Lord knows, I love the ACC. Always have, always will. But these recent delusions of gradeur are getting on my nerves.
First, the nation's best conference basketball schedule was ruined by the additions of Boston College and Virgina Tech. Then, the ACC hopelessy decided that it was a football conference and planted its championship game in Jacksonville, Fla., to the surprise of the locals and the disdain of fans, neither of whom bothered to put their rears in most of that cavernous stadium's seats.
That prompted a move to Tampa, which was even less of a draw and even more of an embarrassment on live TV. In between, the ACC haughtily announced that Charlotte could no longer host its basketball tournament because 19,000-seat Bobcats arena just wasn't big enough for this world-class event, so now we're blessed with 28,000 fans (maybe) in 70,000-seat football domes every March.
Great call.
But just when I thought I understood commissioner John Swofford's motives - feeding his nest of greedy, chirping baby chicks otherwise known as the 12 school presidents - he goes and makes a bizarre decision that seems to have nothing to do with money but everything to do with the rest of the ACC keeping Clemson in its place.
How else can you possibly explain Greenville, S.C., not getting the ACC baseball tournament in favor of Myrtle Beach, S.C.? Here's a hint: You can't.
The ACC baseball tournament is not exactly must-see TV. It excites the masses almost as much as an adult softball double-elimination bracket, so long as the bracket is being played out at Disney World. But years of paltry attendance and sagging interest can be traced almost totally to the league's decision to keep moving the competition to as many backwoods locales as possible; the only common denominator being nobody who cared lived anywhere near the field, nobody knew where that field would be the next season, and Greenville was never in the running.
Since 1996, the ACC baseball tournament has been in Durham, N.C. Also, St. Petersburg, Fla. And Durham. Durham again. Fort Mill, S.C. Back to St. Petersburg. Don't forget about Salem, Va.
What did all of these places have in common (besides Waffle House being the only place to eat)? None of them approached what the league drew for baseball during its nine years in Greenville from 1987 to 1995 (with the exception of St. Petersburg the first time). But none of them were close to Clemson, either. That apparently was more important.
This year was supposed to be Fenway Park in Boston, which sounds awesome until you realize the only reason anyone would go to the games would be to throw things at those hillbilly colleges roughing up the sacred Sox turf (Maryland, at nearly eight hours, is BY FAR the closest team to Boston besides Boston College).
But a "scheduling conflict" (told you the ACC has no sway in Boston) forced a move to Durham, and now "travel concerns" have canned Fenway in 2010 for Greensboro, N.C. OK. Travel concerns are what matter now. Only, that still doesn't make Myrtle Beach make sense.
Myrtle Beach is closer than Greenville for SOME schools - namely the only ones that seem to matter: North Carolina, N.C. State and Duke. Because Myrtle Beach is not signficantly closer to, well, any of the rest and is much farther for many.
Maryland (50 miles), Boston College (75) and Miami (30) join UNC, State and Duke in being closer to Myrtle Beach if you drive, but when you start getting into thousand-mile trips that kind of distance really doesn't matter - especially since anyone who can afford to go that far will be flying anyway.
Of the schools that are within reasonable driving distance, Myrtle Beach is actually much more of a pain in the rear to get to. Wake is closer to Greenville. So is Georgia Tech. And Virginia. And Virginia Tech. And Florida State. And, of course, Clemson.
So whose "travel concerns" are really being addressed by the move to Myrtle Beach? Almost nobody's, as far as I can tell. But, again, Clemson won't be able to get there easily, either. Again, that seems to be the biggest - and only - strike against Greenville.
Let me explain. I was at Furman when the ACC tournament was held at the G-Braves old stadium south of I-85, and that was also around the time that the tournament became relevant - thanks almost solely to Clemson fans, the best baseball fans in the ACC.
Before 1987, the ACC's record attendance at its baseball tournament was 22,638, the year before in Durham. Greenville never drew less than 30,000 and four times cracked 40 as raucous masses of orange clogged the exit ramps off of 85 and the stands at Memorial Stadium.
Tickets were tough. The atmosphere was often electric. But if you listened hard enough between people having fun you could hear the whines about Clemson's unfair "homefield advantage." Nevermind that this advantage doesn't seem to bother the ACC when every single basketball tournament ever has not been held in the states of South Carolina or Virginia and nearly every one has been in the cozy confines of Charlotte and Greensboro - about as big a homefield advantage and the Big Four could ask for outside playing on their own campuses.
But against all logic, the ACC yanked the tourney in 1996 for Durham's crumbling old park and promptly saw attendance plummet to 22,000. By the time it reached Salem in 2003, the numbers were down to 18,000 and whatever momentum the event had gained was lost.
A three-year run in Jacksonville marked a resurgence of sorts, and on paper it looks like that was a better home than even Greenville. But while the league claims attendance numbers of 66, 73 and 59,000 from 2005-07 (you could have fooled me by what I saw on TV), a comparison with Greenville's heyday is apples and oranges because the move to a round-robin format keeps teams from going home (and fans spending money).
At the G-Braves old park, a double-elimination bracket was constantly culling the fan base, and ACC also hasn't been held at Greenville's magnificent new Fluor Field, right in the heart of one of the most underrated downtowns in America.
Come on, ACC. This is getting ridiculous. Why do you keep trying to reinvent the wheel? Greenville is big enough. It's interested. It has a history of success with your tournament nowhere else can match. And, believe it or not, South Carolina is ACC country even though you've been ignoring that for the better part of 60 years.
Greenville is where your tournament belongs. Tell Carolina and State to get over it.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Furman ERA update
Looks like the Paladins will make the first SoCon tournament they have ever hosted despite the fact that they were swept by the Citadel at home last weekend. That's because the teams behind them in the standings - Samford and Wofford - also managed to get swept, so if Furman can somehow win at least one game at last-place UNC-Greensboro this weekend the Paladins are in the eight-team bracket.
Not sure if that's much consolation, but it is what it is. On a higher note - or lower if you want to go down in history - despite four straight losses Furman actually lowered its team ERA to 7.11, meaning the school record is probably safe and the staff is getting hot at the right time.
So watch out, Southern Conference.
Not sure if that's much consolation, but it is what it is. On a higher note - or lower if you want to go down in history - despite four straight losses Furman actually lowered its team ERA to 7.11, meaning the school record is probably safe and the staff is getting hot at the right time.
So watch out, Southern Conference.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Looking like a long summer
I had low expectations for the Braves entering this season. I thought their pitching additions would help a little but their offense would be no better than last year's punchless attack, and guess what? More than month in it looks like I was right.
Of course, it didn't take a rocket science to make those predictions. You just had to be able to read the age column on the roster. The rebuilt starting staff consisted of guys who would be 33, 34 and 36 by the end of the season, and there was no reason to believe that the only dangerous hitter on your team would get better by turning 37. But, sadly, all those gray beards are not the problem. Far from it.
Javier Vazquez, Kenshin Kawakami and Derek Lowe, the hurlers in question, have by and large done a good job. If nothing else, they've been an improvement over last year, and that's all you could ask for from such a no-name bunch. Chipper Jones isn't off to a great start, but a .280 batting average, three homers and a .467 slugging percentage isn't awful.
Much more disturbing for both this season and the future of the franchise has been the utter lack of improvement from young players. Outside of Brian McCann, currently out with a vision problem that could ruin his season, and Yunel Escobar the farm system has fallen on its face, and that's the simple reason Atlanta is 11-15 and sinking fast.
Kelly Johnson, now hitting .218 and platooning with Omar Infante in a season where he was supposed to become the next Chase Utley, is looking more and more like a streaky head case. Rookie center fielder Jordan Schafer has struck out 11 times in his last five games - including an remarkable run of back-to-back-to-back hat tricks - and leads the MAJORS with a staggering 34 whiffs in 84 at bats. He also doesn't hit for power or steal bases and appears to be overmatched to the point that the Braves may have little choice but to send him down to Triple-A.
But in my view nothing is killing the Braves' offense more than Jeff Francoeur, who still can't get on base, make contact when he needs to or hit home runs. He didn't produce last season, and he's not producing this season despite playing every, single day and leading the team in at bats (again).
Going into spring training, much was made of Frenchy's rebuilt swing and renewed plate discipline, and the nine strikeouts so far in 2009 are definitely an improvement. Unfortunately, that extra contact his resulted in little more than Francoeur becoming a below-average poke hitter considering his pedestrian .282 average and only eight extra-base hits - three home runs - in 103 ABs. He also has drawn a paltry four walks, which is the same number of free passes Brandon Jones earned in five games before he was sent down to Triple-A earlier this week.
Casey Kotchman, the decidedly weak consolation prize Atlanta got for Mark Texeira (and we'll go more into the havoc Texeira has wreaked on the entire franchise later), seems to have everything you'd want from a 26-year-old first baseman hitting .297, assuming you like your first basemen to have four - four - RBIs in 26 games with no homers or stolen bases.
Jo-Jo Reyes has devolved from top prospect to washout with a 5-14 record and a 5.85 ERA over three seasons of inexplicably not being able to get anybody out with a 94-mph left-handed fastball, and outside of Tommy Hanson there's precious little else to even hope for out of the minors.
The Braves rank near the bottom of the league in home runs with 20 and are dead last - by a lot - with just four stolen bases. Josh Anderson, banished to Detroit to make room for Schafer in the spring, has more than that by himself (6) in part-time duty (gee, I wonder if maybe Cox should have kept him around?).
In short, the Braves are average, boring and seem to have little potential. And it's only May. Oh boy.
Of course, it didn't take a rocket science to make those predictions. You just had to be able to read the age column on the roster. The rebuilt starting staff consisted of guys who would be 33, 34 and 36 by the end of the season, and there was no reason to believe that the only dangerous hitter on your team would get better by turning 37. But, sadly, all those gray beards are not the problem. Far from it.
Javier Vazquez, Kenshin Kawakami and Derek Lowe, the hurlers in question, have by and large done a good job. If nothing else, they've been an improvement over last year, and that's all you could ask for from such a no-name bunch. Chipper Jones isn't off to a great start, but a .280 batting average, three homers and a .467 slugging percentage isn't awful.
Much more disturbing for both this season and the future of the franchise has been the utter lack of improvement from young players. Outside of Brian McCann, currently out with a vision problem that could ruin his season, and Yunel Escobar the farm system has fallen on its face, and that's the simple reason Atlanta is 11-15 and sinking fast.
Kelly Johnson, now hitting .218 and platooning with Omar Infante in a season where he was supposed to become the next Chase Utley, is looking more and more like a streaky head case. Rookie center fielder Jordan Schafer has struck out 11 times in his last five games - including an remarkable run of back-to-back-to-back hat tricks - and leads the MAJORS with a staggering 34 whiffs in 84 at bats. He also doesn't hit for power or steal bases and appears to be overmatched to the point that the Braves may have little choice but to send him down to Triple-A.
But in my view nothing is killing the Braves' offense more than Jeff Francoeur, who still can't get on base, make contact when he needs to or hit home runs. He didn't produce last season, and he's not producing this season despite playing every, single day and leading the team in at bats (again).
Going into spring training, much was made of Frenchy's rebuilt swing and renewed plate discipline, and the nine strikeouts so far in 2009 are definitely an improvement. Unfortunately, that extra contact his resulted in little more than Francoeur becoming a below-average poke hitter considering his pedestrian .282 average and only eight extra-base hits - three home runs - in 103 ABs. He also has drawn a paltry four walks, which is the same number of free passes Brandon Jones earned in five games before he was sent down to Triple-A earlier this week.
Casey Kotchman, the decidedly weak consolation prize Atlanta got for Mark Texeira (and we'll go more into the havoc Texeira has wreaked on the entire franchise later), seems to have everything you'd want from a 26-year-old first baseman hitting .297, assuming you like your first basemen to have four - four - RBIs in 26 games with no homers or stolen bases.
Jo-Jo Reyes has devolved from top prospect to washout with a 5-14 record and a 5.85 ERA over three seasons of inexplicably not being able to get anybody out with a 94-mph left-handed fastball, and outside of Tommy Hanson there's precious little else to even hope for out of the minors.
The Braves rank near the bottom of the league in home runs with 20 and are dead last - by a lot - with just four stolen bases. Josh Anderson, banished to Detroit to make room for Schafer in the spring, has more than that by himself (6) in part-time duty (gee, I wonder if maybe Cox should have kept him around?).
In short, the Braves are average, boring and seem to have little potential. And it's only May. Oh boy.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Which reminds me ....
Looking up just how awful Furman's pitching has been this season got me thinking about my senior year, 1993, and how awful our pitching was. My fading memory said we were a pretty good hitting bunch that was derailed by giving up nine runs every game, but I had no idea. On both fronts.
We hit .300 as a team that season, which is one of only five times since '63 that a Furman team has managed to do that (it had happened only once prior to '93). Wow. Props to us. Yet we finished only 17-22 and did not qualify for my senior year SoCon tourney because of an injury-riddled pitching staff that managed an ugly 6.64 ERA - sixth worst in school history (soon to be seventh).
I'll never forget standing in center field trying to catch my breath between line drives in the gaps, watching lead after lead evaporate. It was miserable, and I know what this current Paladin crew is going through. Still, it's pretty amazing they're 21-23 with that pitching and only a .282 team average.
We hit .300 as a team that season, which is one of only five times since '63 that a Furman team has managed to do that (it had happened only once prior to '93). Wow. Props to us. Yet we finished only 17-22 and did not qualify for my senior year SoCon tourney because of an injury-riddled pitching staff that managed an ugly 6.64 ERA - sixth worst in school history (soon to be seventh).
I'll never forget standing in center field trying to catch my breath between line drives in the gaps, watching lead after lead evaporate. It was miserable, and I know what this current Paladin crew is going through. Still, it's pretty amazing they're 21-23 with that pitching and only a .282 team average.
Paladins in danger of missing tournament they're hosting. Ouch
The Southern Conference baseball tournament has been in Charleston, S.C., since 1990 and before that it was in Asheville, N.C., so when the league moves its competition to the Greenville Drive's beautiful home digs later this month that will be a historic occasion. Well, as historic as anything can be with SoCon baseball, but you get the point.
You'd think this would be great news for my alma mater and co-host, Furman, and it would be if it wasn't for the nagging little problem of the Paladins actually getting to play in said tournament. With two conference weekends left, FU is sitting precariously in eighth out of 12 teams - known otherwise as the last spot that qualifies for the field.
Furman closes with Citadel (no, I won't call Citadel "The" Citadel because, 1, I hate the school, and, 2, it's stupid. So I'm probably doing Pretend Soldier U a favor, but anyway ...), which is tied for fourth in the standings, and UNC-Greensboro, which, at 4-18 in the league, sits comfortably in last.
Davidson is two games ahead of Furman while Samford and Wofford are two back, so you have to figure the 'Dins will make it barring a major collapse. That's good. I guess. What won't be so good, should it happen, would be giving one of the school's all-time worst pitching staffs a chance to add to its ugly numbers. And keep in mind that using the terms "all-time worst" and "Furman baseball" in the same sentence is not a sentence to be taken lightly.
Records are available back to 1963, and only twice has the school had a a worse team ERA than 2009's 7.28: 7.32 in 1985 and 7.51 in 1988. That is not an easy record to break, but it's entirely possible.
Amazingly, two teams in the SoCon have even worse pitching than FU this season: Samford (7.29 ERA) and Wofford (7.91). Sadly, all the potential fireworks won't light up downtown Greenville since, obviously, no more than one and perhaps none of these stellear "pitching" staffs will make the field.
You'd think this would be great news for my alma mater and co-host, Furman, and it would be if it wasn't for the nagging little problem of the Paladins actually getting to play in said tournament. With two conference weekends left, FU is sitting precariously in eighth out of 12 teams - known otherwise as the last spot that qualifies for the field.
Furman closes with Citadel (no, I won't call Citadel "The" Citadel because, 1, I hate the school, and, 2, it's stupid. So I'm probably doing Pretend Soldier U a favor, but anyway ...), which is tied for fourth in the standings, and UNC-Greensboro, which, at 4-18 in the league, sits comfortably in last.
Davidson is two games ahead of Furman while Samford and Wofford are two back, so you have to figure the 'Dins will make it barring a major collapse. That's good. I guess. What won't be so good, should it happen, would be giving one of the school's all-time worst pitching staffs a chance to add to its ugly numbers. And keep in mind that using the terms "all-time worst" and "Furman baseball" in the same sentence is not a sentence to be taken lightly.
Records are available back to 1963, and only twice has the school had a a worse team ERA than 2009's 7.28: 7.32 in 1985 and 7.51 in 1988. That is not an easy record to break, but it's entirely possible.
Amazingly, two teams in the SoCon have even worse pitching than FU this season: Samford (7.29 ERA) and Wofford (7.91). Sadly, all the potential fireworks won't light up downtown Greenville since, obviously, no more than one and perhaps none of these stellear "pitching" staffs will make the field.
Monday, March 2, 2009
And down the stretch we come...
Only three games remain, and at 9-16 overall, 3-11 in the ACC our beloved Cavaliers are all-but-assured of the program's worst season of the modern era. Three losses, and Virginia finishes 9-19, 3-13, which would be the first team since 1967-68 to fail to crack double digits in the win column, and it will take two victories to reach 11 - the current modern lowest win total set in 1997-98. Thirteen conference losses also would tie '97-98 for the worst in school history.
Remaining is Clemson on the road, Maryland at home and the opening round of the league tournament - most likely against Clemson or Boston College. Could the Cavaliers win one of those games? Sure. And thanks to the debacle that is Paul Hewitt in Atlanta, they won't even finish last in the regular-season standings. So, there's that. As if anyone cares.
The bigger story, from a Virginia perspective, is that this season marks a new low in a long decline that has seen Virginia basketball win 20 games twice in the last 14 years - and counting - with a combined league record (assuming the Cavs lose their final two of '08-09) of 87-137. That would be a winning percentage of 38.8 percent for those of you keeping score at home, which means that Virginia beats an ACC opponent about as often as Sammy Zeglinski makes a shot.
Yeah, it's that bad bad.
Meanwhile, Virginia is 3-11 in the ACC tournament over that span (thank God for conference expansion because all three of those wins came either in the play-in game or the first round) and 1-2 in two NCAA tournament appearances. Ladies and gentlemen, I officially give you the worst program in the ACC.
But we're here to look at the bright side, and the bright side is that as bad as things have gotten it's still a long way from as bad as it has been in Charlottesville. I did a little research, and let's just say that Virginia has a long tradition of not exactly being a powerhouse. Check this out:
The ACC began in 1954. From 1954 until 1977 Virginia finished last or next-to-last 13 times. In the glorious 1960s, beginning with the 1959-60 campaign, the Cavs were dead last in the standings for five straight seasons. Then, they finished seventh of eight teams for the next four seasons.
It wasn't until '68-69 that they won even 10 games (going 10-15), and it wasn't until '70-71 that they had their first winning seasoon (15-11) since 1953-54. Along the way, Virginia had such memorable hits as 6-19 in '56-57, 6-18 in '59-60, 5-18 in '61-62, 5-20 in '62-63 and, the granddaddy of them all, 3-23 in '60-61 that has been matched only by Clemson's 2-21 showing in '54-55 as the all-time standard for ACC putridity.
Wow. I guess this really leaves only one question: Why have I been rooting for this program for so long? Clearly, there's a psychological explanation and most likely a disorder that needs to be addressed, stemming from a dysfunctional relationship with my father.
Of course, that's another column. The lessons here are two-fold: Dave Leitao isn't as bad as he could be, and there is no rational reason to think Virginia should ever be any better than they are - at least for any extended period of time.
Marinate in that one for a while.
Remaining is Clemson on the road, Maryland at home and the opening round of the league tournament - most likely against Clemson or Boston College. Could the Cavaliers win one of those games? Sure. And thanks to the debacle that is Paul Hewitt in Atlanta, they won't even finish last in the regular-season standings. So, there's that. As if anyone cares.
The bigger story, from a Virginia perspective, is that this season marks a new low in a long decline that has seen Virginia basketball win 20 games twice in the last 14 years - and counting - with a combined league record (assuming the Cavs lose their final two of '08-09) of 87-137. That would be a winning percentage of 38.8 percent for those of you keeping score at home, which means that Virginia beats an ACC opponent about as often as Sammy Zeglinski makes a shot.
Yeah, it's that bad bad.
Meanwhile, Virginia is 3-11 in the ACC tournament over that span (thank God for conference expansion because all three of those wins came either in the play-in game or the first round) and 1-2 in two NCAA tournament appearances. Ladies and gentlemen, I officially give you the worst program in the ACC.
But we're here to look at the bright side, and the bright side is that as bad as things have gotten it's still a long way from as bad as it has been in Charlottesville. I did a little research, and let's just say that Virginia has a long tradition of not exactly being a powerhouse. Check this out:
The ACC began in 1954. From 1954 until 1977 Virginia finished last or next-to-last 13 times. In the glorious 1960s, beginning with the 1959-60 campaign, the Cavs were dead last in the standings for five straight seasons. Then, they finished seventh of eight teams for the next four seasons.
It wasn't until '68-69 that they won even 10 games (going 10-15), and it wasn't until '70-71 that they had their first winning seasoon (15-11) since 1953-54. Along the way, Virginia had such memorable hits as 6-19 in '56-57, 6-18 in '59-60, 5-18 in '61-62, 5-20 in '62-63 and, the granddaddy of them all, 3-23 in '60-61 that has been matched only by Clemson's 2-21 showing in '54-55 as the all-time standard for ACC putridity.
Wow. I guess this really leaves only one question: Why have I been rooting for this program for so long? Clearly, there's a psychological explanation and most likely a disorder that needs to be addressed, stemming from a dysfunctional relationship with my father.
Of course, that's another column. The lessons here are two-fold: Dave Leitao isn't as bad as he could be, and there is no rational reason to think Virginia should ever be any better than they are - at least for any extended period of time.
Marinate in that one for a while.
Friday, February 6, 2009
This year's Virginia team could go down in history - and I do mean down
Virginia basketball is bad this season. Really, really bad. But exactly how bad?
I wanted to find out, and it was totally worth it.
Turn out, Dave Leitao's fourth team has a chance to be special. These Cavaliers could be the worst bunch since what I have deemed the beginning of the modern era, Terry Holland's first year as coach in 1974-75.
Sure, I could rate the team on the obvious: A 7-11 overall record and a half-game from last in the league standings. Four of six ACC losses by 10 or more points (and counting). One player on the roster who looks like he could start for any of the 11 other ACC teams. Or that Virginia is 12th of 12 in (we're gonna need a bullet list for this):
Quite well, turns out.
I've narrowed the list of the three worst Virginia teams of the last 34 years to these:
Now, I've been surprised at late-season surges before (seems that the '98-99 crew had one) and it could certainly happen again, but assuming this team keeps stumbling along at its current no-sign-of-getting-it rate, we can chalk down six more losses right now: at North Carolina, at Florida State, Clemson at home, at Clemson, Wake Forest at home, first round of ACC tournament.
That leaves the Hoos at 7-17, 1-11. I know, I know, Wake has lost some weird games lately and Virginia will be in the play-in round in Atlanta, but the Deacs will not get embarrassed again and Virginia never wins in the ACC tournament, ever.
So let's move to the four slim chances at wins: Virginia Tech at home, at N.C. State, Miami at home, Maryland at home. The Hokies are 14-7 and much more talented than the Cavs, but it is a rivalry game and Virginia did play them tough in Blacksburg. Still, I don't see it happening. State is just 2-5 in the league and reeling, but the game is in Raleigh. Virginia wins on the road barely more than it wins in the ACC tournament (witness the unreal choke losses two years ago that cost the Cavs the league title). Again, don't see it happening.
We're left with the Hurricanes and the Terps. Miami is 15-7, but the Hurricanes stink on the road almost as much as Virginia and are prone to Georgia Tech-like bouts of stupid shots and turnovers. Maryland handled Virginia in College Park, but since then Gary Williams' team is in flame-out mode and this, too is a rivalry game. I'm going to go as high as 40 percent that the Cavaliers win one of these games.
That means a final record of 8-20, 2-14. Definitely the school's worst of my arbitrary modern era. How would that rate with ACC's collective worst?
Right up - I mean, down - there, my friend.
Single-digit season wins is select company, as are 20 losses. Only six teams have pulled the latter feat and eight the former. The list:
Most overall losses
I'm one of these guys who prays for every hurricane to reach Category 5 and for every blizzard to drop three feet of snow, so I won't lie: I say we've come this far. Let's go down this road until we're eaten by some kind of giant spider. If nothing else, the chance a fourth-worst team in ACC history will give me a reason to watch for the next month.
And, lord knows, as a Virginia fan I have so little.
I wanted to find out, and it was totally worth it.
Turn out, Dave Leitao's fourth team has a chance to be special. These Cavaliers could be the worst bunch since what I have deemed the beginning of the modern era, Terry Holland's first year as coach in 1974-75.
Sure, I could rate the team on the obvious: A 7-11 overall record and a half-game from last in the league standings. Four of six ACC losses by 10 or more points (and counting). One player on the roster who looks like he could start for any of the 11 other ACC teams. Or that Virginia is 12th of 12 in (we're gonna need a bullet list for this):
- Scoring defense
- Scoring margin (the only team getting outscored)
- Field goal percentage
- Field goal percentage defense (that's an impressive two-fer, by the way)
- 3-point field goal percentage
- 3-point field goal percentage defense (thanks Maryland)
- Assists (thanks Florida State)
- 3-point field goals made (Georgia Tech, Wake Forest are worse - somehow)
- Blocked shots (Assane Sene and Jeff Allen single-handedly hold off Miami and N.C. State)
- Assist-to-turnover ratio (Georgia Tech and Florida State; how the hell has Florida State won 17 games?)
Quite well, turns out.
I've narrowed the list of the three worst Virginia teams of the last 34 years to these:
- 1976-77 team that went 12-17 and 2-10 in ACC, seventh of seven teams
- 1997-98 team that went 11-19, 3-13 in ACC, ninth of nine teams
- 1998-99 team that went 14-16, 4-12 in ACC, ninth of nine teams
Now, I've been surprised at late-season surges before (seems that the '98-99 crew had one) and it could certainly happen again, but assuming this team keeps stumbling along at its current no-sign-of-getting-it rate, we can chalk down six more losses right now: at North Carolina, at Florida State, Clemson at home, at Clemson, Wake Forest at home, first round of ACC tournament.
That leaves the Hoos at 7-17, 1-11. I know, I know, Wake has lost some weird games lately and Virginia will be in the play-in round in Atlanta, but the Deacs will not get embarrassed again and Virginia never wins in the ACC tournament, ever.
So let's move to the four slim chances at wins: Virginia Tech at home, at N.C. State, Miami at home, Maryland at home. The Hokies are 14-7 and much more talented than the Cavs, but it is a rivalry game and Virginia did play them tough in Blacksburg. Still, I don't see it happening. State is just 2-5 in the league and reeling, but the game is in Raleigh. Virginia wins on the road barely more than it wins in the ACC tournament (witness the unreal choke losses two years ago that cost the Cavs the league title). Again, don't see it happening.
We're left with the Hurricanes and the Terps. Miami is 15-7, but the Hurricanes stink on the road almost as much as Virginia and are prone to Georgia Tech-like bouts of stupid shots and turnovers. Maryland handled Virginia in College Park, but since then Gary Williams' team is in flame-out mode and this, too is a rivalry game. I'm going to go as high as 40 percent that the Cavaliers win one of these games.
That means a final record of 8-20, 2-14. Definitely the school's worst of my arbitrary modern era. How would that rate with ACC's collective worst?
Right up - I mean, down - there, my friend.
Single-digit season wins is select company, as are 20 losses. Only six teams have pulled the latter feat and eight the former. The list:
Most overall losses
- Georgia Tech, 23, 1981
- Wake Forest, 21, 1986
- Miami, 20, 2007
- North Carolina, 20, 2002
- Maryland, 20, 1989
- Clemson, 20, 1983
- Georgia Tech, 3-23, 1981
- Wake Forest, 8-21, 1986
- North Carolina, 8-20, 2002
- N.C. State, 8-19, 1993
- Georgia Tech 8-18, 1980
- Maryland, 9-20, 1989
- Georgia Tech, 9-18, 1997
- Maryland, 9-17, 1987
- Maryland, 0-14, 1987
- Wake Forest, 0-14, 1986
- Georgia Tech, 0-14, 1981
- Maryland, 1-13, 1989
- Georgia Tech, 1-13, 1980
I'm one of these guys who prays for every hurricane to reach Category 5 and for every blizzard to drop three feet of snow, so I won't lie: I say we've come this far. Let's go down this road until we're eaten by some kind of giant spider. If nothing else, the chance a fourth-worst team in ACC history will give me a reason to watch for the next month.
And, lord knows, as a Virginia fan I have so little.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
