Eyes tell truths that cold, hard numbers can’t: Hokies look good

CHARLOTTE, N.C.

“Absurd.”

“Ludicrous.”

“Hilarious.”

“Amazing”

Seth Greenberg was reacting to the computer calculations that make his team just a little better than a long shot to earn an at-large bid to the NCAA tournament.

“If you don’t think this team is one of the best 65 teams in the country,” he said following Virginia Tech’s 68-66 loss to No. 1-ranked North Carolina, “you’re certifiably insane.”

That’s the trouble with Greenberg; he just won’t say what he means.

“We’re the No. 1 RPI conference and it’s hilarious that, maybe, a fifth team from the ACC will get in the tournament.”

The Hokies may be in now, though. People, even the people who make up the NCAA selection committee, often remember the last thing they’ve seen.

“We basically controlled the game for 39 minutes and 59 seconds,” Greenberg said after Tyler Hansbrough’s winning jump shot went through the basket with .08 on the clock.

The Hokies’ bold, brave play should change perceptions of a team that looks better on the court right now than it does through the cold prism of the RPI rating and strength of schedule.

The numbers crunchers are a geeky, unemotional bunch, but as Greenberg said in reference to the members of the selection committee huddling in Indianapolis, “In the end, it’s a human decision.”

He hopes so, anyway. Because if that’s the way it plays out, Tech’s tournament prospects are a lot better than they were before Saturday.

If they’re invited to the party after all, with their so-so 19-13 record and only a single victory over a top-50-rated team, it will be because the Hokies passed the eye-ball test on Saturday.

Against the country’s so-called best, they came within two jump shots – the one Tech’s J.T. Thompson missed and the one Hansbrough hit – of upending the home team on a national stage.

Let’s not pretend Bobcats Arena is a neutral site. Greenberg couldn’t. He rattled on about the atmosphere, all those Carolina blue shirts and painted faces in the crowd, hoping this might somehow be factored into the equation that results in a Tech tournament bid.

The team that lost by 39 points at Chapel Hill in mid-February controlled Saturday’s game for more than 39 minutes, but, of course, this isn’t the same Tech that struggled so much while integrating freshmen into the lineup.

As they developed and came together, the Hokies benefited from the ACC’s unbalanced schedule. Tech played the league’s best teams – North Carolina, Duke, Clemson and Miami – only once each, and lost each time.

Tech stayed afloat, finishing fourth in the standings, with six of its nine conference victories coming over Virginia, Boston College and Maryland.

Now it’s a question of whether the selection committee trusts its eyes more than numbers that reveal early Tech losses to Penn State, Old Dominion and Richmond.

Rolling along on his rant, Greenberg expressed concern that the committee that’s assembled in Indy does not include a single ACC representative.

“It’s amazing that we don’t have somebody in that room,” he said. “C’mon, this is the ACC. To me, that’s mind boggling.”

Even worse, said Greenberg, over the next 24 hours, “I’m going to have to hear Digger (Phelps) say we don’t have enough top-50 wins.”

Going strictly by the numbers, Tech may not have enough of what the tournament is looking for. But against Carolina and Miami this weekend, the Hokies looked better than most. They looked like a team on the rise.

You’d have to be insane to think last impressions don’t count for something.

Bob Molinaro, (757) 446-2373, bob.molinaro@pilotonline.com