Student Challenges Master (Pop Quiz!, Part II)

Well, now the tables are turned, and my man Mike is the one tossing around the 'get to know you' questions.  You know how I do.  I'll rise to this challenge like I rise to every challenge.

Prepare to have your minds blown.




I'ma stab my punsul right through the O.


Question #1 -- James Robinson this year or your pick of PG's next year?

Back on the bench, Jontel.

So you're basically asking me if I'd rather have Robinson or Nate Britt.  Look, both are equally fantastic options, so I'm going to zig after you ask me to zag.  My answer to this question is: EITHER ONE!  ANY OF THE ABOVE!  I JUST WANT US TO SIGN AN EFFING POINT GUARD.  I have a gnawing fear that the Sam Zeglinski / Jontel Evans duo at the point is going to short-circuit a team that should be an NCAA Tournament lock this season.  Robinson has the goods, and could open up that DeMatha pipeline (which probably won't yield Jerami Grant, but would very likely give us Beejay Anya in 2013.)  So gun to my head, I'd probably pick Robinson, because of DeMatha, because he'd come a year earlier, and because I just feel like his game is a perfect fit with our roster and with Tony Bennett's system.


Question #2 -- Baseball expanding the stadium and being a perennial powerhouse underachiever one magical run to win the CWS followed by settling into above-average mediocrity and the same ol' Davenport?

Home Sweet Home

Damn, Mike.  This is kind of a crappy question.  Underachiever or mediocrity?  I guess I'll take the one that includes the national championship.  But really, are either of these realistic?  I can pretty much guarantee that the stadium won't be expanded with expensive permanent seating, at least until we start selling out those regular-season games.  I can also guarantee that a program led by Brian O'Connor will neither underachieve nor settle into mediocrity.

I do think it will be very interesting to see how the crowds respond to this year's CWS run once the turnstiles start spinning in 2012.  Can Virginia Baseball draw 3,000+ fans for weekend home games against ECU or Coastal Carolina in mid-February?  That's always the tough draw, baseball in the cold... but if we're down to brass tacks, that's the draw we need to have in order to justify a major stadium expansion.  Personally, I think Davenport is great, and could be fantastic with a few tweaks.  But the state of Virginia ain't the state of Florida or Texas -- it's cold in February and March here.  Damn cold.  And windy.


Question #3 -- Does the Peter Lalich catastrophe give you any trepidation into recruiting these high caliber kids?

Golden Boy, my ass.

No, not at all.  I think you have to be choosy with the kids you recruit, be it 2-star guys or 5-star guys.  Can they hack it at UVA, academically?  Are they scumbags or potheads off the field?  Are they the kind of high-character kids who can shoulder the responsibility of pulling this program out of the dumps?  I think you see my point.

What the Lalich catastrophe (nice choice of words, by the way) did show me is that you cannot ever put all of your eggs into one basket at the quarterback position.  I've said it somewhere before, but at this position it's nearly impossible to gauge future success so you have to throw numbers at the wall and see what sticks.  Recruit quantity along with the quality.  You have to have 4-5-6 QBs in the program at all times, developing guys and preparing for any sort of attrition that might swerve along to sideswipe the program.  (Especially at Virginia, where we seem to get T-boned by attrition at every intersection.)

But yeah, screw Peter Lalich, and screw Al Groh for gambling the entire program on a kid with shit for brains.


Question #4 -- Do we think we can keep competing with Tech like this in recruiting if we don't win this year?  How much do we need to improve?

This man will never be a bad recruiter.

Well, obviously, you have to start winning at some point in order to maintain recruiting momentum.  I'm actually cooking up a longer post about how 2012 might actually be the make-or-break season for Mike London, in that we'll be losing something absurd like twelve starters after this season.  For me (and kind of tapping into the previous question), the real salient objective for this season is to develop a legit #1 starting quarterback from the trio of Mike Rocco, Ross Metheny, and Michael Strauss.  If we find a QB who can get the job done -- and I think that's possible, given the raw tools of these guys, and the QB-friendly offense Bill Lazor can build -- we'll be well on our way toward some level of sustained success.  And that level of sustained success is exactly what you need in order to maintain recruiting momentum.

How much do we need to improve?  Well, to be a smartass, we need to improve by two or three wins from last season.  Can we beat the Dukes, Indianas, and Idahos of the world?  Can we spring the upset over teams like NC State and Maryland?  I don't think it's that big of a leap of faith, especially with a defense that should be much better this season.  Look, we were in a bowl game last season if we had hung on against USC, if we had not allowed that insane 4th down conversion against Duke, and if we could have just punched it in across the goal line against BC.  Three plays away, and I think we'll get those three plays to go our way this season.


Question #5 -- Is Tech not taking us seriously enough, or is London just that good?

Secret Weapon

London is just that good.  Specifically, London, plus Chip West, plus Anthony Poindexter, plus Shawn Moore, plus Vincent Brown, plus the rest of the coaching staff is just that good.  This coaching staff was built to be able to mine in-state talent, especially in the 757, Richmond, and DC/Metro areas.  Our coaches are passionate, filled with energy, and honestly believe that they can get UVA football back on the map... and the recruits are buying it.  So much so that it's now "cool" to sign with Virginia and play for Coach London.

As far as Tech not taking us seriously, look no further than their recent staff shake-up, which I (and many others) took as a direct response to the pressure London is putting on the Hokies when it comes to recruiting the Commonwealth.  It can't be overstated that Virginia's loss has been Virginia Tech's gain over the last decade-plus.  As Al Groh burned bridges with high school coaches in the state, and Virginia's in-state recruiting fell apart, Virginia Tech was there to pick up the pieces and their in-state recruiting and on-field success hit a new apex.  This is no coincidence.  As we take recruits away from Tech and add them to our roster, it makes our program stronger while simultaneously weakening theirs.  Soon enough, I think we'll see the two programs even out, both in the in-state recruiting wars and in the on-field battles.  Tech's success is now on borrowed time, and though they'll never openly admit it, most reasonable Hokie fans are scared shitless of Mike London.

London (and his coaching staff) is that good at recruiting, and it's not just because Tech took us lightly in 2011.  We didn't sneak up on them.  And if anything, our rousing early success with the 2012 recruiting class is proof positive.


Question #6 -- How much better would we be on the radio in the morning than Mark Moses?

Mark Moses is awful.  Can't we find a local to do the local morning show?  Did we really need to import this ass-clown from Chicago or wherever the hell he's from?  I'm just glad Mike & Mike is on AM 1450.

To answer the question... I'm not sure how good I'd be on the radio, but I can damn sure tell you that I'd spend more time talking about UVA sports (and sports in general) than Mark Moses does.  He's just awful.  Like, totally egregious.  I'd rather drive to work in stoic silence than listen to him.


Question #7 -- Would you trade all the obscure sports being as good as they are for a football or basketball powerhouse?

Sorry Steele, but I'd trade you for a stud QB.

It would hurt me to lose our borderline elite baseball program, but... yes, I'd make that trade.  I'm a college football and basketball fan.  Everything else is just gravy.  Football and basketball are the sports that really matter in the grand scheme of things, so as much fun as it's been to win championships in lacrosse and go to the College World Series, I'd trade it all for a powerhouse in either revenue sport.

That being said, it's baseball and lacrosse that have gotten us through the dark ages of the 2000's.  With football and basketball bottoming out under Al Groh and Dave Leitao, we as a fanbase really needed the success of the non-revs to buoy our fanship.  Kris Wright wrote a great piece about this very topic for The Sabre.  At the end of the day, while I wish we had that football or basketball powerhouse, it's still pretty awesome to have such fantastic, well-rounded athletic success.


Question #8 -- Does it annoy you how much we cater to football and basketball since they have sucked so bad of late? (this pisses me off)

You know what, this never bothered me as much as it seems to bother everyone else.  My love for UVA football and basketball is so ingrained in the very fabric of my being, that I willingly choose to mostly bury my head in the sand on the topic.  I guess the way I reconcile it is by reminding myself that these athletes do more for the school and bring more money to the school than any other "regular" student and any other athlete playing a different sport, so they are entitled their preferential treatment.


Question #9 -- I played ball with Keith Werman growing up and I know he is good. (He was actually a stud catcher at Oakton if you can believe that.) But do you think he's a novelty act for the baseball team or is he one of O'Connor's essential pieces of the puzzle?

The art of the bunt.

I definitely don't think Werm is a novelty act.  For a program built on fundamental baseball, sound defense, and the ability to generate runs, Werm is a perfect fit.  Essential piece of the puzzle?  Maybe not.  Maybe you'd prefer a second baseman with a bit more pop in his bat, and a bit taller than 5-foot-nothing.  But Keith Werman exemplifies the "pest" mentality that has allowed us to elevate the program from near-extinction to perennial power.  But to take that next step, I believe we need to see fewer guys like Keith Werman, and more guys like South Carolina's Scott Wingo in the Virginia lineup.  I think we have the pitching and we have the defense, we just need a bit more effortless ability to generate offense.  At times during the postseason, scoring runs felt like passing kidney stones.  A non-hitter like Keith Werman didn't help that situation.  I love small ball and I love smart offense, but I think I might love small ball spiced with great hitting even more.


This was fun, Mike.  We should pop quiz each other again soon.