View Full Version : Teams best positioned for the next 10 years?

05-12-2007, 12:06 PM
Usual suspects. Nope, we're not of the list. Wonder why? I don't know but it's a good topic to think about. How could we possibly be missed!!! http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2867148 What would we need to do to be on this list?

05-12-2007, 12:37 PM
Amazing to me that people get paid money to write such opinionated, subjective stuff. How can anyone predict 10 years into the future with respect to team sports at any level?

The only way this garbage can affect GU is how it influences public perception (especially the future recruits). But when you are talking of the 10 year old that is a potential Zag 8 years from now....what packs more punch? An obscure internet read, or Adam Morrison in the beautiful Zag uniform on the cover of his favorite video game?

05-12-2007, 12:58 PM
What team would you remove from the list to put GU on?

05-12-2007, 02:19 PM
What team would you remove from the list to put GU on?

Texas, Louisville or Indiana. I don't believe in Texas, I doubt Pitino stays 10 more years, and Indiana with Sampson is really an unknown.

USC being mentioned is very iffy, Floyd is a travelin' man and is an NCAA violatin waiting to happen... And the day Calhoun exits UConn, they'll take a big dive, ala Arizona when Lute exits.

GU is very well-positioned, imo. Few is still young. Recruiting is on an upward swing. And GU is in the WCC.

GU should've at least been mentioned.

05-12-2007, 03:33 PM
Every team on that list has made it to a final four in the last 10 years. In that time span, 26 teams have made it to the final four, with 9 teams going multiple times....

05-12-2007, 05:44 PM
Somewhat interesting topic but in my opinion just a list for BCS lovers so they can stroke their ego's. It's a very accurate list as all those schools will have success, make final fours, get the top recruits, draw the most fans, etc. but who questioned that anyways? The traditional programs like UNC, Kentucky, UCLA, Duke, Kansas, etc are always going to be on this list so whats the point of re-iterating that? The thing this list doesn't account for is a school like Gonzaga who has a top up-and-coming coach like Few, great support from fans, and great second tier talent that in the right year can make a final four or contend for a title. More interesting to me would be if ESPN ran an article of the program(s) that had the best chance of breaking into this elite 'club' of traditional powers instead of telling us once again that Kentucky and North Carolina have lots of tradition, lots of money, and lots of fans!

05-12-2007, 06:05 PM
and most like it, like most polls, we used to call thumbsuckers in the trade. Because that's what they are.

Totally subjective or not very seriously researched stories designed to fill a newspaper column or a segment on T.V. during a down or dull time.

And because it works as often as not to fill that bill. It pacifies.

S.I. invented the swimsuit edition because sales on that particular month were down. Now it sells more than any other edition.

So, you never know.

But it's difficult to take any of them too seriously, imo. Except, of course, the swimsuit edition.

05-13-2007, 11:54 AM
"history, tradition, facilities, administrative support, recruiting reach, conference, TV Q-rating, coaching and fans"......I guess what I'd like to know is if any us think we could improve something if any of those defined categories.
Maybe the voters just went with what has worked in the past. It seems to me that we at GU have influenced everything on the list for the positive. "History and tradition"...we can't change. The major flaw in the article's conclusion ( ie the rankings) is that the voters don't seem to be voting the future based on the things we've influenced...........and influenced for the next 10 years too.

I agree with BZ that the next 10 years looks great for the Zags. Maybe the voters just voted what's already in their brains ( ie what the know) and didn't really think about the future. Who knows!! One thing pointed out in the article though is this: Those schools are bathing in money.....state money......tax money or tobacco money.....MONEY! No matter where they got it...they've got money that we'll not see.

Does money REALLY matter THAT much? I'm a little silly when it comes to money. I hate the stuff when it determines how a program does. I guess it just points out how far GU has come in a short period of time.........and done it without big money. Mostly grit, heart, hard work and a thoughtful view to the future. I guess this is why I love this place so much. I also guess this is why the rest of the country does too. They know how hard and complex it is for a small underfunded school to break into the bigtime when the BCS schools have rigged the future against smaller schools.

Even moreso, how hard it is for a small school to stay in the higher echelons of performance. Sometimes I hear (mostly from jealous fans) that GU is on ESPN because of odd times we play out on the West Coast. TV execs don't show games just to show games. They expect performance that'll draw fans.
GU does that..as well as any other program.

So I guess I can't agree (completely) with the poll but I do understand it. One things that most compelling is that we're building tradition and history as we go. Fun to watch and , for some of us older guys.....it's important to bear witness. As the years go by, our future is becoming our history and our traditon. We're building our history by developing our future. It's unique and timely. Makes me smile even in the offseason. For me that's where the real money is. Good luck friends......the miracle is still in progress:) MFE