACC, because personally I've always thought of the ACC as mainly a southern conference rather than an eastern one. So while I find Notre Dame's presence still a bit unsettling, a school in the state of Kentucky seems to work.
Like last year with the three new additions, we need to profile this one, especially since they're UVa's default rival for no other reason than they're Maryland's replacement. I don't care for this, by the way. It's nothing personal, Louisvillians. You guys seem so darn happy to be here, I can't begrudge it, and who can blame you when this is basically a lifeboat to the big time? It's just that I'm a little annoyed at the laziness of the league; Louisville is not a school for whom I can work up as healthy a hatred as I had (have) for Maryland, and would prefer they juggle things a bit to make the rivalries a little more traditional. That said, I think this is a very temporary situation, at least in football. Do not be surprised if, by the end of the year, a new scheduling model comes out.
I digress, though. Last year we looked at each newcomer's prowess through the lens of the Director's Cup, and we'll do the same again. As an added bonus, we'll also compare to Maryland. It's only natural, really. There's a feeling, in general, that Louisville is actually an upgrade athletically, so we'll find out if it's true.
First, the general profile. 16,151
Enrollment (undergrad):
1. Florida State - 31,851
x. Maryland - 26,826
2. NC State - 25,176
3. Virginia Tech - 22,824
4. North Carolina - 18,579
5. Pittsburgh - 18,427
6. Clemson - 16,931
7. Louisville - 16,151
8. Virginia - 16,087
9. Syracuse - 15,097
10. Georgia Tech - 14,558
11. Miami - 11,044
12. Boston College - 9,110
13. Notre Dame - 8,475
14. Duke - 6,495
15. Wake Forest - 4,815
The ACC loses a large flagship institution, which is going to a conference comprised of almost nothing but large flagship institutions. Louisville is no flagship, but is practically UVa's twin in terms of size.
Academic rank (USN&WR):
1. Duke - #7
2. Notre Dame - #18
3(t). Virginia - #23
3(t). Wake Forest - #23
5. North Carolina - #30
6. Boston College - #31
7. Georgia Tech - #36
8. Miami - #47
9(t). Clemson - #62
9(t). Syracuse - #62
9(t). Pittsburgh - #62
x. Maryland - #62
12. Virginia Tech - #69
13. Florida State - #91
14. NC State - #101
15. Louisville - #161
So about that. Louisville was originally considered sort of an outside option at best, because of academic rankings that fall a long way outside of the usual standard for ACC schools. The words "commuter school" have been bandied about, and while there's likely a ring of truth to that, it's largely unfair. (Louisville claims about 6,000 residents of its dorms and various on-campus living, which is probably not very different from UVa.) Cooler heads eventually prevailed - ones more interested in the preservation of the conference than preservation of conference-killing standards - and Louisville's ranking ceased to be a factor. (Look, it's not like UVa is any less of a school for being in a conference with one in the triple digits.) For the record, UConn (widely considered to be the other "finalist") fits in somewhere between Miami and the four-way tie - but then, Louisville hasn't been banned from the NCAA tournament for never graduating its basketball players. So there's more than one side to the academics coin.
Directors' Cup average:**
1. Florida State - 8.4
2. North Carolina - 8.6
3. Virginia - 9.8
4. Duke - 10.4
5. Notre Dame - 14.8
x. Maryland - 29.6
6. Louisville - 35
7. Virginia Tech - 38.2
8. Syracuse - 52
9. Clemson - 52.2
10. NC State - 53.6
11. Miami - 60.6
12. Boston College - 65.6
13. Georgia Tech - 67.8
14. Wake Forest - 77.4
15. Pittsburgh - 112.2
**average finish in the last five years, including 2014
In terms of straight average, Louisville comes in a little less than Maryland, but it's not like the difference is huge. Maryland took a drop recently that coincides a bit with chopping programs and losing money (the ACC has been withholding revenue-sharing from them to pay for their exit fee) while Louisville has been very steadily in the 30s the last four years, and #41 in 2010. They got to #30 this year, just nipping Maryland at #32. Anywhere in the top 40 or so, you can pat yourself on the back for a pretty strong program in general. If the general conjecture is true, both Maryland and Louisville should see a bump in their performance in a few years; the fact that the Cardinals have been doing this without the benefit of major-conference money is reasonably impressive, and they were the only top-40 team outside the big five conferences this year.
Sports we play that they don't
Men:
Lacrosse
Wrestling
Women:
none
Sports they play that we don't
Men:
none
Women:
none
Pretty simple list here, and if I hadn't standardized it the last three times I did this, I wouldn't have done it here, either. Our women's sports are exactly the same as theirs. Our men play lacrosse and rasslin', and there exists a small bit of hope that the extra money coming into the Louisville program will be incentive enough to fix that issue when it comes to lacrosse.
Common sports
**Note: The numbers after each year are the Director's Cup points scored in that season.
Men's cross country
2009-2010: 28 (Md. 0; UVA 45)
2010-2011: 18 (Md. 0; UVA 40)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 61.5)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 63)
Totals: 46; 0; 209.5
Women's cross country
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 32)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 34)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 69)
Totals: 0; 0; 180
We begin with a sport where there won't be much threat to whatever it is that UVa's doing. Maryland's cross-country teams always ran at the back of the ACC pack - and they no longer have a men's team - and Louisville will be an improvement, but no threat to win ACC titles.
Field hockey
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 90; UVa 83)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 100; UVA 83)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 100; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 83; UVA 60)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 83; UVA 25)
Totals: 0; 456; 251
Interesting dynamic here, really. Maryland is by far the most successful team of the past decade-plus. In the last ten years they've missed the final four once and won five national titles. UVA is something of a perennial bridesmaid in the ACC. We don't have a single ACC title in the history of the competition; someone, usually Maryland or UNC but sometimes Duke, is always getting in the way.
Louisville, on the other hand, is essentially an NIT-level team. In men's lacrosse, think Fairfield or Drexel, except without even the rare tournament appearance. They're constantly losing to UConn or ODU in their conference semifinals. They'll probably be at least respectable to start. In the long-term, a move to the obvious "it" conference could give them that boost they need to get over the hump; within the first couple of years, though, the likely upshot is that UVA's path to a conference championship just got a little easier. (But then, so did UNC's.)
Football
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (Md. 50; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 63 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 60 (Md. 25; UVA 0)
Totals: 193; 75; 25
Always a little bit of a sleeping giant, Louisville rode Charlie Strong damn near to the top of the football world, culminating in that big Sugar Bowl win over Florida and following that up with a 12-1 season last year. Strong in turn rode that success to another pinnacle of the football world with a bid to coach at Texas, and so Louisville brought back a guy who they'd had a lot of success with, but whose name became total mud since he'd left: Bobby Petrino. Dude's a sleaze, but he was also 41-9 at Louisville.
This matters, since UVa will have to play them for the foreseeable future. Louisville enters the Atlantic Conference and only makes it tougher at the top, adding themselves to the mix with FSU and Clemson. Whether Randy Edsall was going to make Maryland a threat in the conference is now a moot point; the Cardinals are an upgrade in any case.
Men's soccer
2009-2010: 25 (Md. 73; UVA 100)
2010-2011: 90 (Md. 73; UVA 25)
2011-2012: 73 (Md. 64; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 73 (Md. 83; UVA 50)
2013-2014: 50 (Md. 90; UVA 83)
Totals: 311; 383; 283
The numbers tell the story here. Traditionally, Maryland is among the strongest teams in men's college soccer, but Louisville is no slouch at all. UVA, Maryland, Louisville; all three have made appearances in the national championship game in the past five years, and in that time the teams have combined for five Colleg Cup appearances. The ACC merely replaces one top team with another.
Women's soccer
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 64; UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 50; UVA 64)
2011-2012: 64 (Md. 64; UVA 73)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 50; UVA 64)
2013-2014: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 83)
Totals: 89; 228; 348
In the women's game, though, things are a little different; they're more like field hockey here. Again, the ACC is the undisputed 800-pound gorilla of the sport, and Louisville's Big East/AAC results have been up and down. Maryland could usually hold their own in the conference but wasn't a major contender; Louisville will probably be a downgrade. Since the last three years saw UVa blow the Terps out of the conference tournament, the change isn't likely to make it any easier to win the conference title for ourselves.
Volleyball
2009-2010: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
Totals: 200; 0; 0
Louisville volleyball had a habit of blowing through the Big East like a knife through wet paper and then bowing out of the NCAAs in the first or second round. This still makes them a hell of a lot better than our team, which is only just working its way onto the plus side of the standings, and also a hell of a lot better than Maryland's team, which hasn't even made it that far. It is a long climb to an ACC title for UVA, and getting longer with the addition of another contender.
Men's basketball
2009-2010: 25 (Md. 50; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 83 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 100 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 64 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
Totals: 297; 50; 89
Um, Rick Pitino, y'all. Let's just add him to a conference with Coach K and Jim Boeheim and Tony Bennett and Roy Williams and Jamie Dixon. Maryland was - is - spinning its wheels under Mark Turgeon, so the ACC just got a heck of a lot tougher. Well, for the Georgia Techs of the world, anyway. I'd like to think that it's Louisville that has to contend with the defending ACC champs, not the other way around.
Women's basketball
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
2010-2011: 64 (Md. 50; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 73; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 90 (Md. 64; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 73 (Md. 83; UVA 0)
Totals: 277; 187; 25
On the other hand, it's the Hoos that are spinning their wheels on this side of the sport. Louisville and Maryland both are perennial top-25 teams - or better - so there's not much change from UVA's perspective. We had a way to go before we could hope to contend, and still do.
Men's swimming and diving
2009-2010: 51 (Md. 0; UVA 67.5)
2010-2011: 57 (Md. 0; UVA 70.5)
2011-2012: 59 (Md. 0; UVA 60)
2012-2013: 66 (Md. 0; UVA 47)
2013-2014: 66 (Md. 0; UVA 48)
Totals: 309; 0; 293
Women's swimming and diving
2009-2010: 52.5 (Md. 48.5; UVA 69)
2010-2011: 26 (Md. 52; UVA 63)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 38; UVA 57)
2012-2013: 52 (Md. 0; UVA 56)
2013-2014: 60 (Md. 0; UVA 66)
Totals: 240.5; 138.5; 311
Maryland axed their swimming programs a couple years ago, so the upshot here will be to add a team back to the mix. And a pretty good one, on both ends. Our men's team finished a miserable fourth at the ACC championships this year, which I don't have to tell you is the proverbial UNACCEPTABLE, and bringing in Louisville adds a potent challenger to the mix.
Baseball
2009-2010: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 83)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 73 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
2013-2014: 73 (Md. 64; UVA 90)
Totals: 246; 64; 326
Maryland's surprising super regional run notwithstanding, this is a huge and relatively high-profile upgrade. There aren't cross-division rivals in baseball, so we really have no idea whether we'll even play Louisville right away, but they'll certainly make the pathetic Atlantic rather more worthwhile. The Cardinals have put in an appearance in Omaha each of the last two seasons; they've never won there, but this move to the ACC can only help them - and the conference.
Men's golf
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 65.25)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 27.5)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 51.5)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 39)
2013-2014: 21.5 (Md. 0; UVA 33.5)
Totals: 21.5; 0; 216.75
2009-2010: 33 (Md. 21; UVA 63)
2010-2011: 40 (Md. 0; UVA 80)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 24; UVA 80)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 42)
2013-2014: 20.5 (Md. 0; UVA 61.5)
Totals: 93.5; 45; 326.5
Our men's team isn't a big contender, typically finishing mid-pack in the conference tournament and scraping a few national points here and there. The women's team, quietly, is one of the better ones in the country; not quite a major contender for the national championship, but they're generally in strong contention for ACC titles. Maryland is none of the above and Louisville is a bit better, but not going to be a big deal.
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 100; UVA 60)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 90; UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 83; UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 90; UVA 70)
2013-2014: 53 (Md. 100; UVA 83)
Totals: 53; 463; 263
Again, like field hockey, the ACC is taking a pretty big downgrade here. Maryland is a powerhouse, and working on a six-year Final Four streak. Louisville's team is relatively new, playing their first season in 2008. They've been a mediocre Big East team most of their existence, with the exception of one horrible year in 2012 and one really good one this year. If they carry that success forward, they'll present a challenge, but the ACC is a much different beast than the Big East, even without Maryland.
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 63)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 100)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 75)
2013-2014: 40 (Md. 0; UVA 75)
Totals: 40; 0; 413
Nothing to see here. Maryland has no team, so there'll be one extra boat at the ACC championships; regardless, nobody's touching UVA any time soon.
2009-2010: 50 (Md. 25; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (Md. 25; UVA 0)
2011-2012: 50 (Md. 25; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
Totals: 200; 75; 0
Like rowing, but the other way around. UVA went 8-43 this year with half a roster. Yes, that's the nadir, one hopes, but Louisville is too good a team for us to care where they land in the conference. (Near the top, most likely, but not quite championship material.)
2009-2010: 64 (Md. 0; UVA 83)
2010-2011: 50 (Md. 50; UVA 90)
2011-2012: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 90)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 100)
2013-2014: 25 (Md. 0; UVA 83)
Totals: 164; 50; 446
Back to not caring where in the hierarchy they land, so long as it's behind us. Louisville has a respectable tennis team, but it's about to join the fight for second place. Actually, playing in a conference will be somewhat new to them; the Big East had a conference tournament but its teams didn't really play each other during the season. Louisville's been playing against ACC teams more than Big East teams, and the Cardinals more or less split those matches.
2009-2010: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 50)
2010-2011: 0 (Md. 25; UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 64)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 73)
Totals: 0; 25; 315
Very little to speak of here; Louisville usually has had winning records, but they pad out their schedule with a lot of fluff, and haven't had an invite to the NCAAs since 2008. They won't be a big factor in the ACC, and UVA should expect to beat them most if not all of the time.
2009-2010: 56 (Md. 0; UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 46 (Md. 25.5; UVA 46)
2011-2012: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 15)
2012-2013: 13 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 0 (Md. 0; UVA 25)
Totals: 115; 25.5; 135.5
2009-2010: 36 (Md. 42.5; UVA 0)
2010-2011: 27 (Md. 0; UVA 44)
2011-2012: 22 (Md. 0; UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (Md. 9; UVA 0)
2013-2014: 61.5 (Md. 35; UVA 18)
Totals: 146.5; 86.5; 62
Consistent success in this sport has eluded Louisville, the same as it's eluded UVA and Maryland, and it's going to be hard to predict anything here other than that Louisville probably will be better than Maryland was and won't be a huge threat to win any ACC titles.
************************************************
Yes, I took an extended break for the Fourth, there, and I'll do it again next week, too. Part of it was, I was totally going to write a weekend review yesterday and then I realized, most of the stuff I wanted to write about was from Jeff White's column. So just read that instead.
Summer break for me starts this Friday, but I'll write stuff Wednesday and Thursday, and then Thursday and Friday next week.
Monday, June 2, 2014
weekend review
Well, that turned out to be not so hard. It was no great shock that Bucknell presented little challenge, but even knowing about Arkansas's struggles at the plate it was a little surprising the ease with which UVA dispatched them. It was the blueprint of a regional weekend from start to finish: Hold back your ace and let him dominate a Saturday pitching battle after you blow out the 4 seed on Friday. Then force the one-loss survivor to stretch their pitching just past the breaking point. Arkansas starter Zach Jackson broke down exactly at the point where he'd reached his single-game maximum pitches and innings count.
UVA outscored their opponents 22-3 on the weekend, which you can't do unless the bats get off the schneid some. Hallelujah. Much was helped, to be sure, by the frying-pan mitts on the left side of Arky's infield, both Saturday and Sunday. (Irrelevant side note: the Razorback shortstop shares both a name and some facial resemblence with the villain in my favorite episode of NCIS.) It's often said, though, that you can't give a good team like UVA four or five outs an inning, and the Hoos sniffed blood and pounced like a championship team should.
Even so, pitching carried the day. The starters went more than 20 innings - I forget the exact amount but, y'know, a lot - without allowing a run. Not even an unearned one. What a tremendous advantage that is. It'd take a really unusual set of circumstances to lose the regional after that. I mean, Nathan Kirby. This guy, man. Be honest: did you ever feel like his three-run lead was anything less than perfectly safe?
UVA advances to take on Maryland, and in doing so becomes the bad guy in a feel-good story about a plucky little underdog trying to do things it's never done before. Maryland knocked off regional host South Carolina in extremely convincing fashion, making this guy look incredibly stupid in the process. Well, even stupider than you would when your only argument for why teams are bad is that they used to be. At any rate, if the Hoos eliminate the Terps this weekend,
More bullety stuff:
-- Nate Irving had one of the oddest at-bats in recent memory. First a "foul ball" that actually glanced off the catcher's glove (it wasn't the best weekend for umpiring, to be honest) and then a real and very unlucky foul ball that flew to the wrong side of the hitter and somehow hit the upraised bat.
-- I really do not know how the same shortstop can make a Web Gem-nominated play in between two utterly pitiful ones. But I'll take it. The pitiful ones led to runs and the brilliant stop was worth the out just to watch it.
-- The camera crew only showed Zach Jackson twice after his removal from the game, which is a step in the right direction - away from the usual puzzling desire to soak up as much despair from losing athletes as possible. I don't like the gleeful broadcasting of some poor guy's misery. But was it necessary to follow BOC's teenaged daughter all around the stadium? Yes, I'm sure she's a nice girl and happy birthday and all, now leave her be, once is plenty. The production truck could theoretically be called a windowless van, but you don't have to act like it.
-- I like that if we're going to bunt, we play a little Irvine baseball and hold the bat in bunting position even before the pitcher winds up. The whole point of a pitcher is to not let the hitter do what he wants to do, so I honestly think that holding the bat like that makes the pitcher subconsciously want to miss the bat with his pitch.... which means missing the strike zone too.
-- Arkansas brought in their sidearm pitcher and it's a shame we didn't have some righties to face him because he seemed to think the strike zone was about two feet north and east of where it really was, and would've plunked the bases loaded if the hitters hadn't been lefties.
*************************************************
-- The ACC unveiled its new logo last week. I don't hate it; I might even start to like it. I just think it's funny that they're still ganking the Big East's assets.
The booklet is a little silly, though. Actually, it's a lot silly. "The ACC brand simplifies purchase decision for fans and partners of the ACC." Is that even English? They're English words, I'm sure of that, but they don't fit together to make an English sentence. "The lettering is accentuated by a bold, silver underline that symbolizes the ACC’s journey toward a bright future." All the schools have the logo rendered in their own colors, though, and Duke's and NC State's underlines are black. Should those schools be worried about the future? I know this, though: the sentence "The ACC's future is really bright, and you can tell because their logo has a silver underline" is one that has never been uttered or written in human history and never will again.**
It's a frickin' logo, man. It's nice. But it's just a logo. Your brand is what other people think you are (they even admit as much in the little book) so you can't just go telling people what it is and expect it to stick. I wish they'd put half the effort into fixing the website; right now, "clueless about technology" is more a part of their brand than "confident yet humble."
**Unless someone gets smartassy in the comments.
-- I've parsed this article about the SEC's "Division IV" threat several times and cannot for the life of me figure out the difference between this Division IV thing and the autonomy the five conferences want. The message seems to be "Let us do what we want, or we'll do what we want." Actually, the timing of this public airing, and its message, what it really seems to say is "we're close to locking up the support we need for this autonomy thing, but we need to scare a few more people into compliance."
UVA outscored their opponents 22-3 on the weekend, which you can't do unless the bats get off the schneid some. Hallelujah. Much was helped, to be sure, by the frying-pan mitts on the left side of Arky's infield, both Saturday and Sunday. (Irrelevant side note: the Razorback shortstop shares both a name and some facial resemblence with the villain in my favorite episode of NCIS.) It's often said, though, that you can't give a good team like UVA four or five outs an inning, and the Hoos sniffed blood and pounced like a championship team should.
Even so, pitching carried the day. The starters went more than 20 innings - I forget the exact amount but, y'know, a lot - without allowing a run. Not even an unearned one. What a tremendous advantage that is. It'd take a really unusual set of circumstances to lose the regional after that. I mean, Nathan Kirby. This guy, man. Be honest: did you ever feel like his three-run lead was anything less than perfectly safe?
UVA advances to take on Maryland, and in doing so becomes the bad guy in a feel-good story about a plucky little underdog trying to do things it's never done before. Maryland knocked off regional host South Carolina in extremely convincing fashion, making this guy look incredibly stupid in the process. Well, even stupider than you would when your only argument for why teams are bad is that they used to be. At any rate, if the Hoos eliminate the Terps this weekend,
More bullety stuff:
-- Nate Irving had one of the oddest at-bats in recent memory. First a "foul ball" that actually glanced off the catcher's glove (it wasn't the best weekend for umpiring, to be honest) and then a real and very unlucky foul ball that flew to the wrong side of the hitter and somehow hit the upraised bat.
-- I really do not know how the same shortstop can make a Web Gem-nominated play in between two utterly pitiful ones. But I'll take it. The pitiful ones led to runs and the brilliant stop was worth the out just to watch it.
-- The camera crew only showed Zach Jackson twice after his removal from the game, which is a step in the right direction - away from the usual puzzling desire to soak up as much despair from losing athletes as possible. I don't like the gleeful broadcasting of some poor guy's misery. But was it necessary to follow BOC's teenaged daughter all around the stadium? Yes, I'm sure she's a nice girl and happy birthday and all, now leave her be, once is plenty. The production truck could theoretically be called a windowless van, but you don't have to act like it.
-- I like that if we're going to bunt, we play a little Irvine baseball and hold the bat in bunting position even before the pitcher winds up. The whole point of a pitcher is to not let the hitter do what he wants to do, so I honestly think that holding the bat like that makes the pitcher subconsciously want to miss the bat with his pitch.... which means missing the strike zone too.
-- Arkansas brought in their sidearm pitcher and it's a shame we didn't have some righties to face him because he seemed to think the strike zone was about two feet north and east of where it really was, and would've plunked the bases loaded if the hitters hadn't been lefties.
*************************************************
-- The ACC unveiled its new logo last week. I don't hate it; I might even start to like it. I just think it's funny that they're still ganking the Big East's assets.
The booklet is a little silly, though. Actually, it's a lot silly. "The ACC brand simplifies purchase decision for fans and partners of the ACC." Is that even English? They're English words, I'm sure of that, but they don't fit together to make an English sentence. "The lettering is accentuated by a bold, silver underline that symbolizes the ACC’s journey toward a bright future." All the schools have the logo rendered in their own colors, though, and Duke's and NC State's underlines are black. Should those schools be worried about the future? I know this, though: the sentence "The ACC's future is really bright, and you can tell because their logo has a silver underline" is one that has never been uttered or written in human history and never will again.**
It's a frickin' logo, man. It's nice. But it's just a logo. Your brand is what other people think you are (they even admit as much in the little book) so you can't just go telling people what it is and expect it to stick. I wish they'd put half the effort into fixing the website; right now, "clueless about technology" is more a part of their brand than "confident yet humble."
**Unless someone gets smartassy in the comments.
-- I've parsed this article about the SEC's "Division IV" threat several times and cannot for the life of me figure out the difference between this Division IV thing and the autonomy the five conferences want. The message seems to be "Let us do what we want, or we'll do what we want." Actually, the timing of this public airing, and its message, what it really seems to say is "we're close to locking up the support we need for this autonomy thing, but we need to scare a few more people into compliance."
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
schedule soapbox again
OK, one last time, this time in detail. As you're probably aware, the ACC is a 14-team football conference that voted to stick with eight games on the schedule. (Incidentally, Craig Littlepage was one of the six ADs that prefers nine games.) As currently constituted, that schedule really blows. Divisions with a protected crossover was fine-ish for a 12-team conference, but now, we're admitting to our recruits that they'll never get to play Clemson or FSU. You're not a conference if your players are never playing other teams that are ostensibly in the conference. (A point I've been making long before David Teel did in the linked column above.)
If the NCAA allows it, and I think they will, the solution is simple: Get rid of these damn divisions, which were gerrymandered in the first place, and play out the season and let the top two teams fight it out in the championship game.
That naturally raises the question of how to set up the schedule rotation. Again, an easy solution. Protect three rivalries per team and rotate among the other ten. That lets you play the same three teams each year and flip-flop the other five. It couldn't be simpler. Every recruit would play each other team at least twice and make a road trip to every ACC school, unless they left after three years. So easy a caveman, or an ACC administrator, can do it.
Now, the weeds. It brings up a slightly thorny issue, that of, how to arrange the protected rivalries. The ones you absolutely have to keep are these:
UVA-VT
UVA-UNC
UNC-NC State
UNC-Duke
FSU-Miami
GT-Clemson
And not knowing a lot about the preferences of our Big East wing, I'd also add BC-Cuse and, maybe Cuse-Pitt?
I'm not sure whether the ACC sees them all that way, though. Here's what I'm afraid of:
This makes sense on a ton of levels. You box up the southern teams and have them be each other's protected games. You box up Carolina-land and do the same. And for the six "northern" teams, everyone in your row and your column is your protected rival. So we get Pitt, VT, and Louisville. VT gets UVA, Pitt, and BC. And so on. This is neat and tidy and it keeps together a lot of the already-existing rivalries - all seven current cross-division rivalries are maintained. So is the All Carolina Conference moniker.
It's neat and easy and it's also a big fat middle finger aimed at Charlottesville. Eight "traditional" ACC teams in the south (or seven, depending on how you feel about FSU) and one of them banished to the Big East. The South's Oldest Rivalry is poised, in a few years, to become the second-longest-played college game in history. We (and UNC) had been behind several others, but realignment killed a few ancient games - Texas-Texas A&M, Missouri-Kansas, and Kansas-Nebraska have all fallen victim to greed, and in 2016 UVA-UNC will pass the Border War for second place - tied with Miami of Ohio and Cincinnati and second to Minnesota and Wisconsin. I don't know if the ACC or the respective ADs care, but I sure do. So here's a better idea.
If it offends you that VT gets Duke and Wake as forever-rivals, swap NC State and Duke. There are a few different ways to do it, really. I'm not picky along those lines. Just so long as we play UNC and VT, and UNC plays NC State and Duke. Duke should probably also play Wake, but whatev. This is how you bring heated regionalism back to the scattered world of realignment, in which eastern teams join midwestern and southwestern conferences, northern teams join southern ones, a team can be a member of both the Southwestern and Southeastern Conferences during its history, and cats lie down with dogs if the dog has a better TV deal.
At any rate, I can't stress enough how important it is for UVA not to be labeled a northern school and sent to go play with the new kids. Nothing against them. We just have traditions to uphold, is all.
It turns out that creating a schedule rotation is just as much child's play as the rest of this exercise. From the perspective of one of the four-team groups, say, what we'll call the Southern pod, they would play three teams from the Central pod and two from the Northern in a given year. From the perspective of the six-team Central pod, we'd play two teams from each of the others and one of the remaining Central teams. Our schedule might hypothetically look like so:
As with last time this was done, grayed-out helmets represent road games. After 2018, go back to the first row again. There's one problem: I'd really have liked the non-protected games to alternate, instead of being played in two-year chunks. They can't, though: with an odd number in each "set" of games, it's not possible to alternate like that. You have two of three home games and two of five, then one of three and three of five; if you alternated the unprotected games like I like to, you get two of three and three of five. (Or you play one team on the road two years in a row and then at home two years in a row, an idea which clearly and rightfully would be DOA.)
It may be possible to do some scheduling calisthenics to make alternating games happen instead of two-year chunks, and if the ACC pulls that off I'll tip my hat and take back my "uncreative" potshots. However, when we had 12 teams, we were doing the chunk thing.
(We also had a rotation like a conveyor belt - Team A on the road, Team B at home; Team B on the road, Team C at home; Team C on the road, Team D at home - you get the idea. I didn't like the conveyor belt and it'd be a terrible idea here, too.)
All this would, of course, be independent of the Notre Dame rotation. That doesn't need to be weaved into the conference schedule; it's a separate beast entirely.
The beauty, or ugliness - I don't care which - of this idea is that a nine-game schedule ruins it. Ruins the whole thing. I guess you'd have just two protected games and rotate the other seven somehow, probably skipping teams in two-year chunks like the Big Ten used to do when it had 11 teams. I'm not gonna bother. Just thinking about it makes me realize - if the ACC goes with this format, I'd prefer to stick with eight games. Nine games would be for if one day we hit the 16-team mark.
The really good thing here is, I think this actually has a chance of happening. Quite probably the real thing would have its differences here and there, and I'm legitimately nervous that they'd adopt exactly this format and the protection boxes that stick us in the north. It's up to Littlepage to make sure that doesn't happen. But, in any case, I truly think that the ACC wants to ditch the current model, which is not popular, and I truly think they'll have the ability to do so fairly soon. Here's the best idea they'll ever have.
If the NCAA allows it, and I think they will, the solution is simple: Get rid of these damn divisions, which were gerrymandered in the first place, and play out the season and let the top two teams fight it out in the championship game.
That naturally raises the question of how to set up the schedule rotation. Again, an easy solution. Protect three rivalries per team and rotate among the other ten. That lets you play the same three teams each year and flip-flop the other five. It couldn't be simpler. Every recruit would play each other team at least twice and make a road trip to every ACC school, unless they left after three years. So easy a caveman, or an ACC administrator, can do it.
Now, the weeds. It brings up a slightly thorny issue, that of, how to arrange the protected rivalries. The ones you absolutely have to keep are these:
UVA-VT
UVA-UNC
UNC-NC State
UNC-Duke
FSU-Miami
GT-Clemson
And not knowing a lot about the preferences of our Big East wing, I'd also add BC-Cuse and, maybe Cuse-Pitt?
I'm not sure whether the ACC sees them all that way, though. Here's what I'm afraid of:
It's neat and easy and it's also a big fat middle finger aimed at Charlottesville. Eight "traditional" ACC teams in the south (or seven, depending on how you feel about FSU) and one of them banished to the Big East. The South's Oldest Rivalry is poised, in a few years, to become the second-longest-played college game in history. We (and UNC) had been behind several others, but realignment killed a few ancient games - Texas-Texas A&M, Missouri-Kansas, and Kansas-Nebraska have all fallen victim to greed, and in 2016 UVA-UNC will pass the Border War for second place - tied with Miami of Ohio and Cincinnati and second to Minnesota and Wisconsin. I don't know if the ACC or the respective ADs care, but I sure do. So here's a better idea.
At any rate, I can't stress enough how important it is for UVA not to be labeled a northern school and sent to go play with the new kids. Nothing against them. We just have traditions to uphold, is all.
It turns out that creating a schedule rotation is just as much child's play as the rest of this exercise. From the perspective of one of the four-team groups, say, what we'll call the Southern pod, they would play three teams from the Central pod and two from the Northern in a given year. From the perspective of the six-team Central pod, we'd play two teams from each of the others and one of the remaining Central teams. Our schedule might hypothetically look like so:
As with last time this was done, grayed-out helmets represent road games. After 2018, go back to the first row again. There's one problem: I'd really have liked the non-protected games to alternate, instead of being played in two-year chunks. They can't, though: with an odd number in each "set" of games, it's not possible to alternate like that. You have two of three home games and two of five, then one of three and three of five; if you alternated the unprotected games like I like to, you get two of three and three of five. (Or you play one team on the road two years in a row and then at home two years in a row, an idea which clearly and rightfully would be DOA.)
It may be possible to do some scheduling calisthenics to make alternating games happen instead of two-year chunks, and if the ACC pulls that off I'll tip my hat and take back my "uncreative" potshots. However, when we had 12 teams, we were doing the chunk thing.
(We also had a rotation like a conveyor belt - Team A on the road, Team B at home; Team B on the road, Team C at home; Team C on the road, Team D at home - you get the idea. I didn't like the conveyor belt and it'd be a terrible idea here, too.)
All this would, of course, be independent of the Notre Dame rotation. That doesn't need to be weaved into the conference schedule; it's a separate beast entirely.
The beauty, or ugliness - I don't care which - of this idea is that a nine-game schedule ruins it. Ruins the whole thing. I guess you'd have just two protected games and rotate the other seven somehow, probably skipping teams in two-year chunks like the Big Ten used to do when it had 11 teams. I'm not gonna bother. Just thinking about it makes me realize - if the ACC goes with this format, I'd prefer to stick with eight games. Nine games would be for if one day we hit the 16-team mark.
The really good thing here is, I think this actually has a chance of happening. Quite probably the real thing would have its differences here and there, and I'm legitimately nervous that they'd adopt exactly this format and the protection boxes that stick us in the north. It's up to Littlepage to make sure that doesn't happen. But, in any case, I truly think that the ACC wants to ditch the current model, which is not popular, and I truly think they'll have the ability to do so fairly soon. Here's the best idea they'll ever have.
Monday, May 12, 2014
weekend review
Welp. That's that; another lacrosse season is in the books too early, after a mostly uninspiring performance on Sunday. It looked so promising to start, with the Hoos giving up faceoff wins but then quickly making Hopkins look like a disjointed JV squad. And then....
I mean, just... look, I've always considered that rationality is one of my writing strengths, and I know there was like 45+ minutes worth of reasons why we lost, but I just keep on going back to the bad clear that led to Hop's first goal, essentially an empty-netter. UVA has a reputation as an outstanding clearing team and totally failed to live up to that this year; in some cases they've just completely lost sight of the 30-second time limit, and that's what killed them here.
Matt Barrett was the visible scapegoat because it was his pass that was intercepted, but, feeling compelled to go back to the Tivo for a closer look, I found out exactly how much time he had to clear the ball when he threw that pass: four seconds. Even if he had channeled Adam Ghitelman and run it there himself, he'd never have made it. 26 seconds had elapsed already thanks mainly to sheer unadulterated laziness, and the real culprit on that clear is Scott McWilliams. McWilliams floated around the field for nine seconds before tossing the ball (backwards) to Tanner Scales. Scales returned the ball a few seconds later.... and "half-assed" would be far too generous a term for McWilliams's attempt at catching it. That's why Barrett had the ball in the first place; he had to retrieve it as it rolled the wrong way.
If some people are saying there's a senior leadership problem on the team, well, that's why. And this is by no means to pin the loss on McWilliams, whose play these four years has been unequivocally an asset. You don't lose by six without everyone pitching in. But there's still the irrational fan in me that wonders how that game might've gone if the Hoos hadn't offered a sportsmanlike hand back to the already punch-drunk Jays.
As a season, it certainly wasn't a total loss. You expect Virginia lacrosse to accomplish certain things, and beating Syracuse, Hopkins, and UNC (1 outta 2 in the latter instances, anyway) do qualify. However, after a stretch of four consecutive Final Fours, and missing only two from 2002 to 2011, the natives are rightfully getting restless now that we've missed three in a row. Folks are talking succession plans. If Dom Starsia weren't the winningest D-I coach ever, the words being used might be a little more forceful.
As it is, UVA stands in about the same delicate spot that Florida State football did in about 2008 or so. (And that Penn State managed to botch pretty spectacularly.) FSU succeeded in dislodging Bobby Bowden after the boosters got antsy and it became clear that 1) they weren't going to get much farther with him and 2) he had no plans to leave. They had a couple factors helping that process: the academics scandal greased his skids out of town, and they didn't have his son on staff. FSU is how you want the replacing-a-legend process to go; Penn State is not. And Tennessee exists as the antithesis of Penn State - the fans managed to get Phil Fulmer replaced and the Vols promptly entered the crapper, from which they have yet to emerge.
I doubt there's any talk of succession in the UVA offices, but it's something that should be quietly going through the heads of the decision makers - not because immediate action is needed, but they still have to be working on a contingency plan. And that plan can't just be Joe Starsia. This is too much of a signature program to allow to go stale. If we're playing for a national title next year - hey, cancel the war. If we miss out on the quarters again, let alone Memorial Day, well.... it certainly won't stop people wondering how Mike Pressler or Charley Toomey might look on the Klockner sidelines. Me, I'm nowhere near officially adding my voice to the (still quite small) chorus calling for a change. I don't want to be Penn State but I definitely don't want to be Tennessee.** Just considering it something to keep an eye on.
**A statement made, with that particular emphasis, with consideration only for the on-field aspect of PSU's football succession.
******************************************************
-- Lots of other UVA teams are still running around scooping up Director's Cup points, though:
* Men's and women's tennis are both in the round of 16, about to face Notre Dame and Baylor, respectively.
* Ladies' golf was top-8 at their regional, earning one of 24 spots at the national championship tournament in Tulsa.
* Women's lax faces 3-seeded UNC in the quarterfinals after knocking off Princeton.
This is to say nothing of crew, which still has an ACC title to earn before heading to nationals.
-- Maryland transfer Seth Allen was really digging on UVA, until he took a trip to Blacksburg and found playing time in abundance. That Buzz Williams is apparently a hell of a recruiter. Say what you will but he's definitely injected some talent into a moribund program. Enough to be a real factor in the ACC race? No, not yet, but they seem to be working hard at leaving the laughingstock label behind.
Williams probably made the case to Allen that UVA wanted him but VT needed him, which is pretty much exactly how things stood. Allen would've been a luxury, albeit one that would've helped smooth out the roster makeup. There are plenty of worthy backcourt options already on the roster, though. Any addition this offseason who would hit the roster this fall is icing on the icing.
-- The ACC is having its annualjunketeering trip serious meeting week on Fancy Tropical Resort Island, Florida, during which they usually produce something worth talking about. This year it's the fact that they'll stick with an eight-game football schedule and follow the SEC's lead in requiring every team to play at least one OOC Power Five conference team, starting in 2017. That should make the "schedule for success" crowd happy, by which I mean not happy.** Cue the calls for an annual rivalry game with Indiana from now til forever.
The eight-game schedule vote was surprisingly close, with an 8-6 tally as the margin in favor of staying at eight games instead of nine. This is acceptable if they also abolish divisions, as will reportedly be discussed. (It's also reasonable in light of having Notre Dame sorta-kinda on the schedule all the time.)
It's this last point which should be making all the waves. The fact that the ACC is even bothering to discuss this is a giant flag, pointing in the direction of the August autonomy conference. (At which the NCAA is widely expected to hand over various powers to the ACC, SEC, B1G, Big 12, and Pac-12 that they didn't have before.) John Swofford publically lobbied for more flexibility in scheduling; that is, not having to have two divisions in order to play a CCG. If the ACC is discussing the abolition of divisions, it's likely they have the advance go-ahead from the NCAA to do so and will get it formally in August. For this reason, they may not necessarily announce anything coming out of Amelia Island, but there's hope yet.
I've already put forth my preferred scheduling model for a 14-team, 8-game league: three protected games and five rotating ones. You would play teams A, B, C, D, and E in year one and F, G, H, I, and J in year two. The pitfall, which UVA would have to lobby heavily to avoid, would be the temptation to make all the NC teams each others' protected games - we have to have UNC every year.
**I can't remember whether I've ever expressly made my feelings known on these pages about the "schedule for success" theory, which I despise as both wimpy and totally unworkable, but I'm sure it's worth a full post somewhere along the line.
I mean, just... look, I've always considered that rationality is one of my writing strengths, and I know there was like 45+ minutes worth of reasons why we lost, but I just keep on going back to the bad clear that led to Hop's first goal, essentially an empty-netter. UVA has a reputation as an outstanding clearing team and totally failed to live up to that this year; in some cases they've just completely lost sight of the 30-second time limit, and that's what killed them here.
Matt Barrett was the visible scapegoat because it was his pass that was intercepted, but, feeling compelled to go back to the Tivo for a closer look, I found out exactly how much time he had to clear the ball when he threw that pass: four seconds. Even if he had channeled Adam Ghitelman and run it there himself, he'd never have made it. 26 seconds had elapsed already thanks mainly to sheer unadulterated laziness, and the real culprit on that clear is Scott McWilliams. McWilliams floated around the field for nine seconds before tossing the ball (backwards) to Tanner Scales. Scales returned the ball a few seconds later.... and "half-assed" would be far too generous a term for McWilliams's attempt at catching it. That's why Barrett had the ball in the first place; he had to retrieve it as it rolled the wrong way.
If some people are saying there's a senior leadership problem on the team, well, that's why. And this is by no means to pin the loss on McWilliams, whose play these four years has been unequivocally an asset. You don't lose by six without everyone pitching in. But there's still the irrational fan in me that wonders how that game might've gone if the Hoos hadn't offered a sportsmanlike hand back to the already punch-drunk Jays.
As a season, it certainly wasn't a total loss. You expect Virginia lacrosse to accomplish certain things, and beating Syracuse, Hopkins, and UNC (1 outta 2 in the latter instances, anyway) do qualify. However, after a stretch of four consecutive Final Fours, and missing only two from 2002 to 2011, the natives are rightfully getting restless now that we've missed three in a row. Folks are talking succession plans. If Dom Starsia weren't the winningest D-I coach ever, the words being used might be a little more forceful.
As it is, UVA stands in about the same delicate spot that Florida State football did in about 2008 or so. (And that Penn State managed to botch pretty spectacularly.) FSU succeeded in dislodging Bobby Bowden after the boosters got antsy and it became clear that 1) they weren't going to get much farther with him and 2) he had no plans to leave. They had a couple factors helping that process: the academics scandal greased his skids out of town, and they didn't have his son on staff. FSU is how you want the replacing-a-legend process to go; Penn State is not. And Tennessee exists as the antithesis of Penn State - the fans managed to get Phil Fulmer replaced and the Vols promptly entered the crapper, from which they have yet to emerge.
I doubt there's any talk of succession in the UVA offices, but it's something that should be quietly going through the heads of the decision makers - not because immediate action is needed, but they still have to be working on a contingency plan. And that plan can't just be Joe Starsia. This is too much of a signature program to allow to go stale. If we're playing for a national title next year - hey, cancel the war. If we miss out on the quarters again, let alone Memorial Day, well.... it certainly won't stop people wondering how Mike Pressler or Charley Toomey might look on the Klockner sidelines. Me, I'm nowhere near officially adding my voice to the (still quite small) chorus calling for a change. I don't want to be Penn State but I definitely don't want to be Tennessee.** Just considering it something to keep an eye on.
**A statement made, with that particular emphasis, with consideration only for the on-field aspect of PSU's football succession.
******************************************************
-- Lots of other UVA teams are still running around scooping up Director's Cup points, though:
* Men's and women's tennis are both in the round of 16, about to face Notre Dame and Baylor, respectively.
* Ladies' golf was top-8 at their regional, earning one of 24 spots at the national championship tournament in Tulsa.
* Women's lax faces 3-seeded UNC in the quarterfinals after knocking off Princeton.
This is to say nothing of crew, which still has an ACC title to earn before heading to nationals.
-- Maryland transfer Seth Allen was really digging on UVA, until he took a trip to Blacksburg and found playing time in abundance. That Buzz Williams is apparently a hell of a recruiter. Say what you will but he's definitely injected some talent into a moribund program. Enough to be a real factor in the ACC race? No, not yet, but they seem to be working hard at leaving the laughingstock label behind.
Williams probably made the case to Allen that UVA wanted him but VT needed him, which is pretty much exactly how things stood. Allen would've been a luxury, albeit one that would've helped smooth out the roster makeup. There are plenty of worthy backcourt options already on the roster, though. Any addition this offseason who would hit the roster this fall is icing on the icing.
-- The ACC is having its annual
The eight-game schedule vote was surprisingly close, with an 8-6 tally as the margin in favor of staying at eight games instead of nine. This is acceptable if they also abolish divisions, as will reportedly be discussed. (It's also reasonable in light of having Notre Dame sorta-kinda on the schedule all the time.)
It's this last point which should be making all the waves. The fact that the ACC is even bothering to discuss this is a giant flag, pointing in the direction of the August autonomy conference. (At which the NCAA is widely expected to hand over various powers to the ACC, SEC, B1G, Big 12, and Pac-12 that they didn't have before.) John Swofford publically lobbied for more flexibility in scheduling; that is, not having to have two divisions in order to play a CCG. If the ACC is discussing the abolition of divisions, it's likely they have the advance go-ahead from the NCAA to do so and will get it formally in August. For this reason, they may not necessarily announce anything coming out of Amelia Island, but there's hope yet.
I've already put forth my preferred scheduling model for a 14-team, 8-game league: three protected games and five rotating ones. You would play teams A, B, C, D, and E in year one and F, G, H, I, and J in year two. The pitfall, which UVA would have to lobby heavily to avoid, would be the temptation to make all the NC teams each others' protected games - we have to have UNC every year.
**I can't remember whether I've ever expressly made my feelings known on these pages about the "schedule for success" theory, which I despise as both wimpy and totally unworkable, but I'm sure it's worth a full post somewhere along the line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
