Players 2023-24 Roster Thread

I was sweating bullets trying to refresh the score while I was at work for that one.
That was my senior year! My dad and I left at 4am from RVA and got up to NYC by about 10am or so since our game was at 2:30pm.
I remember I had a bunch of friends who paid $50 for the student bus and hotel package. The trip only covered three nights so they were actually en route on 95 during the Fordham game and were told that if VCU lost the bus would turn around haha.
 
The Kickout call on Ace was the one that got me. Every NBA game there is a similar incident where the shooter is always given the opportunity to have a safe landing on a jump shot. It never crossed the refs minds. That play was critical.
NBA has its own set a rules that differs in many ways from every other level (including NCAAM, FIBA etc.) obviously there's SOME overlap but rule of thumb, only compare calls/rules you see in the NBA to other NBA games lol

That being said, its a matter of what space the shooter is entitled to. Ovewhelming majority of players jump straight up and down or pretty close to it. We as VCU fans know Ace tends to land with his feet staggered, but even still his feet were much wider than his normal jumper. His shot started from a foot or so behind the 3pt line and the contact with his and the defenders foot happened at roughly at or just inside the HS 3pt line. So 2 feet from where his left foot started. His right foot was still behind the 3pt line so I can't say he's entitled to the space where the contact happened.

It sucks that he was hurt on the play, but IMO Ace was more at fault for that contact than the defender was.

-Your Friendly Neighborhood Referee
 
Like whom?
b8e00eea33b777af3d8057de719a0d65_w200.gif



Links are provided below

daa66be088736c81a6b2e5accff3a5d5_w200.gif
 
This is wrong. We would not have gone to the tournament without winning the A10. It’s just like saying 25 wins gets you in no matter what. That’s not always true anymore.

We needed that A10 win to go, and most people who get resumes understand why.
Sadly the A10 didnt do enough to get multiple bids. We had a couple of head scratching loses that took us out of the running. We wouldnt have gotten in.

Should we yes, but would we nope.
 
This is wrong. We would not have gone to the tournament without winning the A10. It’s just like saying 25 wins gets you in no matter what. That’s not always true anymore.

We needed that A10 win to go, and most people who get resumes understand why.

VCU had an at-large worthy resume (metrics, record, reg season/conf tourney finish, etc) and, I suspect, would’ve replaced Nevada in the field had the Rams lost Sunday.

Had that Sunday loss to Dayton happened:
Big 10 = 8 bids (no 19-14 10th place Rutgers)
Big 12 = 7 bids (no 18-15 7th place Ok St)
MWC = 3 bids (no 21-10 4th place Nevada)
A-10 = 2 bids (yes 26-8 1st place VCU)

Notes:
1. 218 of 229 BM brackets had Rutgers dancing. The committee didn’t even have Rutgers First Four out.
2. Only 71 of 229 brackets had Nevada (a non-P6) dancing. The committee did. That speaks to “committee composition.”
3. Oklahoma St was 18-15, 7th place (of 10) in the Big 12. Early B-12 tourney ouster.
4. P6 vs non-P6 at-large bids is a thing. It ended up 31 to 5. That’s typical (and political). Had the committee selected Rutgers or Okla St instead of Nevada (or VCU if applicable), it would’ve been 32 to 4 (a record P6-favoring split)
5. # of bids per conference is a thing. The committee generally leans toward “bid balance” if feasible/reasonable resumes exist (hence I opine it would’ve been MWC = 3, A-10 = 2 instead of MWC = 4, A-10 = 1).
6. Politics. Understand the makeup of the committee (people in the room). Bids = $$$, prestige, power, equity, etc.

With the A-10 having a team (VCU) potentially bubblicious at 3pm Selection Sunday, this likely came down to 21-win Nevada (potential 4th MWC bid) and 26-win VCU (potential 2nd A-10 bid) for that last at-large spot (had the Rams lost). I suspect that last at-large spot was going to a non-P6 regardless and both Nevada/VCU were really the only remaining worthy candidates.

History, IMO, likely would’ve favored the 26-8 Rams.
1) A-10 reg season champ by 3 games
2) Advanced to conf tourney final
3) 26 wins, 1st place finish in a Top 12 conf
4) At-large worthy metrics (NET, wins over Pitt, Vandy, Dayton)
5. Rich (and recent) regular tourney history (participant). A known quantity.

Our victory Sunday over Dayton likely got Nevada in (4th MWC bid, 5th non-P6 at-large).

You are entitled to believe otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Never said he worked for me. Nor did I offer to employ him, I simply asked him to provide evidence for his statement. It's not like it is a major undertaking.

I was just playin BradRamFan....It's pretty common knowledge that MR was NOT the first choice for the PSU job....I honestly don't feel like putting in the work to find all that info, especially because I'm well and truly over all things Mike Rhoades and couldn't give a tinker's cuss about the wildly mediocre Nittany Lion basketball program at Ped State.

I am, however, more than happy to provide further links

sausage-mustard.gif
 
Last edited:
We started the year with just one seasoned starter in Ace. All the other players were limited role bench players. Plus three of the potential starters were just coming off a freshman bench role campaign. Even the transfers were all role players (or taking a large step up in competition).
Over the course of the season, the team did exactly what you would expect a very good team would do......it got better every single month of the season, peaking with a long winning run to finish out the season. If you actually watched, you would have seen all the individual players move from being role players to high level starters over the course of the year. You could see them grow and develop into a very strong and talented cohesive team. I would loved to have seen that team stay together and bring all the development and skill to the new season. I think that team would have done a lot of damage in the upcoming preseason tournament. But it was not to be. Still, seeing that team group over the season was wonderful.
Then can we stop calling our teams "stacked" at the beginning of every season?
 
Almost all of us do. The overall seedings put this argument to bed. VCU was 50, behind AQs Charleston, Oral Roberts, and Drake. Nevada was 46. It wasn't close.

Had VCU lost, they likely/conceivably slot into 46 (11 seed; last at-large) and Dayton into 50 (last 12-seed). Completely appropriate. VCU 1st place reg season 26-8. Dayton 2nd place 23-11. Committee doesn’t need to touch the bracket (just find and replace). Committee likely determined Saturday (once they knew it was VCU vs Dayton on Sunday) the A-10 auto-bid was getting the 50 slot, regardless.

Had the Rams lost:
VCU vs Arizona St (First Four in Dayton)
Dayton vs St Mary’s (Albany)

The committee, when dealing with fairly similar profiles, has done that (find and replace) several times with the bracket in the past based on a few Sunday outcomes.
 
Last edited:
I am glass-half-full guy around here. I don’t understand how one could confidently predict that we will be as good or better than last year, nor do I think this is an indictment of the current roster or staff. We won the conference by 3 games and the tournament, then dumped almost the entire roster and the entire staff and started from scratch. There are huge question marks everywhere you look. If we are top 4 Odom deserves a medal.

I’m not saying it can’t happen; but I am saying it likely won’t.
I think it's too early for any of us to say either way. I would bet anything most of us haven't seen more than one or two full games of any of these new guys (with the exception of maybe Nelson). You're absolutely correct, huge question marks all the way around. Personally, nothing would surprise me in either direction. Just have to wait and see.
 
Last edited:
..... especially because I'm well and truly over all things Mike Rhoades and couldn't give a tinker's cuss about the wildly mediocre Nittany Lion basketball program at Ped State.
Yet, you were the one who brought up both PSU and MR in the first place. "....well and truly over...", I think not.
 
Back
Top