The situation is reminiscent of the 2021/2022 season where we were trying to integrate a lot of new players into the line up and Tony’s schemes. Some key differences, though: (1) no horrendous losses in OOC this season (assuming we beat Morgan State next week); (2) our freshmen are better this season (Eli, Bond, and Buchanan >> the 3 M’s); (3) our defense is much better so far this season; and (4), our overall talent, while generally young, is probably better this season (the only spot that the 2021/2022 team was was arguably better was the 4/5 with Gardner/ Kadin, but it’s apples vs. oranges comparing them to Dunn/Groves/Buchanan, as in better rebounding/inside scoring vs. better defense/3 point shooting from Groves, with rim protection/scoring being about even). The 2021/2022 team did improve some during the season, but not meteorically. In conclusion, I think you could reasonably hope that this season’s team will improve more in Jan/Feb/Mar than the 2021/2022 team did based on the above advantages it has over that team. Okay, now take your best shot at my convoluted/possibly overly-optimistic argument.
This is very much in line with my thinking. I, also, think that this team faces some of the same challenges as did the 2022 squad, but I believe that the 2024 edition has a bit more potential. That said, Rohde and Gertrude are making mental errors which Clark, for the most part, did not. Right now, I think that that is the biggest difference between the two teams. FWIW, I also thought that the 2022 team improved enough to be on the bubble until FSU hit the miracle three to end that game. There is reason to expect improvement.
I was struck by the number of turnovers where I (and probably the guy who had his dribble or pass slapped away) asked myself, Where did he come from?. In addition to being quick and strong, they were also long. That length seemed to surprise in our passes and dribbling.
Think we’ll know what we’ve got over the next three games. On paper, all should be double digit wins and if we struggle I think there is reason to be concerned about the rest of the season. We’re done with a 3rd of the season and will be at the halfway mark in a few weeks and hard to see there being substantial improvement after you’ve played half the season. We’ll get better - but so will everyone else.
I don’t know if this team is capable of such consistency so that we can make a judgement based on a three game stretch. I think that they can be very good, and I think that they can struggle. And, matchups are going to be a concern. Some will be favorable, some won’t, and I think the inexperience of this team makes the unfavorable ones more of an issue.
this is where I wish the program was more active/savvy on social media or had media members that actually asked about this stuff to staff. This stuff contributes to a perception. Would love Wideman or J Willi to respond and defend us.
I believe our NIL is actually not that bad according to prior reports (Reece at 100k plus) but no one knows that
The NIL issue to me is more so that other teams can get much better, much more quickly through NIL and leap frog teams like us. Our NIL I believe is strong enough to retain players we develop (and give playing time to) but not bringing in impact guys.
So let’s say you somehow convince guys to develop and stay 3-4 years, then you’ve still got 10 other teams that are able to immediately improve their roster through the portal - but doing so in a matter of months.
I think they’re able to leapfrog us in December, when we are playing guys who have mostly only stayed 0-1 years, on their homecourt. (well, blow us out, tbh)
IF we had 3-4 years guys with top 100 talent, then we’d be ahead of those teams (except for Kansas, Kentuckys, UNCs, etc. who we are almost always going to be behind from a talent acquisition standpoint).
I have problems with Tony’s roster management philosophy the last few years since the rule changes (Imagine that! 
), but I think it’s still very doable. We just have to do it!
I think there are two positions that are potentially NIL-implicated for us, in a negative way:
- Minor - I forget the pool of available bigs, but I suspect we could have done a little better with a lot of cash. But also, don’t forget UVa’s transfer restrictions also limit what we can bring in, except for younger guys (like Rohde) and grads.
- Rohde - He’s solid to good to great in the out years, hopefully, but with a senior PG and a likely 1st rounder gone after the year, we could’ve been better off with a more skilled, mature scoring wing as a 1-year rental.
But obviously either of those could potentially upset chemistry. The upside of the two choices above is that we have Rohde in the out years, and Blake getting minutes and experience, and hopefully staying happy
it looked like Dunn was blocked at least twice by the rim and/or backboard.
Fair.
My overall perspective is that we were annually a top 15 team prior to the natty. We are now annually a Top 30 team and I don’t see that improving next year.
NIL and transfer rules are a convenient factor to point to given historic success in roster continuity and development.
What are other factors?
- Tony suddenly got bad at identifying talent
- Failure to innovate offensively/defensively and now the book is out on us
- Roster construction has changed (when’s the last time we played a true center anyway?)
- Bad luck
- Other
Bad luck - yep. Harris, Malc, and Dre all were 75+ guys who turned into all-american caliber. That’s hard to replicate. (more the absence of awesome luck, IMO)
Other:
Woeful guard recruiting for a number of years
Tony not doing an ace job of managing the roster through the Unite the Right, Natty, Covid, NIL, and portal era disruptions (until recently, fingers crossed)
The passes to the middle of the Memphis defense were weak and the receiver did not make a big target and go meet the ball. Rohde’s lazy response to retrieving a deflected pass that led to a game killing breakout was inexplicable.
Memphis leap frogged us for sure. They added more new pieces than we did and kicked our asses all over the court. Boeheim makes good points.
My understanding is that we are competitive on NIL and even had situations where the UVA NIL was greater than competing schools. I suspect the issue with NIL is that it stands in contrast with the Five Pillars and Tony is very focused on maintaining the culture of the program. Bringing in a hired gun for $300K may help but likely creates a real issue in the locker room if not well managed (not dissimilar to recruiting over existing players). We also may experience some adverse selection in the transfer process as the people we tend to target are not looking to maximize their NIL potential (i.e. they are looking for development / coaching). The guys looking to maximize short-term earnings potential (and who can come in and make an immediate difference) are likely not looking at UVA given our strengths are development / putting guys in the NBA…
I don’t think NIL stands in contrast with the Five Pillars any more than Tony’s salary or the assistants’ salaries or the staff salaries stand in contrast with the Five Pillars. (I think you could make an argument they all stand in contrast, but no more so than any other, unless you want to put $$ figures on this stuff … in which case…)
I say this as someone who HATES HATES HATES the current NIL system, but if Tony wants his guys to be salaried employees of the school, microphones get put in front of his face all the time, and he can say that into one of them, and a lot of people would be influenced by that.
No way to prove it, but I kinda think that Tony agrees in general players should be able to share in the huge amount of money that’s dumped into college basketball because of their talent, hard work, and commitment. What probably bothers Tony, though, and it’s the same with freshman recruiting, are uber wealthy supporters who throw money at kids that is completely unrelated to earnings from the player’s name, likeness, and image.
I dont think tony is opposed to NIL. I do think he choses not to spend much time thinking about it or including it in his pitch.
I remember tony was asked if he would rather do away with NIL or free transfer, the answer was free transfer.
We are recruiting consistently top 150 kids. Just need them to get older and develop
Yes, but incredibly difficult to sustain that in the one-time transfer era. Haven’t been able to do it yet, although optimistic about this latest crop. Pessimistic with ability to pull that off in multiple years.
Not to get too off course, but I think we’ve also shot ourselves in the foot with our own one-time transfers - seeking marginal upgrades that fly in the face of development.