Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="EricLA, post: 2462829, member: 26"] I thought I'd address your comments in a different way. I disagree with, but it's because of my experience in watching ND over the years. ND is not the only team where you look at the players and think "we should have a big athletic advantage over them". I think the same thing when I look at Stanford and a number of other teams. THEN we play them. First, the TV adds at least 10 pounds on anyone's frame (I KNOW this - I've seen myself on the tube and it's horrible - nothing like reality! ;) ). Seriously, tho, it's true. Second, for all our fitness and athleticism, it is NOT always what ends up being our advantage. It's one thing when we play a Longwood or LA-Monroe (2 lowest RPI in WCBB at the moment) - our sheer talent and athleticism will wipe them off the floor. But not against teams like ND and Stanford. Their kids are deceptively fit, super smart hoops players, and often seem able to disrupt our offense in ways that surprised me. My point is over the years I've learned that you can't know squadoosh about a team by using the "eye" test. Kids who are just great hoops players can compensate in all sorts of ways. If you watch the WNBA, are there players who could afford to lose a few lbs? Of course. Shone Schimmel was the perfect example of a kid coming out of college with all kinds of hoops skills, but she did not take her fitness seriously and pretty much flamed out after 3 years (I believe she's taking a year off this season). Not only was her fitness discussed on the BY, but by her coaches and staff of the pro team she played for, and they were NOT happy. But that's different than losing weight. As many pointed out, body types come in all shapes and sizes, and someone like Dee, for example, for all her fitness improvements is NEVER going to have guns or a body like Dangerfield. Just my $.02... [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach