Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 64
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Did Cut have anything to say about this game?

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern VA

    Unhappy Shoot!!

    Quote Originally Posted by OZZIE4DUKE View Post
    You're darn tootin skippy it isn't over. We've only just begun. Far too many pessimists populating this board for my taste. Almost reminds me of late February 2001 when Carlos Boozer broke his foot. Next thing we knew there was the infamous "It's over" thread. And of course, it wasn't over - we won the National Championship instead. My friends, we ARE going to beat Alabama next week.
    So, Oz, are you picking us for the NC???!

    Obviously there's a lot of frustration as we didn't play our A game today, and - take this as a positive sign - most of us were actually expecting to win this one.

    Look, I agree that we CAN challenge 'bama next week, especially in this age of NCAA balance (there just isn't as much difference between a top-5 team and a top-60 team as there was , say, 40 years ago). But if we DO come out of week-3 with a 1-2 record, I do worry about the team's confidence level heading into some truly "must win" games in weeks 4-6 now.

    I suspect Coach will be doing some of his master-motivator magic in the coming few weeks.

    In Cut we trust.
    (Now bring on 'bama!)

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA

    Uh, not the best quote

    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    It wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, and it ain't over now. -- OPK
    Blutarsky was "on a roll" when he said that. Can't say the same for Duke FB

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    I was at the game and here are some positives (since I think we can all agree about the minuses - too many miscues, too many mental errors on defense, poor run defense)

    1) The first half was a spectacle. Not always in Duke's favor, but it was sure entertaining
    2) We may already have the best quarterback in the ACC. Wipe out two of Renfree's interceptions - they hit his receivers square in the hands. He's accurate, tough, he's got a cannon, he's got great touch. He's the real deal.
    3) Our running game is much better than last year. Scott is a difference-maker. He's explosive, capable of hitting those home runs that Cut was looking for.
    4) Will Snyderwine, as we already knew, is a great kicker.

  5. #45

    the loss

    Sorry to be so late in replying to this thread. I was at the game and by the time I got back, I didn't feel like rehashing it. I wanted to watch Alabama, then I got caught up switching back and forth between Southern Cal and Virginia (amazing showing by the Cavs).

    Let me start by saying it was a disheartening loss. It was a game Duke could have -- and probably should have -- won. It's a loss that will be hard to make up this season.

    I know it is easy to blame the defense, which did perform poorly, but we all knew that the defense would struggle. We are at a stage where many of our experienced players are not ACC level physically (Rwabukamba, Adam Banks, Patrick Egboh ... even Charlie Hatcher) and our physically talented players (August Campbell, Ross Cockrell, Tyree Glover, Justin Foxx) are too young and simply have no experience -- which leads to mistakes.

    Let me focus on one guy -- Ross Cockrell. If you have the game on tape or saw it in person, try to watch his performance. Cockrell is the most physically gifted DB we have -- a 6-foot corner with sub 4.5 speed and all the agility and quickness you want in a cover guy. But he tore up a knee at the end of his high school career and was hobbled most of his redshirt year at Duke. He's playing for the first time in two years.

    Against Wake, he made a couple of glaring coverage mistakes (although on one long completion, he was the victim of a blatant push-off by the Wake receiver). He also made one of the most athletic interceptions Duke has had in years ... AND led the team in tackles (he had seven solo tackles and three assists).

    My point is that Ross Cockrell will be a very good ACC corner one day (if he doesn't lose his confidence). He's not one now. And that describes a lot of guys on our defense.

    The point somebody made about our defense wearing down ... for the most part, that's not true. Duke rotated an awful lot of players on defense, even with so many defensive snaps. It might have been true for two guys -- DT Charlie Hatcher and S Matt Daniels, who played the great majority of snaps. Daniels, BTW, is the one legitimate combination of ACC talent and experience on our defense right now.

    The complaint our our lack of strength on defense is definitely true, especially up front. I don't see how that will change this year. And it only changes next year if guys like Bryant, Bruce, Sink and Hood develop. I am very confident that our young OL prospects will be very good. I'm more skeptical about our DL prospects.

    Overall, I think going in, we all knew that Wake would have some measure of success against our defense. I thought the only thing that REALLY discouraged me was the number of busts that we had the secondary. Two of their long touchdowns came on plays where the secondary flat-out lost a receiver.

    Still, didn't we all know that this was going to be a high-scoring game? Didn't half the people on the pregame board predict a shootout?

    As tough as the defense was to take, to my mind that wasn't what cost us the game. I expected the young defense to struggle. But I expected Duke's passing game to shred Wake's defense too.

    And it did ... to the tune of 48 points and 358 yards passing. I was even pleasantly surprised by the running game -- Desmond Scott goes for 122 yards, including a 63-yard TD run? When was the last time we had a 100-yard game against an ACC opponent?

    But I thought it was the offense -- more specifically the passing game -- even more specifically the receivers -- that cost us the game. I expect the young defense to give you yards and points. But I expect our receivers to catch the damn ball when it's in their hards. I've argued and bragged that we have the best group of receivers in the ACC ... but they weren't that good at Wake.

    Connor Vernon was -- eight catches for 181 yards and two TDs (both over 50 yards). He was an All-American.

    But Donovan Varner is just as good and yesterday he had FOUR drops, including one that bounced off his hands and was intercepted. And even though Austin Kelly had 10 catches (for 73 yards and a TD), he had THREE drops, including one that bounced off his hands and was intercepted.

    Think about it. Sean Renfree was 31 of 39 against Elon with three drops. Against Wake, he was 28 of 44 with nine drops. He's completing passes at a 71 percent rate. But he's hitting his receivers at an 86 percent rate. A few drops are normal -- but 12 out of 71 potential catches? That's awful for what's supposed to be a great receiving corps.

    When you go back and reconstruct the game, you have to understand that Duke wasn't going to stop Wake very often and Wake was going to struggle to stop Duke. So why did Wake win? I'd say, go back and look at the game's six turnovers:

    --With Duke up 14-7, Rwabukamba intercepts a pass at the Duke 15 and returns it to the Duke 43. I would say that without the INT, Wake scores a touchdown. So that leaves Duke PLUS one TD.

    -- To open the second quarter, Duke lines up for its first punt (Wake has had one). Kevin Jones lets the center snap -- not a perfect snap, but not a real bad one -- sail through his hands. Then, instead of falling on the ball (which would have at least given the defense a chance), he tries to pick ip up, leading to a Wake pickup and TD on the play. That cancels the Duke TO edge and leaves the two teams even.

    -- Duke takes the ensuing KO and marches right down the field. With 1st and 10 and the Wake 21, Renfree hits Kelly on a crossing pattern at about the 15. The ball bounces off his hands and is intercepted by Wake after about three tips. That TO cost Duke a TD -- leaving Wake up one TD.

    -- After the two teams score three TDs in 30 seconds of gametime, Wake is up 28-21. Duke gets the ball after their long halfback pass for a score. Duke has to start at the Wake nine after a penalty on the kickoff, but the Devils get a quick firstdown to the Wake 26. On first down, Renfree hits Varner at the Duke 44 ... the ball bounces off his hands and is intercepted and returned to the Duke 26. Two plays later, Wake scores a TD ... leaving Wake up two TO touchdowns (not even counting the fact that if Varner catches the ball, Duke has the ball near midfield and driving again).

    -- On Wake's first possession of the second half, the Deacs are 3rd and 13 at their own 17. Price heaves a deep ball to Williams over the middle. He appears to be open, but Cockrell makes a great recovery and takes the ball away from him at the Duke 39. Here's the key -- the play functioned as a punt for Wake -- a 44 yard punt with no return. I would argue that it didn't impact the TD balance in the game.

    -- Late in the game, down 54-41 with just over two minutes left, Renfree throws an INT on the sideline. It's the one TO that's is his fault -- the Wake DB jumped the sideline pattern. It was was more a bad read than a bad throw -- but at that point in the game, Renfree may have been desperate. Still, Duke was at the Wake 39 and driving when he threw it. That cost Duke another TD chance -- and leaves Wake up three TDs in the TO balance.

    THAT is why Duke lost the game by six points -- They either gave Wake or cost themselves four TDs while Wake's two mistakes cost themselves one TD and didn't give Duke any.

    As bad as the defense was, Duke's passing game should have been good enough to win it. It would have been if our quality receivers would JUST HANG ONTO THE BALL WHEN IT'S IN YOUR HANDS.

    As I said, disheartening. The defense will get better as the talented young guys get experience. The improvement in the running game appears to be real. And Renfree is going to be a great one.

    But whatever Duke accomplishes this year, they'll never get that game back. I fear it's going to cost us any chance of a bowl game.

    PS Kudos to Alex King, the walk-on who replaced Kevin Jones, as punter. He was superb -- a 48.6 average on four punts. Even the one long punt return wasn't a case of out-kicking his coverage -- Duke's two gunners actually overran the play.
    Last edited by Olympic Fan; 09-12-2010 at 11:42 AM.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by cspan37421 View Post
    Kudos to you for rooting the team on. I hope you're not implying that those with constructive criticism don't give "enough of a damn"
    Certainly not. Just giving a personal observation that, after not giving a rip for many years, Cut and Crew have me excited again. Certainly not a coment on anyone other than myself. And I certainly don't mean to imply that we don't have plenty of room for improvement.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    {great post shortened for space}
    Great summation, Oly. I wish we had been able to put that one in the win column. Thankfully, the rest of the conference looks like they may give us one back that we would not have thought we would get.

    Next play. Time to step up.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    I don't understand the ire or the frustration.

    1)five years ago the score would have been 54-13. We are scoring points-this is attractive to big time recruits. Win or lose doesn't really matter-its how we do it. The end game is attracting the 4 and 5 stars who usually go to stanford or wake. Our offensive system is looking attractive win or lose.

    2)Everyone knew the defense would be extremely weak. Why is everyone so surprized? We don't have any pressure to the qb coming off the lines not a lick.You can have dion sanders out there in his prime,along with darrel Revis,champ bailey along with all the great saftey and they will look awful if know one is pressuring the QB. But we don't have champ bailey,derrel revis or asante samuel-we have Chris rwabakuama and Johnny willaims. On paper before we even played wake I could tell you that our defense is really going to reak this year.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Wake's football team may average more points per game than the basketball team under a new HC.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    In the n&o today, I admire how Cut frankly said he was not satisfied at all with us "putting our heads down and letting guys go by us." Also was interesting to read that Renfree took the blame for ALL the INT but a bit later in the article and in another source, Kelly and Vernon said it was the fault of the "corps" for the drops/tips/INT. Good character traits.

    Here are the links: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/...y-renfree.html

    and: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/...mp-devils.html

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by Acymetric View Post
    Did Cut have anything to say about this game?
    See post#50.

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by badgerbd View Post
    I agree that we shouldn't have been so conservative there.

    It was dynamic programming done by David Romer (Christina's husband) on NFL data that suggested teams should go for it a lot more often than they did.
    I agree with the coaching decision here. We needed 2 scores and we took a FG here for a high likelihood 3 points. Unfortunately, we couldn't stop them and it turned into a 2 score game again. If we don't get the 1st down, then we have to stop them twice, still needing 2 scores for a tie or win.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    Sorry to be so late in replying to this thread. I was at the game and by the time I got back, I didn't feel like rehashing it. I wanted to watch Alabama, then I got caught up switching back and forth between Southern Cal and Virginia (amazing showing by the Cavs).

    Let me start by saying it was a disheartening loss. It was a game Duke could have -- and probably should have -- won. It's a loss that will be hard to make up this season.

    I know it is easy to blame the defense, which did perform poorly, but we all knew that the defense would struggle. We are at a stage where many of our experienced players are not ACC level physically (Rwabukamba, Adam Banks, Patrick Egboh ... even Charlie Hatcher) and our physically talented players (August Campbell, Ross Cockrell, Tyree Glover, Justin Foxx) are too young and simply have no experience -- which leads to mistakes.

    Let me focus on one guy -- Ross Cockrell. If you have the game on tape or saw it in person, try to watch his performance. Cockrell is the most physically gifted DB we have -- a 6-foot corner with sub 4.5 speed and all the agility and quickness you want in a cover guy. But he tore up a knee at the end of his high school career and was hobbled most of his redshirt year at Duke. He's playing for the first time in two years.

    Against Wake, he made a couple of glaring coverage mistakes (although on one long completion, he was the victim of a blatant push-off by the Wake receiver). He also made one of the most athletic interceptions Duke has had in years ... AND led the team in tackles (he had seven solo tackles and three assists).

    My point is that Ross Cockrell will be a very good ACC corner one day (if he doesn't lose his confidence). He's not one now. And that describes a lot of guys on our defense.

    The point somebody made about our defense wearing down ... for the most part, that's not true. Duke rotated an awful lot of players on defense, even with so many defensive snaps. It might have been true for two guys -- DT Charlie Hatcher and S Matt Daniels, who played the great majority of snaps. Daniels, BTW, is the one legitimate combination of ACC talent and experience on our defense right now.

    The complaint our our lack of strength on defense is definitely true, especially up front. I don't see how that will change this year. And it only changes next year if guys like Bryant, Bruce, Sink and Hood develop. I am very confident that our young OL prospects will be very good. I'm more skeptical about our DL prospects.

    Overall, I think going in, we all knew that Wake would have some measure of success against our defense. I thought the only thing that REALLY discouraged me was the number of busts that we had the secondary. Two of their long touchdowns came on plays where the secondary flat-out lost a receiver.

    Still, didn't we all know that this was going to be a high-scoring game? Didn't half the people on the pregame board predict a shootout?

    As tough as the defense was to take, to my mind that wasn't what cost us the game. I expected the young defense to struggle. But I expected Duke's passing game to shred Wake's defense too.

    And it did ... to the tune of 48 points and 358 yards passing. I was even pleasantly surprised by the running game -- Desmond Scott goes for 122 yards, including a 63-yard TD run? When was the last time we had a 100-yard game against an ACC opponent?

    But I thought it was the offense -- more specifically the passing game -- even more specifically the receivers -- that cost us the game. I expect the young defense to give you yards and points. But I expect our receivers to catch the damn ball when it's in their hards. I've argued and bragged that we have the best group of receivers in the ACC ... but they weren't that good at Wake.

    Connor Vernon was -- eight catches for 181 yards and two TDs (both over 50 yards). He was an All-American.

    But Donovan Varner is just as good and yesterday he had FOUR drops, including one that bounced off his hands and was intercepted. And even though Austin Kelly had 10 catches (for 73 yards and a TD), he had THREE drops, including one that bounced off his hands and was intercepted.

    Think about it. Sean Renfree was 31 of 39 against Elon with three drops. Against Wake, he was 28 of 44 with nine drops. He's completing passes at a 71 percent rate. But he's hitting his receivers at an 86 percent rate. A few drops are normal -- but 12 out of 71 potential catches? That's awful for what's supposed to be a great receiving corps.

    When you go back and reconstruct the game, you have to understand that Duke wasn't going to stop Wake very often and Wake was going to struggle to stop Duke. So why did Wake win? I'd say, go back and look at the game's six turnovers:

    --With Duke up 14-7, Rwabukamba intercepts a pass at the Duke 15 and returns it to the Duke 43. I would say that without the INT, Wake scores a touchdown. So that leaves Duke PLUS one TD.

    -- To open the second quarter, Duke lines up for its first punt (Wake has had one). Kevin Jones lets the center snap -- not a perfect snap, but not a real bad one -- sail through his hands. Then, instead of falling on the ball (which would have at least given the defense a chance), he tries to pick ip up, leading to a Wake pickup and TD on the play. That cancels the Duke TO edge and leaves the two teams even.

    -- Duke takes the ensuing KO and marches right down the field. With 1st and 10 and the Wake 21, Renfree hits Kelly on a crossing pattern at about the 15. The ball bounces off his hands and is intercepted by Wake after about three tips. That TO cost Duke a TD -- leaving Wake up one TD.

    -- After the two teams score three TDs in 30 seconds of gametime, Wake is up 28-21. Duke gets the ball after their long halfback pass for a score. Duke has to start at the Wake nine after a penalty on the kickoff, but the Devils get a quick firstdown to the Wake 26. On first down, Renfree hits Varner at the Duke 44 ... the ball bounces off his hands and is intercepted and returned to the Duke 26. Two plays later, Wake scores a TD ... leaving Wake up two TO touchdowns (not even counting the fact that if Varner catches the ball, Duke has the ball near midfield and driving again).

    -- On Wake's first possession of the second half, the Deacs are 3rd and 13 at their own 17. Price heaves a deep ball to Williams over the middle. He appears to be open, but Cockrell makes a great recovery and takes the ball away from him at the Duke 39. Here's the key -- the play functioned as a punt for Wake -- a 44 yard punt with no return. I would argue that it didn't impact the TD balance in the game.

    -- Late in the game, down 54-41 with just over two minutes left, Renfree throws an INT on the sideline. It's the one TO that's is his fault -- the Wake DB jumped the sideline pattern. It was was more a bad read than a bad throw -- but at that point in the game, Renfree may have been desperate. Still, Duke was at the Wake 39 and driving when he threw it. That cost Duke another TD chance -- and leaves Wake up three TDs in the TO balance.

    THAT is why Duke lost the game by six points -- They either gave Wake or cost themselves four TDs while Wake's two mistakes cost themselves one TD and didn't give Duke any.

    As bad as the defense was, Duke's passing game should have been good enough to win it. It would have been if our quality receivers would JUST HANG ONTO THE BALL WHEN IT'S IN YOUR HANDS.

    As I said, disheartening. The defense will get better as the talented young guys get experience. The improvement in the running game appears to be real. And Renfree is going to be a great one.

    But whatever Duke accomplishes this year, they'll never get that game back. I fear it's going to cost us any chance of a bowl game.

    PS Kudos to Alex King, the walk-on who replaced Kevin Jones, as punter. He was superb -- a 48.6 average on four punts. Even the one long punt return wasn't a case of out-kicking his coverage -- Duke's two gunners actually overran the play.
    Great analysis. You have far more patience and skill than I do to summarize like that. I will partially disagree with you on your conclusion that the offense/receivers lost the game for us. But your argument/s is/are indeed good one/s. Give me a reasonable # of how many of the "drops" should have been caught, allowing our WR/TE a mistake or two and that the other team will play some D and break up a potential completion or two. 4? 6? 8? I think our receivers and QB are fantastic, our OL and RB improved but don't expect them to make every catch. However, if they make 1 or 2 of the expected receptions yesterday, then we may well win. But, 48 points should have been enough for the W as it would have been in every other game played in the history of the ACC. Except this one.

    We can't give up 500 yards/4 TO/54 points and expect to win. We can't allow 4 opposing teammates to average 4+ yds/carry (totaling about 270+ yards) in the same game. I think Cut said something to the TV crew before or after the 1st half that we needed to tackle better and more often. We can't have our DB sucked in on fakes/play action/reverses and not be within 10 yards or more of their WR and give up huge gainers/TDs like we did yesterday. And, BTW, I do agree that Duke and Cockrell were absolutely screwed on that no-call around mid-field on Wake's 1st drive. A blatant offensive pass interference call that was incredibly missed/ignored. That let Wake out of a huge hole (3rd and long?) from fairly deep in their own territory.

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles

    Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by mkline09 View Post
    It is a shame because it isn't because there is a lack of effort it is just experience, technique and scheme are just all wrong right now.
    . . . How'd you like the play?

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by arnie is still king View Post
    The only problem with the defense is that we are slow, weak and inexperienced.
    Those don't seem to be significant obstacles to success . . .

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by devildeac View Post
    Great analysis. You have far more patience and skill than I do to summarize like that. I will partially disagree with you on your conclusion that the offense/receivers lost the game for us. But your argument/s is/are indeed good one/s. Give me a reasonable # of how many of the "drops" should have been caught, allowing our WR/TE a mistake or two and that the other team will play some D and break up a potential completion or two. 4? 6? 8? I think our receivers and QB are fantastic, our OL and RB improved but don't expect them to make every catch. However, if they make 1 or 2 of the expected receptions yesterday, then we may well win. But, 48 points should have been enough for the W as it would have been in every other game played in the history of the ACC. Except this one.

    We can't give up 500 yards/4 TO/54 points and expect to win. We can't allow 4 opposing teammates to average 4+ yds/carry (totaling about 270+ yards) in the same game. I think Cut said something to the TV crew before or after the 1st half that we needed to tackle better and more often. We can't have our DB sucked in on fakes/play action/reverses and not be within 10 yards or more of their WR and give up huge gainers/TDs like we did yesterday. And, BTW, I do agree that Duke and Cockrell were absolutely screwed on that no-call around mid-field on Wake's 1st drive. A blatant offensive pass interference call that was incredibly missed/ignored. That let Wake out of a huge hole (3rd and long?) from fairly deep in their own territory.
    After working in the yard all after noon and re-thinking this post, I realized an error. My next to last sentence in my 1st paragraph should have read "...in many other games played..." . What I did learn from the N&O in Raleigh today was that we now apparently have the ACC FB record for most points scored in a loss. Sorry about the error and need for the correction. Surprised someone didn't realize this before me.

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by devildeac View Post
    What I did learn from the N&O in Raleigh today was that we now apparently have the ACC FB record for most points scored in a loss.
    Wooohoooo! We got a record!
    Actually, I haven't looked them up, but I'm thinking there was more than one record posted yesterday. While it wasn't a record, I know that Wake scored it's 3rd longest TD off a pass at our expense. You can't have the score we had and not have something new written in the books.
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    Wooohoooo! We got a record!
    Actually, I haven't looked them up, but I'm thinking there was more than one record posted yesterday. While it wasn't a record, I know that Wake scored it's 3rd longest TD off a pass at our expense. You can't have the score we had and not have something new written in the books.
    I think I also read that it was the 2nd or 3rd highest scoring game in ACC FB history. I'm not sure I read of any other all-time records being set. 70 points combined in a half might be a record of some sort.

  19. #59
    They also said on ESPN3 that 95 points was the most ever scored at the Deacs' stadium. Of course, we went on to add 7 more in garbage time, so I'm pretty sure that record is firmly "ours."

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Berg View Post
    They also said on ESPN3 that 95 points was the most ever scored at the Deacs' stadium. Of course, we went on to add 7 more in garbage time, so I'm pretty sure that record is firmly "ours."
    If we had executed an onside kick in a recoverable fashion (a wfu guy basically grabbed it before it went OOB. We didn't even have a chance at it), it would not have been garbage time. I had quite a bit of confidence in our O if we had recovered it with about 1:30 left on the clock and the ball near mid-field. Sigh.

Similar Threads

  1. MBB: Duke 90, Wake Forest 70 Post-Game Thread
    By Jumbo in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 196
    Last Post: 01-20-2010, 09:57 AM
  2. MBB: Duke 101, Wake Forest 91 Post-Game Thread
    By Bob Green in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 02-24-2009, 03:18 PM
  3. MBB: Wake Forest 70, Duke 68 Post-Game Thread
    By Cavlaw in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 323
    Last Post: 01-31-2009, 12:51 PM
  4. Duke MBB at Wake Forest post-game thread
    By throatybeard in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 267
    Last Post: 02-21-2008, 01:37 PM
  5. Duke MBB vs. Wake Forest Pre-Game and In-Game Thread
    By Devils8780 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 02-17-2008, 10:03 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
  •