i am not trying to start a pissing match about how good they are...they are respectable while many other mid-majors have not taken that step.
The mid-majors seem to get 2 and 3 stars....how much is that they evaluate better, how much is coaching, how much is commitment to the program by admins, how much is facilities, how much is marketing and/or getting some signature wins, or having a few good years and building off of that to get better recruits? I am sure it is some combination of the above, just curious what is the factor, or factors, that seem to stand out.
Again, not trying to say how good a specific mid-major is as there are lots of definitions of 'good'....just that some have made the jump and risen above others while some have not.
My own thought is that it is a combination of the above, but coaching and evaluation stand above the rest....but curious to know what others think.
The mid-majors seem to get 2 and 3 stars....how much is that they evaluate better, how much is coaching, how much is commitment to the program by admins, how much is facilities, how much is marketing and/or getting some signature wins, or having a few good years and building off of that to get better recruits? I am sure it is some combination of the above, just curious what is the factor, or factors, that seem to stand out.
Again, not trying to say how good a specific mid-major is as there are lots of definitions of 'good'....just that some have made the jump and risen above others while some have not.
My own thought is that it is a combination of the above, but coaching and evaluation stand above the rest....but curious to know what others think.
