The Quandary that is Seth Greenberg's Contract Extension
by Mark Trible on Apr 7, 2010 5:19 PM EDT
Email
PrintI have a very simple problem with the Virginia Tech basketball program that I was willing to let sleep for the remainder of this offseason. However, with the firing of Dino Gaudio at Wake Forest, I feel the need to take a closer look at the Hokies in relation to the rest of the ACC.
With both Al Skinner and Gaudio losing their jobs on the ACC chopping block in the last couple of weeks, the question that I had on March 26th has gained some more steam...
Why did the Hokies extend Seth Greenberg?
Before I get into my questioning of Athletic Director Jim Weaver, I first would like to extend my opinion towards Coach Greenberg in its entirety. I appreciate the work Greenberg has done in Blacksburg, whether it be making the Virginia Tech basketball program a respectable entity, his recruiting, public relations, etc. He has sold us Hokies his name brand and gotten the wheels turning on giving Hokie Basketball an identity. However, after three consecutive years of missing the NCAA tournament (the last two being brutally painful), and with most signs pointing to his terrible non-conference scheduling as the culprit, there seems to be a problem. Only NC State and UVA have missed the NCAA tournament in as many or more consecutive years in the ACC since the Hokies have danced. I'm not debating whether or not Seth Greenberg is the man for the job, that is another battle for another day. What I am debating is if there was any real reason to extend Greenberg with the full body of work that he has put together.
To put the discussion in perspective, lets look at Dino Gaudio's three year coaching career at Wake Forest. In the years since Skip Prosser passed away, Gaudiotook Wake to two NCAA tournaments as well as finishing with a 61-31 record overall and a 23-16 record within the ACC in that time. Although many Wake Forest fans believe the team underachieved with Dino at the helm, his record is still fairly decent.
Another ACC coach to be canned recently was Boston College's Al Skinner. If you choose to chalk his removal up to the insanity that is the Boston College Athletic Director, I would be right there with you. Whatever personal vendetta Gene DeFilippo had with Skinner is anyone's guess, but his numbers and reputation hardly deserved a pink slip in my opinion. Skinner went 247-165 in his time at Boston College, and in the five years since joining the ACC, he was only 40-40 BUT he did have 3 NCAA tournament appearances in that time.
In comparison with Seth Greenberg's 132-92 (117-79 since joining the ACC) record at Virginia Tech, including a 48-48 record in six years of ACC play and one NCAA tournament appearance, something doesn't seem to compute to me. I understand that Gaudioand Skinner both inherited programs that have had basketball success in the past, but that brings me to the most important part of my argument against Greenberg's extension. Virginia Tech is a football school now, it will be a football school 20 years from now, and maybe even forever. All Hokie fans understand this fact. However, I don't feel that the school's football success and lack of basketball success in the past should have any bearing on where we sit today. Today, the Hokies belong to a basketball conference in the ACC (not the Metro or the Atlantic Ten), and in accordance with that, they should act like basketball success is measured in NCAA tournament appearances and not decent records with very little substance behind them.
I'm not saying that Seth Greenberg should be fired and I'm not saying that Virginia Tech should become the UCLA basketball program. All I'm asking for is some accountability from Jim Weaver and the Athletic Department in reference to as why Greenberg deserved an extension. Because the last time I checked, NIT appearances, poor non-conference scheduling and underachieving weren't invitations to a safe and secure pay day. I think as Hokies, it is essential that we understand that this is no longer the Virginia Tech Basketball program of old. In turning the page, we must demand more from the team than the comfortable confines of mediocrity. The time for the next step is now. Extending Seth Greenberg's contract didn't make that step any shorter.
20 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great Question
Some good facts here Mark, way to do your homework. Also, great job of speaking your mind without your usual fire-breathing. Sets a good example for the kids, haha.
AN ABSOLUTE CROCK
Okay, more than any coach in Virginia Tech’s athletic program, Seth Greenberg deserved an extension, and I will tell you why. Looking at it from a broad perspective, Seth Greenberg IS Virginia Tech basketball. He took us from basketball irrelevance and took us to the level we are at now. Now, I know you said that he has only taken us to 1 NCAA tournament, BUT the selection committee has been HIGHLY scrutinized by basketball pundits far and wide for not including the Hokies the last 3 years…2 of which, they have a more than legitimate grievance (2008 and this year). I find it highly doubtful that if ANY other ACC team were sitting on that bubble (save maybe Miami) that their basketball pedigree would have gotten them in. So yes, having a tradition rooted in basketball can certainly keep you from having to fight the uphill battle for respect that Tech is continually having to fight.
You mentioned that Dino Gaudio has done such a good job at Wake (and I think he has done well…I am still puzzled why he got canned today), but he INHERITED A PROGRAM! You may disagree, but I can prove you wrong. Skip Prosser had commitments from Jeff Teague, James Johnson, Al-Farouq Aminu, LD Williams, Ish Smith and Tony Woods all before Dino ever took over. I’d call that inheriting something special every day! And Al Skinner? Well certainly I don’t understand why their athletic director fires anyone that interviews with another school or for another job, but BC was not lowly like Tech when he came in. And if you want to talk about NCAA Tourney bids for either of those guys, I’d argue to the grave that neither the Wake team this year or the BC team from a year ago deserved to be in over Tech. So basically, I am saying we have been screwed by the tournament committee. The blame lies there more than anywhere else. Watching the tournament selection show the last 3 years has left me with a pain in my gut like someone kicked me there and I lost all my breath.
If you’re saying the scheduling is weak, that is a somewhat valid point, but overly vague and in general not well founded. Despite what all the experts said about our schedule this year, Greenberg scheduled a home-and-home with Georgia (the reigning SEC champs two years ago when they were scheduled), a road game with Penn St. who was coming off their best season in their history as NIT champs, and were given Iowa without choice in the ACC Big 10 Tourney. Tech beat all 3, and as Greenberg continually repeated, COULD NOT CONTROL HOW THEY DID IN THEIR GAMES, ONLY IN THE GAME THAT THEY PLAYED AGAINST EACH OTHER! And he was SOOOOOO right. It was a bad schedule. For the most part, it was an intentionally bad schedule. However, the anticipation of those teams having better seasons both in and out of conference was what we banked on, and it could have made the difference of up to 150-200 spots in NCSOS if they had performed based on how Seth thought they would. But, the fact still remains, that yes, albeit a weak conference schedule, we DOMINATED IT, going 13-1 and winning 8 by double digits. So that certainly not something that should have kept us out of the tournament.
You also mentioned that in 2009 Tech had a weak schedule. This could not be further from the truth. The 2009 Virginia Tech team played arguably the hardest schedule in the history of the school, meeting up against the likes of Wisconsin, Xavier, Seton Hall, and St. Johns out of conference. Even the people you are probably referring to as being the weak ones of the crop such as Gardner-Webb and Mount St. Mary’s MADE the tournament the year before. The thing that instead kept us out in 08-09 was not poor scheduling, but an inability to win enough BIG games.
So you wonder why Seth Greenberg ABSOLUTELY deserved this contract extension? Here we go…1. In 7 years we have 5 postseason births…2. In 7 years he is ALREADY the second-winningest coach in Virginia Tech basketball history…3. Greenberg has twice been named the ACC Coach of the Year…3. Greenberg was the key to us constructing a $21 million dollar practice facility just this past year…4. In their 6 years in the ACC, Virginia Tech is FOURTH in ACC wins behind only UNC, Duke and Maryland…pretty elite company there…5. In 6 years in the ACC, Tech has received a bye in the ACC Tournament 4 times! That’s 4 top four finishes in 6 years!…6. Seth Greenberg has signed the top recruiting class in Virginia Tech history, and is well on his way to breaking his own feat with 2 Top-100 players already committed for 2011 and 2 scholarships still open…7. We now have expectations! Yes it hurts to fall short of them, but MAN is it sooooo good to even have an opportunity to fall short of expectations….8. IF VIRGINIA TECH DID NOT EXTEND GREENBERG’S CONTRACT, HE MAY HAVE BEEN TEMPTED TO LEAVE TECH TO GO TO ST. JOHNS OR ANOTHER TOP PROGRAM!…and lastly, once again 9. SETH GREENBERG IS VIRGINIA TECH BASKETBALL!
I want to let you know that this is not a personal attack on the writer of this article, but only an attack on the idea that Greenberg should not have received a contract extension. The idea to me is totally unfounded, offensive, and ludicrous to suggest. Hopefully my research has shown you that Greenberg is undeniably the guy for us, and we should have him as long as we are lucky enough to have that privilege!
First off, you make some fair points, especially about the 2008-09 schedule. However I hold the same opinion as Mark on the Greenberg extension, it was unnecessary. His only leverage was the St. John’s job, which I don’t believe he was really ever interested in.
He took us from basketball irrelevance and took us to the level we are at now.
Are you happy with that level? I’m not. Yes making the NIT during the first part of Seth’s tenure was an accomplishment. However, he was already rewarded for doing that when he was extended in 2008 through 2012-13. I’ll ask this, what has he done since then to merit another extension?
by collegegameballs on Apr 7, 2010 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Name me a coach that is willing to come to Tech that can take is to the next level. NO ONE. People want to sack Greenberg but know of no alternative to hire. We are not other schools that can demand great coaches. The best we can do is close our eyes and pick a mediocre mid major school coach and hope he can magically bring our program into greater prominence. What Greenberg has done is pretty good, but the least he deserves is a small extension. If he continually fails to meet expectations, then we can fire him. He has brought the program into one of the greatest periods of its existence, I think he deserves two more years.
You're Missing the Point
I didn’t say we should fire him. All I said was there was no need to extend him, since he was already signed through 2012-13.
The $20mm practice facility isn’t just going to open the eyes of the recruits, but prospective coaches down the road. You are beyond foolish to think good coaches don’t want to come to school that is 1) in the ACC 2) making a serious investment in the program.
by collegegameballs on Apr 7, 2010 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions
That serious $20mm investment you are talking about is directly caused by Greenberg. I can name 20 programs that were in our or better situations that couldn’t get better coaches. But i cant name ONE that got a better coach. We have more things going against us than for us in bball. We may be in the ACC, and just put some money into the program (due to Greenberg bringing some prominence and excitement), but we are still overshadowed by football. Big recruits don’t want to come to a school where they are overshadowed by football recruits. Our school is in the middle of nowhere, we still have less investment in our bball program than MANY other programs. Our fanbase is still relatively not as big or stable as others. People still dont show up to the “little” games like they do at schools even like NC State where its been a while since they’ve been relevant (Julius Hodge Days). Our alumni support is also quite weak (comparitively). Despite these roadblocks, Greenberg has been recruiting quite well (even if actual coaching is lacking a little). But I am digressing, the point is there are MANY other programs that are struggling that were once prominent that have a lot of money to throw around in big markets which have no other major sports that will entice the “good” coaches.
The best case scenario is we get a coach that saws promise and somehow luck out and he takes us to a new level. Chance of that happening, very little. I didnt proofread, too lazy, so sorry for the mistakes.
Several Issues
First and foremost, what part of “I didn’t say fire him” was missed by folks? CGB was referencing the lack of need to extend Greenberg, sinking more money into that investment. What he did was essentially the same thing Beamer did to UNC a decade ago, feign slight interest and get a raise from the administration. He played the game and got paid when, in all reality, odds are the money wasn’t needed to keep him.
Secondly regarding the job he’s doing, as a guy on the outside looking in seeing Penn St touted as an out of conference game is, for lack of a better term, sad. Same with Georgia being touted as the “SEC Champs” when they got that far thanks to a ridiculous tornado and Sandyatta Gaines going Randolph Childress in Atlanta. Greenberg’s got to put some legitimate meat on that schedule so that the same problem doesn’t come up over and over and over again.
Third, as far as recruiting goes basketball is not football. There’s a reason football schools can sustain a level of basketball success and that’s because it generally only takes 2-3 pretty good kids for a program to play well. Its not getting oodles of athletes to Blacksburg, its getting 2-3 kids a year who can do their job. Between DC, the Triangle, Charlotte and the rest of the area there are plenty of kids that can’t go to Duke, UNC, MD, G’Town, etc but still want to play in a BCS league. Perhaps the most obvious examples of this are Ish Smith and Demontez Stitt. 2 Charlotte kids that wanted to stay in the ACC but got 0 interest from UNC/Duke. Its not getting leftovers, its more about knowing what you can and can’t do in recruiting.
UNC-Duke-UK-KU-UCLA will, on a consistent basis have their classes inked before they’re juniors in high school. That leaves plenty of kids out there to battle for and if you’ve ever been to Lawrence, East Lansing, Stillwater or Pullman (all teams that have made NCAA tourney runs) you know being in a remote location means dick.
Greenberg’s a good coach. We’ll see what he does next regarding scheduling and team improvements. The fact is sometimes coaches have ceilings and, it at least appears, that he may have reached his. The next question is will 2 or 3 more years of this be ok or do you want more?
Yeah BoYeeEEeeE
by InTheBleachers on Apr 8, 2010 11:23 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
The only thing I'll argue with
is the idea that “Seth Greenberg is Virginia Tech basketball.” While this program isn’t on par with Wake Forest or Boston College in terms of tradition, there was a basketball history before Greenie. And one NCAA Tournament appearance in seven seasons does not make you the living embodiment of Virginia Tech basketball.
Not when guys like Dell Curry have played for this program before. Basketball was pretty good at Tech in the 70s and it made the NCAA tournament three times in a five-year span when the field was 32, 40 and 48 teams.
My main complaint with this whole thing isn’t that Greenie is getting a raise or an extension or whatever, it’s that fans have put him on this pedestal that he doesn’t deserve to be on. He has one NCAA appearance in seven years. But because Beamer was given extra time to build the football program, people think that Greenberg should be given the same. Well, football is a lot harder to win at than basketball. In football a lot of things have to go right for a team to be a winner. In hoops it just takes one Carmelo Anthony and you can make a tournament run.
What Greenberg has done in seven years is great, but it’s not like he’s done the impossible or even something that the program hasn’t seen before in its history.
A bullhorn, a bottle of whiskey and a dream. GobblerCountry.com
by furrer4heisman on Apr 8, 2010 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Greenberg should always be a Hokie
To be honest I want a lifetime contract for Seth. To add to Chicagomaroon’s points. Seth was 11th out 12 league coaches in salary before this extension and yet is tied for 4th in the league in wins since the Hokies joined the ACC. Not only are we getting top recruits to look at us now, we got a top 30 recruit to commit last Friday. Last I checked it took Beamer 8 years before we went to a major bowl game (1995 vs. Texas in the Sugar Bowl). Building a program takes time, but he is a relentless worker. Al Skinner was apparently a slacker and let his assistants do all the work. I can’t tell you how many articles I have read about Greenberg driving all over the place to recruit players. Coach K will show up occasionally if it is a recruit he really wants. Greenberg is desperate… always to win. His work ethic is second to none and that is why Hokie Nation and your poll are showing that Greenberg deserved this raise and extension. Hokie Nation loves this basketball team and coach. Plus we have never been a basketball school because we have only been playing ACC basketball for 6 years. N.C. State fired Herb Sendek and look what happened. Their expectations were way to high just like I surmise yours are because you sound like you expect us to get into the dance every year. By the way, here is my blog if you anyone is interested: www.virginiatechsports.blogspot.com
Can't get too greedy.
I think it’s a fair question, but I support the extension fully. I thought about it, and I can’t see how this is risky. I can see how the timing of this extension seems unfitting, seeing how we missed the tournament the last few years. As seen above though, we easily could have been in 2 of the last 3 tourneys. But If i’m not mistaken, I think the provision of the first contract extension through 2013-14 allowed them to discuss an extension after 2 years (now), and I can’t imagine any AD tell a coach like Greenberg, “let’s wait and see how you do after MD, Zo, JA, and JT leave.” Really? 2011-12 will be a tough year. But I think he’s already proven he can rebuild quickly after Dowdell and Gordon left. Looking at his full body of work, I think it was justified that the man deserved a raise and extension. Postseason births, better recruits, more depth, more televised games, and beating UVA. Non-conference scheduling is fixable. Tony Bennett was making twice as much! We can’t get too greedy. We should be very appreciative of what Greenberg has done for the program.
TWO Year Extension
I agree completely with chicagomaroon and Jodoma. The point is, It is a TWO year extension, not 8 years, not 15. One thing Greenberg does deserve is time. He has gotten us to one tourney appearance and some close calls to get into the tourney. To let go of him now would be asinine. He deserves atleast a couple of years to show he can take the program to the next level (especially after building the program this far). Too many people these days are calling for the sacking of the coach because their team cannot meet their own high unrealistic expectations, but the fact of the matter is, we are not a basketball powerhouse. There are VERY FEW programs that can demand high profile coaches and final fours whenever they want. VT is not even close to one of those programs. Hell, even Kentucky (arguably the best college basketball coaching job) had trouble finding a capable coach after firing Tubby Smith. Even when they did, Billy G didnt work out and it set back the program a couple of years.
Greenberg does a great job of getting players to a very unglamorous basketball school in a power house conference. He may have some flaws, but they seems fixable or at least compensated in other aspects. He concluded one more step in bringing our school into prominence, funding and facilities. The least he deserves is a little bit of time.
If Delaney gets his head on straight and decides to return to Tech, we will have pretty high expectations next year especially with Allan Chaney and Jarell Eddie ready to contribute immediately. Hopefully, next year will bring us some glory!
Almost there Furrer
I’ll absolutely agree that there was something there before Greenberg came in…the likes of Dell Curry, Bimbo Coles and Ace Custis. But, even then, that’s still kind of green. We were a run of the mill basketball program historically with a few really good years (mostly coinciding with Curry and Coles). But, I’m arguing that when Greenberg came, Tech basketball was at the lowest of the lows. That is why for right now, Seth Greenberg IS VIRGINIA TECH BASKETBALL. In Ricky Stokes’ last year, #3 Pitt came to play us, and my family and I were running late for the game. We walked in 15 mins. late and a woman gave us tickets for free at half court below the nose-bleed (which is a joke at the Cassell if you didn’t get it, but they were great seats). The point is that we were playing #3 PITT! I’d dare you to try that now. Good luck. So yes, I’m not downing on our basketball history. I’m not saying we were the greatest ever, but it wasn’t terrible. I hope I didn’t ever make it sound like that. It’s just that Greenberg took us at our worst and now we’re at our best. And as for the winning in basketball thing…that’s true, but winning in the early Big East in football and winning in the current ACC basketball climate pale in comparison. The ACC has Carmelo Anthony-like guys you’re talking about coming and going every year…just not on our team…YET…so to be able to have been as competitive as we have been without any of those guys, speaks to the fact of how good a job Greenberg has done.
Three straight NITs
is “at our best”? Wrong.
A bullhorn, a bottle of whiskey and a dream. GobblerCountry.com
by furrer4heisman on Apr 8, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly
This reverance for Greenberg is only surpassed by the Coach K, Roy Williams love that Duke and UNC have. At Maryland they don’t talk about Gary Williams this way, BC didn’t talk about Skinner this way and Clemson didn’t talk about Purnell like this.
K and Roy have actually won something. Greenberg, in the grand scheme of things has not done much. Purnell had Clemson winning, going to the tourney yearly and folks still wanted more. Skinner won an ACC regular season title and folks still wanted more.
If you’re happy where you are and have no desire to improve your lot as a program then its ok to never question anything. However, as a team in a BCS conference the NCAA tourney should be a starting point in my opinion. Yes, school profiles matter; Duke/UNC/KU/UK etc should be in the tourney yearly, sweet 16 yearly and every 3-5 years challenge for a title. VT/Miami etc should get to the tourney every 2-4 years and win games every other trip. That’s realistic. Every now and then, probably once a decade you have a Sweet 16+ caliber team.
Look at LSU, Miss St, Oregon, Providence etc. Are they basketball schools? No way. But every few years they are tournament worthy and every couple times they go they make a splash. That’s your goal.
NIT is not where you want to be.
Yeah BoYeeEEeeE
by InTheBleachers on Apr 9, 2010 7:50 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Basketball Powers
I meant “are they basketball powers” not “are they basketball schools.”
Yes Providence is a basketball school.
Yeah BoYeeEEeeE
by InTheBleachers on Apr 9, 2010 7:53 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
desire to improve
“If you’re happy where you are and have no desire to improve your lot as a program then its ok to never question anything.” Who has implied that we’re happy with where VT basketball is and we have no desire to see it improve? You and I just seem to have a difference of opinion about whether we have been improving (we absolutely have, in my opinion), and whether Greenberg is the right man to lead us in further improvements (I certainly don’t revere him, but at this point I don’t know how you justify saying no to that).
missed the point
“I’m not debating whether or not Seth Greenberg is the man for the job, that is another battle for another day.” Um… no, it’s not. Greenberg is ridiculously underpaid compared to other ACC coaches. If he is the man for the job, then he needs to be paid like it or he will leave. If he’s not the man for the job, then certainly don’t extend him. But I don’t see you how you can divorce those two issues.
Also, I take great issue with the assertion that Greenberg has underachieved. I cannot even phathom what the author must be thinking to say that. Remember where we were picked pre-season? And with good reason. Remember the 2 previous ACC coach of the year awards, and how close he was to another one this year? Mediocrity? Does the author recall VT basketball in the years before Greenberg came? That was worse than mediocrity, but the current state of affairs certainly deserves a much better description than that. We are placing in the top third of the ACC. That is not mediocrity. Is there room for improvement? Absolutely. And if Greenberg can’t take the next step then we can talk about moving on. But at this point, with this track record, with the road ahead looking pretty good, with this business situation (let’s not forget it’s a business)… an extension was the right choice.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
