Words used like "elite" ... "top" ..."strong" ... "good".... "solid" ..... etc are subjective descriptions of a programs level.... and everyone has their own opinion of who belongs in each category based on their own criteria.
To me "elite" is a very strong term and is only reserved for a select few.
I'd have to say there's probably less than 5-10 teams at each of the 4 classes (A-B-C-D) ... that have earned the term "elite" over time.
Searn's "elite" test .... . I'd say it has to be clear and obvious that the program deserves that honor.
To be "elite" it should be obvious to most ... if it warrants arguments and discussion to decide ... then such a program is likely not "elite" ... but perhaps "very good" .... a program that is truly "elite" does not need to convince anyone ...we already know.






