Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham

    Weak non-conference road schedule

    A couple of months ago (I think after the Wisconsin game) I said that Duke's weak non-conference road schedule would come back to bite them in ACC play and the NCAA Tournament. No one on this board agreed with me at that time, but who agrees today?

    I don't want to attribute all of Duke's bad play in the losses to playing on the road, but I think it does factor into the game. If we had played a few of those neutral-site games as true road games, I believe that this team would be a much better road team. But since we have not, we will be seeking our first true road win of the season for the 4th time on Saturday.

    GO DUKE! BEAT CLEMSON!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Columbia, North Carolina
    I think its going to be an awesome game Saturday, but I think we can pull it out.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Calipari Hell
    It's worth noting that probably two of the three best teams we've played this season are Wisconsin and Georgia Tech, and those were both true road games. Was playing on the road the primary culprit in those losses, or the fact that the competition was so strong? It's a combination of both, of course, but I'm not convinced the location of the games was the overwhelming reason for either loss.

    State was what it was. An improving, hungry team playing in a crazed arena against a Duke team that played as poorly as it has all year. A perfect storm. Good teams can lose games like that; really good teams respond well to such losses. We'll find out where we stand in that regard on Saturday.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Quote Originally Posted by dukediv2013 View Post
    I don't want to attribute all of Duke's bad play in the losses to playing on the road, but I think it does factor into the game. If we had played a few of those neutral-site games as true road games, I believe that this team would be a much better road team.
    GO DUKE! BEAT CLEMSON!
    I disagree. But if you are correct, we have now played three true tough road games so we should be ready for Clemson now if playing on the road makes us a much better road team.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Quote Originally Posted by camion View Post
    I disagree. But if you are correct, we have now played three true tough road games so we should be ready for Clemson now if playing on the road makes us a much better road team.
    This brings up a good point. How many true road games would the original poster have liked us to schedule? State was our third one, so I guess two would not have been enough. Maybe we should schedule all road games, but then if we lost a tournament game we'd probably have to blame it on the lack of neutral site games in the pre-season.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO

    Question "Those guys?"

    Quote Originally Posted by KyDevilinIL View Post
    State was what it was. An improving, hungry team playing in a crazed arena against a Duke team that played as poorly as it has all year. A perfect storm. Good teams can lose games like that; really good teams respond well to such losses. We'll find out where we stand in that regard on Saturday.
    The other comment about last night's game that seems appropriate is a piece of movie dialogue:

    "Who are those guys?" said Butch Cassidy to the Sundance Kid.

    I mean, really: Horner, Javi, Tracy? I have seen State play a few times, and I never saw anything like last night. And they shot 58%, which is a good percentage in a shoot-around .

    sagegrouse

  7. #7
    Why doesn't anyone ever come on and post, "Remember 3 weeks ago when I posted that (blah...blah...blah...) and no one believed me then? You all mocked me and said I didn't know what I was talking about. Well, 3 weeks later, I wanted to come back here and post that you were all right and I was wrong. I've learned a lot from all of you."?

    Dukediv - if we come back and win 3 road games in a row, I'm hoping you restore my faith in humanity and make the first such post

    s.i.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    This brings up a good point. How many true road games would the original poster have liked us to schedule? State was our third one, so I guess two would not have been enough. Maybe we should schedule all road games, but then if we lost a tournament game we'd probably have to blame it on the lack of neutral site games in the pre-season.
    I don't really understand your point. Are you suggesting that we played enough true road games in our non-conference schedule? The original poster's main argument is that Duke didn't have enough true road games to truly prepare themselves for the rough ACC. Considering that we played only one true road game before ACC play, lost that one, and then played two road games in the ACC and lost those too, he may have a pretty convincing point.

    So many, and I mean so many, attribute experience as a sign of potential success. Experience comes in many verticals: age, minutes, NCAA success, and home/road games. This team has a lot of the other types of experience, but true road games this year it does not. I personally think last night was a fluke. If we played NC State 10 times, we would have won 9. That said, I agree with the original poster that we weren't prepared for away games coming into the ACC.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    I don't really understand your point. Are you suggesting that we played enough true road games in our non-conference schedule? The original poster's main argument is that Duke didn't have enough true road games to truly prepare themselves for the rough ACC. Considering that we played only one true road game before ACC play, lost that one, and then played two road games in the ACC and lost those too, he may have a pretty convincing point.

    So many, and I mean so many, attribute experience as a sign of potential success. Experience comes in many verticals: age, minutes, NCAA success, and home/road games. This team has a lot of the other types of experience, but true road games this year it does not. I personally think last night was a fluke. If we played NC State 10 times, we would have won 9. That said, I agree with the original poster that we weren't prepared for away games coming into the ACC.
    My point is I don't think he has anything close to a convincing point. I apologize for being snippy but I tend to get annoyed by "I told you so" posts, especially since his point is sooooo far from being proven in a two game sample size with no control group.

    Only three of our players are freshmen (and one of them hardly played last night). The rest have played in plenty of road games (although I'll grant that Miles didn't actually get on the court in so many road games last year). The idea that playing one or two extra road games would have made Mason and Andre (or Miles, for that matter) play better last night makes no sense to me.

    Moreover, if I recall correctly, the original debate was comparing our schedule to UNC's, saying why couldn't we play as many road games as they do. Well, UNC's only road games (pre-ACC) were at Kentucky, in Texas (but not @Texas, it wasn't really a "true" road game, although perhaps a little more than our game in Chicago), and at Charleston (although that came way after the original discussion). Well, accepting that in the original discussion UNC's schedule was considered laudatory (which is my recollection but admittedly may not be accurate), then the OP would effectively be arguing that one extra road game against a second-tier Southern Conference team plus moving the Chicago game to somewhere closer to Iowa (but not @Iowa State) would have been acceptable and would have avoided last night's debacle. Again, that seems like quite a stretch to me, not to mention that all those road games didn't keep Carolina from getting clobbered in their only league road game so far. (Plus, UNC's lost 2 of their 3 home games in the league so far; maybe they didn't schedule enough home games in the pre-season.)

    Finally, even if the original debate wasn't in the context of UNC's schedule, I doubt too many of the top-tier teams play more than two (and certainly not more than three) "true" road games in the pre-season schedule. So, (a) again, we are arguing about one (or at most two) additional road games; (b) most coaches of top-tier teams seem to more or less agree with K's scheduling strategy; (c) plenty of other teams who play only one true pre-conference road game (or even none) seem to do OK on the road in their conference schedule; and (d) Duke has been one of the best (if not the best) road team in the ACC for years, despite K's scheduling tendencies.

    And if we're really only talking about one extra pre-season road game, then didn't we get that against GaTech? It shouldn't have affected us against State at all, right?

    So I don't agree. Is that better?
    Last edited by Kedsy; 01-21-2010 at 12:53 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by Kedsy View Post
    My point is I don't think he has anything close to a convincing point. I apologize for being snippy but I tend to get annoyed by "I told you so" posts, especially since his point is sooooo far from being proven in a two game sample size with no control group.

    Only three of our players are freshmen (and one of them hardly played last night). The rest have played in plenty of road games (although I'll grant that Miles didn't actually get on the court in so many road games last year). The idea that playing one or two extra road games would have made Mason and Andre (or Miles, for that matter) play better last night makes no sense to me.

    Moreover, if I recall correctly, the original debate was comparing our schedule to UNC's, saying why couldn't we play as many road games as they do. Well, UNC's only road games (pre-ACC) were at Kentucky, in Texas (but not @Texas, it wasn't really a "true" road game, although perhaps a little more than our game in Chicago), and at Charleston (although that came way after the original discussion). Well, accepting that in the original discussion UNC's schedule was considered laudatory (which is my recollection but admittedly may not be accurate), then the OP would effectively be arguing that one extra road game against a second-tier Southern Conference team plus moving the Chicago game to somewhere closer to Iowa (but not @Iowa State) would have been acceptable and would have avoided last night's debacle. Again, that seems like quite a stretch to me, not to mention that all those road games didn't keep Carolina from getting clobbered in their only league road game so far. (Plus, UNC's lost 2 of their 3 home games in the league so far; maybe they didn't schedule enough home games in the pre-season.)

    Finally, even if the original debate wasn't in the context of UNC's schedule, I doubt too many of the top-tier teams play more than two (and certainly not more than three) "true" road games in the pre-season schedule. So, (a) again, we are arguing about one (or at most two) additional road games; (b) most coaches of top-tier teams seem to more or less agree with K's scheduling strategy; (c) plenty of other teams who play only one true pre-conference road game (or even none) seem to do OK on the road in their conference schedule; and (d) Duke has been one of the best (if not the best) road team in the ACC for years, despite K's scheduling tendencies.

    And if we're really only talking about one extra pre-season road game, then didn't we get that against GaTech? It shouldn't have affected us against State at all, right?

    So I don't agree. Is that better?
    Much better . You give a convincing argument, but I think all of these posts are underlying an overall theme: Duke is not very good (and one could easily make the argument of being horrible) on the road. We lost to two undefeated teams at the time (Sconsin wasn't ranked when we played them) and an inconsistent GT team. All on the road. This is bad. I kinda laughed and never thought that a poor shooting Singler was an issue when DBR was going bonkers. However, not being able to play away is indeed a concern. Anyone who thinks it's not, I'd love to hear your views.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by dukediv2013 View Post
    A couple of months ago (I think after the Wisconsin game) I said that Duke's weak non-conference road schedule would come back to bite them in ACC play and the NCAA Tournament. No one on this board agreed with me at that time, but who agrees today?

    I don't want to attribute all of Duke's bad play in the losses to playing on the road, but I think it does factor into the game. If we had played a few of those neutral-site games as true road games, I believe that this team would be a much better road team. But since we have not, we will be seeking our first true road win of the season for the 4th time on Saturday.

    GO DUKE! BEAT CLEMSON!
    I think my single favorite (from a chuckling, entertainment standpoint) feature of this board is the "I told you so" posts, particularly when they're of the "I'm so smart about all the reasons Duke may fail" variety. Kudos.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Much better . You give a convincing argument, but I think all of these posts are underlying an overall theme: Duke is not very good (and one could easily make the argument of being horrible) on the road. We lost to two undefeated teams at the time (Sconsin wasn't ranked when we played them) and an inconsistent GT team. All on the road. This is bad. I kinda laughed and never thought that a poor shooting Singler was an issue when DBR was going bonkers. However, not being able to play away is indeed a concern. Anyone who thinks it's not, I'd love to hear your views.
    We only have one bad loss in an away game. If we start losing to more relatively bad teams on the road, I'll say we have a problem on the road. It's too small a sample size to judge future performances on right now.

    A certain team lost to Boston College at home to start ACC play and followed that up with a loss at Wake Forest last year.

    Want to know how they finished the season?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Much better . You give a convincing argument, but I think all of these posts are underlying an overall theme: Duke is not very good (and one could easily make the argument of being horrible) on the road. We lost to two undefeated teams at the time (Sconsin wasn't ranked when we played them) and an inconsistent GT team. All on the road. This is bad. I kinda laughed and never thought that a poor shooting Singler was an issue when DBR was going bonkers. However, not being able to play away is indeed a concern. Anyone who thinks it's not, I'd love to hear your views.
    I'm not sure that 3 games is enough to say that Duke "is not very good or arguably horrible" on the road as a truism, for two reasons.

    First, the losses to Wisconsin and Georgia Tech were losses to top-20 caliber teams by less than a handful of points. The GT game, especially, was extremely winnable. We played pretty well in both games - not our best, certainly, but we didn't play like a "not very good" or "arguably horrible" team in either.

    Second, 3 games is only 3 games. The team has 7 more road contests this year, including two big ones the next two weekends. The time for defining our talent as a road team will come later.

    Clearly, the team has not played as well away from home as in Cameron. But that doesn't mean that now, or for the season, Duke becomes a "not very good or arguably horrible" team on the road.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by airowe View Post
    We only have one bad loss in an away game. If we start losing to more relatively bad teams on the road, I'll say we have a problem on the road. It's too small a sample size to judge future performances on right now.

    A certain team lost to Boston College at home to start ACC play and followed that up with a loss at Wake Forest last year.

    Want to know how they finished the season?
    I'd have to disagree with you on this point. That team you speak of already proved their away games with wins at UC Santa Barbara (k, not a great example), Mich State, and Nevada.

    Second, we're already a third into the ACC and the season is basically half done. That isn't a small sample size, even if we only have 3 "true" away games. IMO, it is a concern. Littlejohn is a great (in many senses of the word) test for Duke.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by pfrduke View Post
    Clearly, the team has not played as well away from home as in Cameron. But that doesn't mean that now, or for the season, Duke becomes a "not very good or arguably horrible" team on the road.
    How would you interpret 0-3 on the road? A loss is a loss, and not being able to maintain a lead (ie GT) or play good defense (ie NCSU) is not exactly elite basketball on the road. Yes - the sample size is small. But, on a neutral court, would you rather take Duke or any of the other teams that we played? I'd take Duke 10 times out of 10 and be confident. On the road, it's a completely different matter.

    For the record, I think Duke is a top 10 team and probably a top 5 team. But there are two types of Duke right now - on the road Duke and home / neutral Duke.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    I'd have to disagree with you on this point. That team you speak of already proved their away games with wins at UC Santa Barbara (k, not a great example), Mich State, and Nevada.

    Second, we're already a third into the ACC and the season is basically half done. That isn't a small sample size, even if we only have 3 "true" away games. IMO, it is a concern. Littlejohn is a great (in many senses of the word) test for Duke.
    Don't talk to me about Nevada and UCSB. That team was a lot better than this team also. All I'm saying is, you can't predict future successes on such a small sample size.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by airowe View Post
    Don't talk to me about Nevada and UCSB. That team was a lot better than this team also. All I'm saying is, you can't predict future successes on such a small sample size.
    And all I'm saying is that Duke's play on the road is a concern. Currently, with the exception of K's track record, there is nothing to suggest that we're a good team on the road. Do I think we'll be 8-8? Of course not. Do I think K will get it together? Absolutely! But, as of this moment, our road situation is indeed a situation. And the most pressing issue that Duke faces right now.
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    How would you interpret 0-3 on the road? A loss is a loss, and not being able to maintain a lead (ie GT) or play good defense (ie NCSU) is not exactly elite basketball on the road. Yes - the sample size is small. But, on a neutral court, would you rather take Duke or any of the other teams that we played? I'd take Duke 10 times out of 10 and be confident. On the road, it's a completely different matter.

    For the record, I think Duke is a top 10 team and probably a top 5 team. But there are two types of Duke right now - on the road Duke and home / neutral Duke.
    We play 10 "true" road games this season. If I had to rank them, today, in terms of degree of difficulty, it would be somewhat like this:

    1) Clemson
    2) Wisconsin
    t3) Georgia Tech and Georgetown
    5) UNC
    6) Maryland
    7) NCSU
    8) UVA
    9) Miami
    10) BC

    Yes, so far, we're 0-3, and yes, we've lost one of the games that should have been one of the easier (relatively speaking) road games we'll play this year. But if we end up 5-5 or 6-4 on the road against that schedule, I'd say we're a pretty good road team - K's teams don't usually do much better than that. If we end up 7-3, which we still can, that's really good. That doesn't mean we're an exceptional road team, but we don't need to be, since (as so many others have pointed out) we don't play road games after March 3.

    Also, the team that played at Georgia Tech and at Wisconsin is a good road team. I'd wager that those two schools don't have more than 1 or 2 closer home games all season, and those are two teams that are very good on their home court. The team that played last night was bad - there aren't really any two ways about that one. IMO, calling the team "not very good" or "arguably horrible" on the road extrapolates way too much from the most recent game and ignores both earlier performance from this year as well as several seasons' worth of performance for our other players.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    Again, I don't want to attribute all of Duke's losses to a weak non-conference road schedule, but Duke has lost 6 of the last 8 in the ACC on the road.

    I would like to see us play 2 non-conference road games before conference play next year. Scheduling Louisville is a great step in the right direction.

    I also don't like "I told you so" posts, but this theme is becoming more prevalent as the year goes on, so maybe it is time to think about some things like this. I was at the game last night and we just looked awful defensively. Does the road crowd have anything to do with it? I don't know, but it just had me thinking.

    Sorry if I made anyone upset with my initial post.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    And all I'm saying is that Duke's play on the road is a concern. Currently, with the exception of K's track record, there is nothing to suggest that we're a good team on the road. Do I think we'll be 8-8? Of course not. Do I think K will get it together? Absolutely! But, as of this moment, our road situation is indeed a situation. And the most pressing issue that Duke faces right now.
    The most pressing issue Duke faces right now is Clemson's Defense

    I understand where you're coming from. Duke has played three poor games on the road. Two of them were against really good competition though and one of those is almost impossible to beat at home. If we start losing at BC, at Miami, at UVA I'll be concerned. I hope we win this game at Clemson, and I think we will but if we lose at Georgetown I'm not freaking out. That's a really good team and they're going to be out for blood.

Similar Threads

  1. Weak Non-conference schedule
    By dukediv2013 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 12-09-2009, 06:37 PM
  2. Duke conference schedule and NIT info
    By duketaylor in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-01-2009, 10:05 AM
  3. Duke schedule vs. Carolina schedule
    By FerryFor50 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 12-01-2008, 04:48 PM
  4. Weak in the Knees
    By EarlJam in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-26-2008, 11:14 PM
  5. 18 game conference schedule
    By jjasper0729 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-11-2007, 01:09 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
  •