Say what you will but the rankings are pretty spot on. Don't hate the messenger for delivering the news. History shows that the strong teams remain the strong teams. PS '96 battled last year and had a strong showing(they gave us a run at SoCal State) and CA Knighten were the best '96s at ASA Nationals. Not to say another team can not climb the ladder but you cannot dispute the accolades these teams have earned.
As Spazsdad said......the rankings are both fun and fairly on target. We all know that ASA Nationals means everything at the end of the day.
Also, say what you will about the BCS in college football, but nobody waits till the championship game to rank teams and judge performance.
The reality is, today, on November 24th, the top 5 (perhaps top 10) teams can all beat each other on any given day. That will not be true on July 1st.
Again though, IMHO... the true "A" teams accomplish things when it counts on the field against the best competition, under the greatest pressure at ASA Nationals....not on the message boards of Heybucket...
I just found it odd to call a team an "A" team without much of a resume to back it up against the very best at ASA nationals... thats all...
I am sure as second year 12's in 2006, all three of these teams you mention were viewed and ranked as "A" teams early in the year, yet not ranked as 'A" as first year 12s. hmmmmm kinda like this year.
I seriously have no idea...
I'm just sayin.
IMHO
Charlie



























