I've read similar, even identical sentiments posted many times during discussions of individual players where an official award or recognition is at stake. Can't argue with the clear deserving nature of the high impact players on teams outside of those highly ranked and judged as deeper in talent. They should be promoted and merit as much consideration and respect as other contenders.
It is an individual award. I don't claim to know what those who vote consider or to what degree they may analyze or dissect...say, a players stats, or other player attributes.
But again, it is an individual award...so while successful freshmen from outside the higher profile teams certainly deserve equal consideration I'm always a little uncomfortable with suggestions that the team of any contender should be a factor. It may well be a factor for those voting. That's reasonable, but if it's me...I'm going to try and decide by attempting to strictly compare player(s) individual performances. The team obviously does impact a players success so it may not be easy, or entirely possible to weigh one against another, on individual merits alone, with perfect accuracy.
Basically my concern is that the strength of a contenders team not be a negative for their consideration. Not held against them.
Plus, it would seem likely to me that voters throughout D-I conferences would likely not have seen all legit candidates play...live and in person. Right?
