A few weeks ago, I was sitting around wondering why I wasn’t excited about the upcoming basketball season. This was really a first for me because I even looked forward to the season when we were losing 20 games — without really trying. Now I am wondering if I am getting too excited too early. We have been down this road before and have tumbled by the wayside when the calendar hits March.

If you study a little Oliver Purnell history since he took over at UD, you will find that a good start is not all that unusual.

As can be seen, Purnell’s teams have had a tendency to start off with a bang and then run out of gas when it comes down to crunch time. This has happened when we were good and when we were bad. It has happened when we were deep and when we were thin. At some point, you have to realize that there is a pattern and one that this team needs to avoid.

The question has to be asked, “Is this team any different that the ones before it?”

In the early years, we won because the competition was poor early in the year but it caught up with us when the conference season started. In the middle years, UD had some talent but were not as deep as they needed to be. In the last few years, the team has been deeper at certain positions but really seemed to lack a go-to guy when the Flyers needed it.

This team is somewhat unique but not a great deal different from the one that made it to the NCAA in 1999-2000. There was senior leadership in Edwin Young and Mark Ashman and some young talent in Brooks Hall. We had a good inside threat in Ashman and outside threats in Tony Stanley, Hall, and Cain Doliboa. It was a team that started out well, but stumbled home and was one of the last teams given entrance into the NCAA Tournament.

This year’s senior leadership comes from Hall and Nate Green. This team, however, has a very strong junior class with Finn, Marshall, and Waleskowski. There are several freshmen that could contribute but it is far too early to even guess who that might be.

Despite the fact that the 1999 team was probably Purnell’s best since his arrival at UD, there is little doubt that this team can be much better.

Point Guard — Although the defense of Young was better than either of the two current point guards, the offense of the Marshall/Williams duo will easily exceed what Young and Morris could do that year. Young was a very emotional leader that this team sorely needs but Marshall has the ability to take over a game. Defenses actually backed off Young daring him to shoot. That will never happen with this year’s group.

Shooting Guard — Stanley was one of the most spectacular players ever to wear a UD uniform despite his up and down performances. Jones has shown little thus far offensively, but has the ability to handle the ball with the ability of a point guard and can take it to the hoop with some authority. Marshall’s minutes at the two guard have been limited, but that could change if Williams shows the ability to handle the point.

Small Forward — There is no question that the Hall of 2002 if far better than the Hall of 1999. Already named the Player of the Week in the A-10 during the first week of the season, the 2002 Hall is poised to take over the team on both ends of the court. His ability to rebound from the small forward position may be as important as his ability to nail a three at crunch time. His backup in 1999 — Doliboa — only lasted 7 games before a back injury ended his career at UD. Stelly’s streaky shooting does not match Doliboa’s, but he should be able to give us strong minutes for the whole season.

Power Forward — This is the easiest choice of the group. Waleskowski has the ability to drop in 15 footers similar to Ashman, but is a superior ball handler and rebounder. To compare him to Fitz isn’t worth the time it would take. The 2002 Green is a much better shooter than the 1999 version of Holland and hopefully smarter when it comes to judging when and when not to foul.

Center — There is no doubt that Ashman was the better scorer, but Finn can make more of a difference on the defensive end. What added value Ashman throws into the equation is negated by the lack of offense that Cooper brought to the floor when he played. As a result, this would have to be rated as a toss-up.

Bench — in 1999, there was no bench. In 2002, there may be some real talent. This was almost as easy as Power Forward.

The coaching staff remains virtually the same, but their ability to work with this group will determine just how far they go. The early results that Purnell’s teams exhibit (.713 winning percentage) must be maintained throughout the entire season. Some of it will depend on his ability to keep everybody fresh. The .429 winning percentage that his teams exhibit from February on must be eliminated. Keeping the troops fresh will be of the highest concern. A .713 winning percentage would give this year’s team an opportunity to go either 19-8 or 20-7 during the regular season. That kind of record with the likes of Duke, Cincinnati, Marquette, and Villanova from the pre-conference schedule should be enough to get them into the NCAAs.

The question is however, “How far can they go after they get in?”

One and out is not good enough for this team. Anything short of a Sweet 16 finish is simply unacceptable. Have I gotten caught up in the excitement of the win over UC? I don’t think so. This is a team that has a good deal of experienced talent and one that should give Xavier a run for the best in the A-10. If it doesn’t, it is time for Oliver Purnell to take a look in the mirror and start asking some very tough questions.