(03-14-2019 08:14 PM)Tribester Wrote:  Who would have predicted that of all people a female Renaissance Literature major from Carleton College would become the most pro athletics president of W&M since Paschall. Maybe if she had been president back then instead of Graves we would all be watching W&M play in the ACC tourney this weekend instead of arguing on a CAA fan board about the unfairness of firing our former coach. A coach by the way with a .457 win percentage at W&M. A coach with a .434 conference win percentage in the CAA. ONE shared conference championship in SIXTEEN years. Zero wins against ranked teams over sixteen seasons. ZERO NIT postseason wins. ZERO NCAA tourney appearances, even with arguably the best player in school history on the roster. No other school would have allowed this to go on for sixteen years besides W&M. I am glad that Tony will get all the money that is contractually owed him because he earned it. Nothing else however, like one more year, is guaranteed to any coach. That is the nature of the coaching profession plain and simple. I am sure Tony understands that as much as anybody. If he is such a hot commodity on the open market, he should get a chance for a better job at a bigger school, where he can make more money, win, and prove doubters like me and Huge wrong. Time will tell.

Good grief! This is malicious.

Let me jog your memory:

https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-the...35554.html

That the rebuttal is a link to a loss from five years ago really speaks to the divide here.

FWIW - When President Rowe spoke to this alumni group and to me personally afterwards, I came away with the impression that she is VERY knowledgeable about sports and W&M's particular situation. She impressed me and encouraged me with her authentic interest in W&M sports to donate a lot more money to W&M basketball.

But then they fired Shaver....

Yes, I am upset at the loss of Coach Shaver. Right now, I just think it is wrong and not consistent with the values of W&M to let him go at this time. I worry that AD Huge just doesn't understand William & Mary.

That said, I still want to see what happens next before I pass final judgment. I understand much of the reaction on this board, but I think most of it is hyperbolic at this time.

As I have said before, though, if we wind up with the basketball equivalent of Mike London, I will be very upset about paying an extra $1.7 million to lose a very good coach who represented W&M admirably just to get a mediocre coach who likely will perform worse under the current circumstances.

But I would love for President Rowe and AD Huge to validate this decision with a hire that makes sense and proves the detractors wrong. Time will tell.

(03-14-2019 10:09 PM)Marshall Wythe Wrote:  FWIW - When President Rowe spoke to this alumni group and to me personally afterwards, I came away with the impression that she is VERY knowledgeable about sports and W&M's particular situation. She impressed me and encouraged me with her authentic interest in W&M sports to donate a lot more money to W&M basketball.

Yeah, maybe because she knew a big buyout was imminent.

(03-14-2019 08:24 PM)ttgwm02 Wrote:  He also won games, and was on track for his best squad ever next year.

Thornton, Tarpey, Prewitt, and Dixon would beg to differ with that statement.

(03-14-2019 06:32 PM)TDenverFan Wrote:  

(03-14-2019 05:23 PM)Pete24 Wrote:  Here’s my point. Why is making the NCAA Tourney such a Holy Grail? What has it done for Virginia schools like Hampton U or Radford? Has it raised their overall stature? And what about George Mason & VCU, both of which had Final 4 runs in ‘06 & ‘11, respectively? Did it raise their academic profile? I don’t think it did.

It definitely raised their national profile. The year after VCU's Final 4 run, they saw a 20% increase in applications, and an increase in out of state students (who pay more in tuition).

George Mason estimated that they got close to $700 million worht of free advertising by making the final four. Their applications have rose 350% (though it would be foolish to attribute all of that to basketball). They saw more out of state students apply, and an uptick in alumni donations.

https://www.educationdive.com/news/how-m...es/234331/

Who here was familiar with Butler University before their final four runs?

(03-14-2019 08:24 PM)ttgwm02 Wrote:  i'm also not sure the schools cited as positive examples of a post-NCAA tournament "bump" are peer institutions. Butler and VCU and George Mason focus on a very different type of student. Butler closer, but still quite distinct. Reality, not arrogance. And these schools all made significant runs.

Time to jump in on this. ttgwm02 is right about this. First off, a "run" is usually considered to be to the Elite Eight or to, at least, the Sweet Sixteen. The GMU, VCU, and Butler runs you are talking about were all to the FINAL FOUR! Yes, that got them some publicity - duh! - but not analogous to what our none-or-one win first appearance would be. Moreover, VCU has actually gone to the dance for about the last eight straight years, so their exposure is more of the long-term type (they would like to be Gonzaga). However, W&M making their first trip to the dance is going to be just like most other first-timers: starry-eyed and deer in the headlights and a quick exit. It will take several trips close to each other before a school/team would feel comfortable enough to actually play their best game and expect one or two wins every year. W&M is not going to reach that stage in my lifetime (although obviously Huge and Rowe want to get there - but it is a pipe dream). Until then, we would be a media darling for a few weeks and then fade from public consciousness. Now that Northwestern broke through two years ago, does anyone remember that now (or care)?

However, what really prompted me to write was all this talk of increased applications. In so far as that would apply to W&M, SO WHAT?! W&M already gets thousands more quality applications now than they could possibly admit (based on school size limitations). We are already getting the cream of the crop both in state and out of state -- and turning more than 50% of them away. All of the smart kids already know about W&M and are already applying there if they are interested. So why in the heck do we need thousands of more applications (of probably lower quality students because we were already attracting most of the top tier) that we will just wind up rejecting anyway? To bolster some phony algorithm like what favored TCU?

The "exposure" thing is the same way. It is just transitory -- especially so and especially shorter for no-wins-or-one-win teams. W&M already is on every list of the top colleges in America. That is the kind of exposure that a university needs, not the kind that comes from fleeting athletic prowess and sacrificing your morals for winning.

Now, I will agree that there are some benefits to making the NCAAs. Alum and fan morale is a top one. That also leads to another top one: increased alumni giving, donations, and merchandise sales. I am all aboard for those. There is one last one -- which is the one that I think that Rowe/Huge are most enamored with -- which is the extra money a school gets for every NCAA share. Each game is worth a share so obviously the more you win the more shares you get. I think it is their plan to completely fund the athletic department with all the money they think they will get from shares. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT, IN PRINCIPLE. That is, a self-funding athletic department would be beyond great. However, as I have said, it is how they went about it (firing Tony) that leaves me in shock and frightened that W&M will fall into that inescapable maw of corruption that is big-time college athletics. Firing the winningest coach in your basketball history pursuing this dream makes me wonder if the culture they are spawning to gain it is worth it.

W&M is slowly dropping down the national rankings, and something must be done or we will be outside the top 50 in the next 20 years.

If investing in athletics is the way to keep us there, let's go.

(03-14-2019 10:03 PM)Tank55 Wrote:  That the rebuttal is a link to a loss from five years ago really speaks to the divide here.

The link is an article about the uniqueness of W&M that would allow a quality man and quality coach to hold the position for 16 years because of that uniqueness.

The link is an article about W&M’s best recent shot at making the Dance when arguably the best player in W&M history draws a charge that isn’t called, misses the last shot, and doesn’t pass to Tim. Any one of those things goes differently, and the “basis” for the firing of Shaver does not happen.

The link is an article about being up 6 with a minute to go, and missing the front end of a one and one. That goes differently, and the “basis” for the firing of Shaver does not happen.

Finally, I got information yesterday that, in January...JANUARY ... it was known/rumored that this was Shaver’s last year. If true, what does that tell you?

If true, this has nothing to do with his record or the Dance. Let that sink in.

Just because I am irate at the front end of this (the firing of Tony), I await the back end (the hiring of a new coach) with an open mind.

(03-15-2019 05:39 AM)nj alum Wrote:  Just because I am irate at the front end of this (the firing of Tony), I await the back end (the hiring of a new coach) with an open mind.

This is exactly where I am. Making a great hire will go a long way in healing the community wounds. An uninspired hire that regresses the program will lead to years of what ifs and why's.

It tells me that 15.5 years was enough for Huge to evaluate Shaver's potential to take the program to where she feels it can be (or, if you rather, if Shaver is the guy to steward the long overdue sustained investment in the program). Honestly, everyone who still cares about this program should pray that this was a well-planned and fully thought out maneuver. A reactionary decision is what would be damning.

"To take the program where she feels it can be"- What does that mean? Students don't show up for games and haven't for decades (even with Marcus Thornton and Nathan Knight on the floor); Locals haven't shown up in great numbers since the Balanis and Bruce Parkhill days (40 years ago); Who amongst us think that on a consistent basis we're going to the NCAA tournament? Really? Would that require a much looser admissions standard? What kind of financial commitment would that take? Where is that money coming from? Not only initially but on an ongoing basis. Plenty of folks bitched about the recent seat license fee for both basketball and football season tickets. Who thinks that there's an audience out there, just waiting to pour money into College sports? Maybe a bunch of Walter Zables will appear on the horizon, and that's always appreciated but if we start getting into a financial arms race to fund our athletic programs, I don't see that being a winning recipe.

(03-15-2019 07:10 AM)Tank55 Wrote:  It tells me that 15.5 years was enough for Huge to evaluate Shaver's potential to take the program to where she feels it can be (or, if you rather, if Shaver is the guy to steward the long overdue sustained investment in the program). Honestly, everyone who still cares about this program should pray that this was a well-planned and fully thought out maneuver. A reactionary decision is what would be damning.

I think you're wrong, and here's why.

The Laycock situation was handled perfectly. Jimmye went out on his own terms (maybe with a little behind the scenes push). Props to the AD.

Now, it's Shaver's turn. You would think that the same thing would happen. It didn't. Why not? It wasn't a contract issue. There's no scandal. The CAA season had started well. Something happened in the winter of 2018-2019 that forced the AD's hand (the January rumor that I heard for the first time yesterday), so that Tony would not see 2019-2020 ("the year"). Something smells.

I'm actually impressed with the AD's statement, becoming unavailable so that she didn't have to obfuscate on what really went down, and having the buyout ducks all lined up. The III rumors are pretty cool, too, even though he wouldn't be my choice. Program's come a long way since the last hire was not a D-1 guy.

This is not about the record. This is not about the Dance. This is not about a diversity fire / hire.

I think daggers came out in the winter of 2018-2019. I don't believe that the AD held any of those daggers. Who held the daggers? No idea. Why did they hold the daggers? No idea.

There are survivors to every massacre. What really went down will come out eventually, and those who held the daggers, and their reasons, will become known.

(03-14-2019 10:51 PM)Zorch Wrote:  

(03-14-2019 10:09 PM)Marshall Wythe Wrote:  FWIW - When President Rowe spoke to this alumni group and to me personally afterwards, I came away with the impression that she is VERY knowledgeable about sports and W&M's particular situation. She impressed me and encouraged me with her authentic interest in W&M sports to donate a lot more money to W&M basketball.

Yeah, maybe because she knew a big buyout was imminent.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my comment, but she did not once bring up anything about donations. Just listening to her enthusiasm and interest in Tribe sports was enough to make me think that I should give more money, because I felt like it would be spent well. But, as I said before, that was before we spent $1.7 million to fire an honorable, well liked, and very good coach.

The funny thing is that I wish I had posted this information before the Shaver firing (but, of course, had no clue that would happen). I think if I had posted this info before his firing, the reactions would have been largely positive and more supportive of the benefits of the College's first NCAA bid. I think you can be opposed to the Shaver firing and also strongly support a focus on getting to the tournament.

I think it's perfectly legitimate to propose "make the NCAA tournament regularly" as a goal for our men's basketball team. If we are not interested in periodically fielding a top team, what are we doing in division one?

Is it "the biggest problem" facing William and Mary? Of course not. I'm not sure what the Pres. meant when she framed it this way, but I wasn't there so maybe she was being a little tongue-in-cheek, or working the room, or something. Whatever. As long as the basketball tail never wags the University dog, I'm okay with it. Do I agree with the Shaver decision? Not really, not yet anyway. The unceremonious dismissal, the big buyout, and the uncertainty that always comes with replacing the key man make me uneasy. But that is a separate issue.

Rowe is saying the same thing that many of us have said for years. An NCAA tournament appearance would put a lot of new eyeballs on William and Mary. If we popped into the round of 32, the school's website would crash from the attention, I guarantee it. Tens of millions of people watch March Madness. We would be a media darling. Every high school kid and parent-of-teenagers in America would have to read our name when they fill out their bracket. You know it's going to piss you off a little bit when you have to read "Northeastern" on there again this year. Tell me I'm wrong. Go ahead.

A lot of people who live in Virginia have an outsized sense of William and Mary's importance and national profile. Most Americans don't really know what William and Mary is, where it is located, or anything about its history or current status. I was routinely asked if I was attending a Catholic school, or if I was in Maryland or Virginia ("Mary" really throws them off for some reason), by the people back home. So maybe we'll be "that school in Virginia with the basketball team" but that's better than nothing.

And yes, a nationally interesting basketball team would draw students and townies to home basketball games who have previously been reluctant or unlikely to attend. Richmond and Old Dominion drew over 6,000 per game in 2017-18. George Mason drew 4,200, Hampton drew 3,100 and VCU drew 7,600. We drew 2,600, which is pretty strong for a CAA school. I don't see any reason why we couldn't average 4,000 a game (here comes the litany of old excuses). Williamsburg, James City County, and York County comprise 155,000 people and growing. A lowball estimate says 15% are at least casual college basketball fans (in 2017 Gallup found that 38% of Americans described themselves as college basketball fans). That's three jam-packed Kaplan Arenas full of people. Go get them.

(03-15-2019 01:59 AM)soccerguy315 Wrote:  W&M is slowly dropping down the national rankings, and something must be done or we will be outside the top 50 in the next 20 years.

If investing in athletics is the way to keep us there, let's go.

So, a slip in academic standing can be fixed by prioritizing athletics? How has that worked out for Alabama's academic profile?

(03-15-2019 05:39 AM)nj alum Wrote:  Finally, I got information yesterday that, in January...JANUARY ... it was known/rumored that this was Shaver’s last year. If true, what does that tell you?

If true, this has nothing to do with his record or the Dance. Let that sink in.

I have no inside info, but it certainly would not surprise me if alarm bells were ringing in late January after the 5-game losing streak (including Elon at home and UNCW on the road) brought the team's record to 7-14, 3-6 on Jan. 26.

Perhaps promises were made to somebody at that point, or discussions were so far along, that it was considered preferable to ignore the results for the rest of the season rather than backing off from whatever was in the works.

Which would be (is) a crying shame. The late season turnaround, to me, was a great accomplishment for Tony.

(03-15-2019 09:55 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(03-15-2019 01:59 AM)soccerguy315 Wrote:  W&M is slowly dropping down the national rankings, and something must be done or we will be outside the top 50 in the next 20 years.

If investing in athletics is the way to keep us there, let's go.

So, a slip in academic standing can be fixed by prioritizing athletics? How has that worked out for Alabama's academic profile?

I know what you’re trying to say, but it has worked out real well for Alabama’s academic profile.

Alabama is offering Jersey kids free academic rides with the football money.

I would go there in a heartbeat if I was 18 now.

(03-15-2019 01:59 AM)soccerguy315 Wrote:  W&M is slowly dropping down the national rankings, and something must be done or we will be outside the top 50 in the next 20 years.

If investing in athletics is the way to keep us there, let's go.

(03-15-2019 10:21 AM)nj alum Wrote:  

(03-15-2019 09:55 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(03-15-2019 01:59 AM)soccerguy315 Wrote:  W&M is slowly dropping down the national rankings, and something must be done or we will be outside the top 50 in the next 20 years.

If investing in athletics is the way to keep us there, let's go.

So, a slip in academic standing can be fixed by prioritizing athletics? How has that worked out for Alabama's academic profile?

I know what you’re trying to say, but it has worked out real well for Alabama’s academic profile.

Alabama is offering Jersey kids free academic rides with the football money.

I would go there in a heartbeat if I was 18 now.

Yes, that is great for individual students wanting a free education (I know one of those people, too) but my point was: "has Alabama's academic standing (rank) improved any based on their football national championships?". I don't think so. Even if it has gone up some, it would be like going from 350 to 324 (just example numbers).

All I got from this thread is that the current President played Ultimate Frisbee in college, which should make WM an Ultimate Frisbee powerhouse and that someone has daggers and is lurking at WM Hall (campus PD should probably be notified).

(03-15-2019 10:34 AM)Paulbintheburg Wrote:  All I got from this thread is that the current President played Ultimate Frisbee in college, which should make WM an Ultimate Frisbee powerhouse and that someone has daggers and is lurking at WM Hall (campus PD should probably be notified).

Like anything else, you get out of it what you put into it. (Sorry, couldn't resist).