Originally Posted by SoCal10s
I have to say USC ... losing 2 of the best college players and they can still be top 4 in the country is some what amazing to me.. Steve Johnson and Daniel Nguyen usually gave USC 3 automatic points,that's pretty hard to replace..
Texas A&M is a big disappointment to me.. the have a team full of USTA elite program kids and they still cannot compete enough to be top 4.. those ''USTA elite "" are supposed to be the next generation of American pros and they are stuck in 2nd gear over there..
I like Harvard ... remember these kids have to go a ""real"" school and somehow they can still study and play great tennis... they don't give you easy passing grades in Harvard classes because you are a tennis player..
This post is a mess.
Improved as in from last year to this year. So Cal is worse this year than they were last year. Quiroz and Gomez are improved but they lost a lot from last year.
Texas A&M is better this year than they were last year. They aren't recruiting the very best players. Who thought that Vinsant and Adams were immediate pro potential? They are recruiting very good Americans but I would not say they are disappointing.
I guess only Ivy League schools are "real" schools? Please tennis is not that popular that they can cost by just based on their "name recognition on campus", doesn't exist in tennis not even for the top guys at the top teams.