Originally Posted by shocka43
Better term to be used by all would be "peer institutions". With being a peer institution comes athletics. With athletics comes financial support from donors and fans. With that comes the expectation that the end results over a given time are equal to or greater than those peer institutions.
Yes...UD isn't on the same level as a basketball program as any of those three. But as a peer institution with just as much if not more support/facilities, UD fans should have the expectation to be as good as or better than those 3 on the court.
|
shocka, what pops into my mind after reading your post is this. Yes, UD is good....but given all the advantages, why not better, much better?
A few years ago we cracked the Elite Eight...to the astonishment of everyone. It was great...thrilling. And we made it back in each of the next three years...but we accomplished less each successive year.
Coaches matter a great deal. But the game is about talented players. Why can't we recruit talent at the level of the three other schools being discussed? Are they more willing to bend the academic rules than Dayton? How about the character of the players they are willing to take? I know
Ted Kissell has an opinion about that. I've discussed it with him.