(10-11-2019 03:40 PM)tribeinexile Wrote:  https://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-xpm-2...story.html

.....I know there are other posters who believe we have underachieved or that our success lately has been the result of our natural competitive advantages in the CAA.

Good reminders, thanks! Your second article (the one immediately above) had this cogent paragraph:

"My first year, I thought we had to get better athletes to compete," Shaver said. "We still need good athletes, but we might be more inclined now to take a highly skilled athlete who's a good shooter and has some smarts, but who may not be the most athletic kid, over somebody who's strictly an athlete. Because of the way we've chosen to play, we have more of an idea of the kinds of players we want to recruit, so we can target certain kids."

Shaver said that in year 4. I believe that he had mastered that approach by years 11-16. That is how W&M was able to recruit great players like Marcus Thornton and Nathan Knight, and average athletes who played great in his system, like Terry Tarpey. Oh well, that is all gone now.

Serious question, no snark involved: What are the "natural competitive advantages" that we enjoy in the CAA"? I am aware of many disadvantages but the only competitive (recruiting) advantage that I can even remotely think of is the academic reputation of W&M --- and, of course, the stringent academic requirements at W&M are usually viewed as a disadvantage.