If it's the play I'm thinking of, I thought it was Kelly's man who got loose. He and Dawkins switched off on Clark right before, and when Dawkins's man cut towards the basket, Kelly and Dawkins both followed him while Clark curled around a double screen for a wide open 3. Definitely a miscommunication between Kelly and Dawkins that in the end left Kelly w/o a man to guard.
"There can BE only one."
My claim to fame: It was one of those two NIT games at Cameron - Ala A&T or 'Bama - where as a student I brought a life-sized poster of a model (Cheryl Tieggs?) in a skimpy bathing suit, and camped out in the first row behind the north basket. When the team from Alabama was shooting that direction in the second half, some friends and I held it up for each free-throw they shot. I think they missed, like, 7 of 12. At least that's how I remember it. I remember Tommy Emma, lined up along the key before one of the shots, looking over, breaking into a big grin and just shaking his head and laughing... Ah, those were the days!!
As for Elmore, I for one welcome critical views, and have been known to peruse the occasional opponent fan website to better understand the external view of Duke, its fans and various plays/calls. So I don't begrudge a commentator the right to criticisize Duke or Duke players, at all. But Elmore just comes across too often as simply, if you watch the subtlties, rooting against the Devils, or just not paying very close attention. I remember the example given earlier of a game where he pointed out maybe five or six (?) close calls that went Duke's way, while obviously ignoring EVERY marginal call against us -- and there were some bad ones. It simply was unprofessional. And vs Wake his criticism of the Wake kid laid out on the floor for a "lack of toughness," was just embarrassing. You could see very clearly on the slow-mo replay that Nolan, entirely by accident as he was dribbling away, had a hand swing around and smak the kid solidly on the side of his face. Yet LE was already on his high horse, and not even looking at the replay (I think Patrick saw it, but stopped short of directly contracting Elmore).
For those leaping to LE's defense, listen carefully the next time he does a game involving the Terps. Listen for it. I think you'll eventually hear the bias.
Unfortunately us Dukies are more used to alums, such as Bilas, going overboard the OTHER way, just to prove that they aren't Duke homers. Oh well... I think that's a better problem to have.
Not what I said.
I was talking about carefully listening to an Elmore broadcast, especially one involvoing MD, and pay attention for any bias. One could certainly come away from such an examination with the conclusion that said announcer is NOT exhibiting bias. My point was simply that if one PAYS ATTENTION to the issue of whether bias is being shown, it will become evident very quickly in his case. That is different than watching Elmore while TRYING TO PROOVE his bias. You certainly won't see the sort of "studied neutrality" of a Bryant Gumbel (?), Brent Musberger, Gminski, or other professional announcers.
I have mostly enjoyed Len Elmore when he's done Duke games.
I do remember the times when we were most sensitive about the anti-Duke stuff and he seemed to pile-on a bit. But I like his perspective and welcome his knowledgeable insight into the game of college basketball. He's generally entertaining, and doesn't seem to flub facts or harp on one subject too often.
Unlike some of us, I could care less if his bias shows through once in a while. He obviously loved representing Maryland on the floor, and I'd feel cheated (if that's the word) if he didn't show his pride as a Maryland alum once in a while. What's wrong with being Len Elmore, Maryland great? That is who he is!
I'll get slammed for it, but I put him just below Mike Gminski on a short list of really good color guys doing ACC games.
Man, if your Mom made you wear that color when you were a baby, and you're still wearing it, it's time to grow up!
Compared to your average basketball announcer, Elmore is in fact educated and erudite. He has a law degree from Harvard, and worked as a prosecutor in NYC. Now, that doesn't necessarily make him a better announcer than others, but he was more of a scholar than some.
Interesting, of course, is entirely subjective. I personally like Elmore more than many other announcers, particularly Vitale.
I completely agree with you. I too like Elmore. Call me crazy. I like the fact that he isn't 100% objective and has a little bias towards Maryland. Don't you kinda wish that Bilas had a little bias towards Duke sometimes? It gives Elmore an edge and makes him seem more human. Plus, his analysis is rarely off. He rarely gets carried away. However, I will say that the chemistry with Mike Patrick isn't great. I think Elmore needs a better partner. Just my 2 cents.
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
I don't hate Elmore, but he does say some rediculous things about Duke players. At least I can tune him out. With Vitale, who I have no problems with as a person, I have to turn off the volume completely because he distracts from the game.
I will re-phrase then: If you are carefully listening for bias you will certainly hear it.
I listen for information and insight so that's what I usually hear although not always.
I often scan the opponent's board during commercials and always find it interesting that while DBR posters are complaining about biased officials and announcers the other teams fans are doing the exact same thing. During the championship game I received messages from my UNC buddies screaming that Butler was getting hosed by the officials while DBR posters were simultaneoulsy complaining that Duke was getting hosed by the officials. They can't be biased both against and in favor of Duke so it must be a difference of perception.
Obviously, there's some disagreement here about whether Elmore is biased in his commentary, and more specifically, if there is evidence that he believes that "Duke gets all the calls."
If we assume that Duke does not, in fact, get all the calls, then we may assume that Elmore would comment equally often on officiating errors that benefit each team when he calls a Duke game.
I volunteer to measure this statistic for one game, though I must admit that I believe that he is biased, and I think that it's at least possible that it could affect my numbers. To be fair, I think someone from the other side of the argument should measure the data as well for the same game, and maybe we could average the results. It's not much of an experiment, but it would be a start. Would any Elmore supporters like to volunteer?
Officials do make mistakes and those mistakes likely do favor one team or the other although that too can be subjective. My point is that Elmore or any announcer's comments about officiating are going to relate more to the actual events of the game than any bias that they have.
I think it is a little paranoid to think that officials and announcers are biased against some teams because of where they went to school. When Elmore played for MD he tried to be the best ball player he could be. He's been an announcer much longer so isn't it likely that his objective is to be the best announcer that he possibly can be instead of carrying out some conspiracy against Duke or other teams besides his alma mater?
I have several good customers who are Carolina grads and Tarheel fans. Trust me I'm only interested in earning their business not changing their basketball allegiance. It's called being a professional and earning a living and it's way more important than who your favorite basketball team is.
You've clearly never listened to Kenny "We Win!" Smith doing a game.
I think it is a little naive to think that announcers AREN'T biased by where they went to school. I find your take particularly ironic considering you just wrote right above it that it's funny how partisans of one school see biased officiating one way, partisans of the other school see the reverse.
Personally, I think good announcers should strive to be objective and be reasonably successful at that endeavor-- ultimately that is all I ask. I think Len Elmore actually pretty much does that these days although his bias shows through at times.
That being said, my irritation with Elmore is more about him piling on with the Duke officiating conspiracy than the fact that I do honestly believe that he dislikes Duke and subtly (and probably unconsciously) seems to skew things accordingly.
Yeah, I noticed that none of the legion Elmore supporters stepped up to the plate on that one. Sure it's a somewhat annoying task, but most of us here have DVRs and are going to be watching the game anyway. A number of people in this thread have spent more time defending Elmore's neutrality than it would take to pull out a pad of paper and write time signatures down when Elmore criticizes calls that went against Duke.
My guess is that it would hardly take any time at all-- 91_92_01_10 is the one who's going to have the real work to do here.