[HD28]

I don't understand some of the "debate" between some posters. The bottom line is that Rowan earned its way to state by beating 3 teams in the regional tourney. Is it possible that another team would be crowned champion if the tourney was replayed this week....well sure....but that is not how tournaments work. Rowan was the best team in the region when it mattered, from March 1 to March 6 - case closed.

Regarding POY awards and especially all-tourney teams I personally don't like them.

All-Tourney awards take a team victory and, many times, reduce it to individual accomplishments. I've also been around long enough to know 2 things:
1) Many voters don't even watch enough of the tourney games to justify their decisions (many base it on season performance)
2) Selections can be very political and not entirely based on performance alone.

Regarding POY awards, there is no clear-cut criteria that constitutes a POY - everyone has their own criteria. For example is it all stats (even if the team losses), is it the importance of a player to a winning team (even if much of the contribution doesn't show up in the box score), is it if the player's team wins the regional, is it how much opposing teams have to change their offenses or defenses to hopefully reduce an opposing player's output?

Case in point - Connor of Ashland had great stats during the year in multiple categories (points, rebs, and blocked shots) but she had poor stats during the most important game of the year due to foul trouble. One could also make the argument that no single player caused opponents to rework their defensive strategies more (double teaming, junk defenses, etc.)

Kissinger of Rowan on the other hand also had great season stats (even had a higher point average), was the definitive leader in Rowan's regional championship, and she won the MVP of the regional tournament.

Which player deserves the POY more? - IMO, both players are worthy of POY - it just depends on your personal definition of what the POY is.

Very well said!