Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 201 to 209 of 209
  1. #201
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    FWIW, the '07 Duke team was much younger than this year's UNC team. No recruited seniors and one recruited junior (Nelson). McRoberts, Paulus, McClure, and Pocius were sophomores, Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas and Zoubek freshmen.

    By contrast, a healthy 2010 UNC starts three upperclassmen, fifth-year senior Ginyard, fourth-year junior Graves and true senior Thompson.

    As far as the '06 Duke team is concerned, that team won the ACC regular season at 14-2, won the ACC Tournament, was ranked number one in the final AP poll, had the consensus national POY, the national defensive player of the year and finished the season 32-4. The disappointing and premature end to that season shouldn't obscure its many accomplishments.

    I understand why UNC's struggles have resulted in much mirth on this board. For the record, I voted them number two in the ACC preseason and may well have overrated them.

    But I'm more than a little wary of those 7-9 ACC prognostications. There are some real back-court issues and Roy Williams has the public persona of someone preparing for a tax audit. But this team still has considerable resources and I expect them to come back from the abyss and be a credible ACC team this season, maybe more than credible.

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    FWIW, the '07 Duke team was much younger than this year's UNC team. No recruited seniors and one recruited junior (Nelson). McRoberts, Paulus, McClure, and Pocius were sophomores, Scheyer, Henderson, Thomas and Zoubek freshmen.

    By contrast, a healthy 2010 UNC starts three upperclassmen, fifth-year senior Ginyard, fourth-year junior Graves and true senior Thompson.

    Those are good points about the experience on that UNC roster, Jim. I am still concerned about their front court scoring and depth. Let's not forget that they are undefeated in conference play!

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisheery View Post
    I love that they lost and all, but we almost lost to Rhode Island last year. Rhode Island. At home. So, we should just be glad that kid missed that last 3, I guess. I hope they have a terrible year too, but I don't think we can bank on it . . . yet.
    Is it time to mention again that College of Charleston isn't actually good? That they lost to Clemson by 39, and don't belong in the same conversation as last year's Rhode Island team?

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by pfrduke View Post
    Well, last year's Rhode Island team did go 23-11, 11-5 in the A-10, and got an NIT bid. They finished the season 71st in the Pomeroy Ratings. I don't think Charleston is likely to get that high.

    That said, this games strikes me as one of those 5-20-5 games - each time has 5 games a year where they play above their heads, 20 where they play average (for that team), and 5 where they play below what they should do. This has to be a "third 5" game for UNC.
    Plus, Duke didn't actually lose...

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    Best line of the week...on local Charlotte sports radio (The Chris McLain show, or Mac Attack, or whatever they call it).

    Host 1: "When was the last time Carolina lost in front of 5,000 people?"

    Host 2: "The Meineke Car Care Bowl"

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mizzou, post-Quin
    Quote Originally Posted by juise View Post
    I agree. This sentiment that the quality of a team is almost exclusively judged by NCAAT performance seems to really be taking over. Maybe I just hadn't been aware of it previously. For instance, ESPN named the winningest program in the decade, in arguably the most difficult conference (with unprecidented performance in the conference tournament), the 5th best program of the decade.

    Shoutingncu is definitely a reasonable poster...
    This is true (your overall post, not necessarily that last part quoted ), but let's look at it another way (although this is more a Rivalry Thread segue, I'd imagine).

    How many Final Fours has Duke been to? Fourteen? Take the last win away from each of those, be it championship or elite eight. Duke would still be the fourth winningest program in history and would still have the most wins of last decade. But would you be the same elite program that you are on a national scale? Does Syracuse belong in the "Blue Blood" conversation along with Kansas and UCLA and Indiana? Because the Orange have the fifth most wins overall, ahead of two of those. On the national scene, the national championship is what makes all those regular season wins count.

    Another example: Say a team from, I don't know, a really long time ago goes undefeated for the season while playing in arguably the most difficult conference, or say, region. And an organization decides to go back and recognize that team years later as the nation's best, even though the dominance really only played out in region. Should that team's accomplishment be lauded on a national scale, or in the grand scheme, is that team just the best team in conference at the time?

    Duke's sustained excellence, with or without championships, is definitely an admirable accomplishment. But without the championships, I'm not sure it would matter to anyone outside Tobacco Road.

  7. #207
    Quote Originally Posted by shoutingncu View Post
    Duke's sustained excellence, with or without championships, is definitely an admirable accomplishment. But without the championships, I'm not sure it would matter to anyone outside Tobacco Road.
    Does that mean Dean Smith didn't matter until 1982?

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mizzou, post-Quin
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    Does that mean Dean Smith didn't matter until 1982?
    Coach K wasn't awarded the fifth best coach of last decade. Duke, the program, was considered fifth best (by ESPN, I believe is what was said).

    So Dean Smith kept the program of North Carolina very good prior to '82, just as Krzyzewski did with Duke in the late 80's, but I feel it's the championships that make both schools elite. Once again, Syracuse. Boeheim was certainly an elite coach prior to 2003. But is Syracuse an elite program in the same way that Duke, Carolina, Kansas, etc. are?

    Now I do think it's a combination of sustained winning and championships. NC State won it all with the greatest player our conference has ever had. And then won it again through magic. Two championships make them better than most programs, as far as that metric goes. But I wouldn't consider them elite.

    Kansas is the opposite. Prior to 40-12, how long had it been since Manning's group won the school's second, and how long had it been in between those two? But their overall wins during that time and continued post season success (Final Fours) kept them elite, in my mind.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilmington, NC

    All in good fun

    I know this is late to the party, but I made this up for my work neighbor buddy, huge Carolina fan.


Similar Threads

  1. So Ill vs College of Charleston
    By Indoor66 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-14-2008, 07:01 PM
  2. College Football 08
    By pless55 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-21-2008, 08:59 PM
  3. College Campuses
    By colchar in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 12-26-2007, 10:18 PM
  4. College Lecture
    By tecumseh in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-11-2007, 08:14 PM
  5. College or NFL?
    By Bluedawg in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 09-25-2007, 11:52 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •