Ravaging Beast wrote:Mr. Jefferson wrote:While I see your point, I think the same arguement would then have to apply to Michigan as well....when was the last time they were in the final four, to me that would put them in that second tier of teams - trying to become staples of the final four. Consistency of staff???? Out side of CSU, BYU, UMD and Michigan - whose coaches have been at those programs at least 10 years..I know that is not the case at UCSB - so that might be a stretch - great staff yes - but you need to be somewhere for more than 5 years to be considered consistent.
When was the last time that the USLIA pre season player of the year wasnt on a top 5 program roster??? Most importanly - for sake of this arguement, when was this player not from the WCLL or the RMLC???
I think its safe to say they are top 5 , but arguements for #1 on expectations and hype are a bit hard to support - we agree on this I think...
By the way.. I apologize to all for my spelling, I just hate the spell check feature on this board...
As Catlaxman pointed out, Michigan has been in the semi's. They have made the quarter's alomost every year. As far as UCSB coaching consistency, they have had the same defensive coordinator for 8 years, and defense has definitely been their strong point over the years. I was a player for UCSB when Scott Demonte passed the team on to Mike Allan. Both Scott and Mike made sure not to change things up very much so that the transition would be easy for the players. I do like your posts though. You have a very logical objective way of looking at the league. If only I could look at every team that way. But I have watched what the top teams do every year. I'm very skeptical of up and coming teams until they prove themselves. Will they be able to be consistently good every year?
Perfect explanation of not only your thought process, but the staff back ground at UCSB. I was familiar with the staff there, but I wasnt sure if you were in the earlier posts mentioning that those teams were the only ones, so a slight misunderstanding of the post - it happens. No worries about all of us sharing opinions about the state of the league. Personally I think there are way to many people coming on here going....." Team X should be #1 - and no arguement, or rather a weak one to support it. I too have been watching this league for quite sometime myself....I remember you running around, how do we say, "back in the day...." during your playing career
My thought on Michigan is simliar to that of how you put your top teams into comparision year in and year out - those at the top, are there more often then they aren't ... they had one birth in the final four, and yes they have made it to the second round, but they havent had the amount of success as one might think they have had at Nationals - I was using your rational in saying, BYU, CSU, UCSB - class of the league, year in and year out - Noma could be put in that same realm based on their past - though they did have a rough go last year, but Michigan, Zona, Oregon, etc - are still trying to climb into that realm of the "elites"
My process of thought is this, though consistency at the top breeds a drive for teams to strive to be them, and beat them ... I do like parity (like in the NFL) that is starting to show up in this league - and Im glad that some teams are starting to push to be in that "we are closer than you think arena" --- I look at it almost as closely as I follow the NCAA D1, 2, 3 levels --- and try to find the same parity...I think the only thing that compares really is the D2 situation, as you will have teams at the top, constiently for 3-4 years, before someone replaces them (for about the same time period)...
The better question is....why dont we ever work while were at work???
