Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 129
  1. #41

    Ya never know...

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAlumna View Post
    Sat, Sep 01 Connecticut Durham, N.C. 2:00 p.m.
    Sat, Sep 08 Virginia * at Charlottesville, Va. 12:00 p.m. LFS/R
    Sat, Sep 15 Northwestern at Evanston, Ill. 8:00 p.m. Big Ten Network
    Sat, Sep 22 Navy at Annapolis, Md. 1:00 p.m. CSTV
    Sat, Sep 29 Miami * at Miami, Fla. TBA
    Sat, Oct 06 Wake Forest * Durham, N.C. TBA
    Sat, Oct 13 Virginia Tech Durham, N.C. TBA
    Sat, Oct 27 Florida State * at Tallahassee, Fla. TBA
    Sat, Nov 03 Clemson * Durham, N.C. TBA
    Sat, Nov 10 Georgia Tech * Durham, N.C. TBA
    Sat, Nov 17 Notre Dame at Notre Dame, Ind. 2:30 p.m. NBC
    Sat, Nov 24 North Carolina * at Chapel Hill, N.C. TBA

    I'd say we might (MIGHT!) have a shot at UConn and Navy, but the rest? Well, let's just say it doesn't look good.

    But, I'm always happy to be proven wrong when it comes to predicting Duke Football results...
    This schedule is really, really tough. I'd say 3 wins max, 2-10 likely, but you never know what might happen if the team gets momentum from a couple of early wins. The UConn game is a must to win to start the season and would be a huge confidence booster if they can do it, but then to head to UVA and then to Northwestern on successive weeks will be major challenge.

    The key is September - Duke first needs to just get a win, and the UConn game is that game. They really, really need to win that game. Then, with that opening W, can they pull off another W in one of the next 4?

    Last year, what would have happened differerently had Duke pulled out a W either at Wake Forest, which was oh so close against an Orange Bowl team at their home field, or converted on 4th down at the end against Miami?

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    Largely, yes. But it also includes the sense (subjective, I grant) that the administration puts real value upon athletics in general and football in particular. The lacrosse case makes it much harder for recruits to believe that such support exists, whatever one thinks of the administration's performance. The Yoh Center is great, but WW is a dump.
    I'm not convinced by the argument that the university administration needs to prove that it places a high priority on athletics, because, let's face it, it's not that a high priority, and shouldn't be for a major research institution. It's a luxury - an enjoyable one - but not a necessity.

    And in two years football recruits (and high students generally) won't even remember the lacrosse case.

    Yup. This issue is way undervalued in importance. Obviously, I'd love to see a packed WW, but the most important ingredient for the players in this regard is the support of their peers. Great student support would go a long way toward mitigating a less than full WW.
    The only way to fix this is to win. From my observations, Duke students typically do a pretty good job of turning out for the first game, and stop showing up when it becomes apparent that Duke is in for another loss-filled season. Winning will take care of that.

    I'm surprised to see this question asked so soon after the Gang of 88 debacle. Here is a report from an official Duke publication showing tepid (at best) faculty support for football, and it surely hasn't gotten any better since then. More is available here, including K's concern, and here. The situation is often described in much starker terms by those who note that a frequent academic antipathy to sports is made worse for football players at Duke since hoops is untouchable and football is the other high profile sport.
    How is that supposed to affect the success of the football program - by hurting the feelings of the players? It's not clear why it matters whether faculty support is "tepid," so long as they remain willing to address the needs of athletes as students.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Green View Post
    Navy lost 35 lettermen off of last year's squad. We lost 16.
    You make it sound like retaining players from teams that have gone 3-30 over the last three years is a plus.

  4. #44
    I'll be happy with one win. Just one. Maybe that's setting the bar too low - but I believe in baby steps.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    I'm not convinced by the argument that the university administration needs to prove that it places a high priority on athletics, because, let's face it, it's not that a high priority, and shouldn't be for a major research institution. It's a luxury - an enjoyable one - but not a necessity.
    Many schools disagree. Prominent examples include Stanford (for obvious reasons) and Harvard (41 varsity sports -- the most anywhere -- and roughly one in four undergraduates a recruited varsity athlete). Moreover, the idea that it's luxurious fluff is belied by the connection between athletic success and both undergraduate applications and alumni giving. It's no coincidence that Duke's rise up the rankings charts corresponds nicely to its basketball success.

    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    And in two years football recruits (and high students generally) won't even remember the lacrosse case.
    If you think so you aren't very experienced with the athletic recruiting process. Duke's competition will remind parents and students early and often about the lax case and what it means for athletes at Duke for years to come. K's success and reputation can readily overcome that. It will be much more difficult for football.

    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    The only way to fix this is to win. From my observations, Duke students typically do a pretty good job of turning out for the first game, and stop showing up when it becomes apparent that Duke is in for another loss-filled season. Winning will take care of that.
    Sadly, you're probably right. But it doesn't speak well of our students, who ought to support their school and their peers, particularly when contrasted with the (much higher) level of student support at other schools despite "competitive difficulties" or even with earlier times at Cameron, when student support was excellent even when the teams were not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    How is that supposed to affect the success of the football program - by hurting the feelings of the players? It's not clear why it matters whether faculty support is "tepid," so long as they remain willing to address the needs of athletes as students.
    That's a major so long as. Duke has been rife with stories of professors sticking it to athletes, and particularly football players, simply for being athletes, for a long time. All of us who attended should be familiar with the anecdotal evidence. What we now know happened in the lax case (look here, here and here too) makes it easier to believe that an ugly pattern exists. Why else would 17 members of the economics faculty have to specifically welcome all student athletes to their classes during the lax scandal? The players know it and the competition exploits it.
    Last edited by RPS; 07-12-2007 at 07:43 PM. Reason: typo

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA

    They've gained experience...

    Quote Originally Posted by mapei View Post
    You make it sound like retaining players from teams that have gone 3-30 over the last three years is a plus.
    The players may have gone 3-30 but they've gained experience in the process. This is specifically the case with our offensive line. Lewis needs time to throw the ball. So yes, retaining players that have gone 3-30 the last three years is a plus!

    Bob Green
    Yokosuka, Japan

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Gotta love your optimism, Bob!

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by mapei View Post
    Gotta love your optimism, Bob!
    I'm trying hard to catch up with Ozzie in the optimism department!

    Bob Green
    Yokosuka, Japan

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Watching carolina Go To HELL!

    Exclamation Logic and facts not required!

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Green View Post
    I'm trying hard to catch up with Ozzie in the optimism department!

    Bob Green
    Yokosuka, Japan
    I'm on a big, empty train right now, Bob. Welcome aboard! Seats will fill up quickly once the winning starts.
    Ozzie, your paradigm of optimism!

    Go To Hell carolina, Go To Hell!
    9F 9F 9F
    https://ecogreen.greentechaffiliate.com

  10. #50

    running track and la coliseum / fixing Wade will take leadership

    Quote Originally Posted by OZZIE4DUKE View Post
    As for replacing Wallace Wade Stadium, of which I am a regular attendee in for football games and have been since 1972, I like the stadium but hate the facilities. Without a doubt the bathrooms need to be replaced. The President's box is a joke. Seats with backs and drink holders large enough to hold the cups being sold PLEASE! Food quality and choices have improved significantly in the last 3 years, and I have no objection to the concession stands and food carts as they are from the consumer's standpoint (I'm sure the vendors would love significant improvements). Your suggestion to lower the playing field and get rid of the track to add seats doesn't thrill me. I sit in row J. I wouldn't want to be much closer to the field because it would be difficult to see the action without increasing the viewing (rake) angle of the stands. Granted, lowering the field would do that a little bit, but not significantly. (The more I think about this and the geometry involved, maybe it would work nicely. Didn't you post previously that you have seen this done elsewhere? At Stanford maybe?) Heck, as you well know, the worst view of the game is on the sidelines. That's why some of the coaches (at Duke, at other colleges and in the pros) sit up in the press box -- to get a bird's eye view. And if I were in a position to buy a luxury box, I'd want it on the west side (press box side) of the field, so the sun wasn't in my eyes in the late afternoons.
    In 1992, 1993, the running track was removed at the LA Coliseum. The rake, viewing angle of the seats which were added (with the lowering of the field) was slightly steeper than the the viewing angle for the rest of the stadium. This allowed adding slightly more seats - of course the field was lowered slightly more to accommodate the additional seats. As long as the last seats, or the seats closest to the field are still elevated by at least 10 feet, I think they are good viewing seats. So if we are wedded to renovating Wade so that it is no longer a "dump" as RPS has noted, I suppose the running track removal could come later. Firstly, create some archtecture around the top of the ravine. A building to replace the Presidents box makes a lot of sense, and could probably be added for around $5-7 million, with catering facilities, for the boxes. I bet Duke could raise funds to cover a good bit of the cost of the building from corporate sponsors. Removing the running track - Roof told/e-mailed me once that he like the idea.

    But, all of this takes some leadership to get it done. We do not have that with Brodhead who quivers vis a vis the Group of 88. I also believe Brodhead is not a fan of sports, college athletes and that he harbours resentment toward them. RPS's comments that Harvard undergrads are 25% recruited athletes is really telling. Yale undergrads are something like 20% athletes. And, during Brodhead's tenure at Yale, I am sure he was restrained vis a vis taking punitive actions against athletes who were pulled over for DUIs, for example. I worked for, with, a Yale undergrade, Yale Law, Yale trustee. In fact I have been told Brodhead was constrained. And, he did not like this. So Duke hired him and he has freer reign. Danowski refused to enforce Brodhead's alcohol policy vis a vis the Lacrosse team - thought it too punitive and was not afraid to let folks know. Danowski got his contract anyway. Delle Donne was admonished too harshly - indirectly by Brodhead, so he transfers. Had we Delle Donne last season, we would have won a least one game.

    Getting back to Wade, on the Presidents box side there are things that can be done to reduce glare later in the afternoon - start of the art windows and shading help. Hopefully scheduling of games will be dictated more and more by television, but in the meantime, noon games and night games eliminate the problem entirely.

    At Duke we have 10% athletes. At Stanford, Harvard, Yale the percentages are higher. And Brodhead still does not get it. Our undergrad admissions policies are skewed away from wanting to admit future leaders to wanting to admit computer geeks and Othello freaks.

    Hopefully, Duke's next president will get us on track and provide the right kind of leadership. In the meantime, let's hope for some luck this season for Ted in making a bad situation better.

    Bac, in t

  11. #51
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama

    Just a few thoughts about this years team. . .

    We return 11 starters on offense, including a dynamic QB who started 10 games last year as a true freshman. We have one of the better wide receiver groups in the ACC. Last year we struggled because we had no experience along the offensive line. This year we return every offensive lineman and we have quality depth at the position.

    On defense we suffered significant losses. We graduated both of our Cornerbacks and 2 defensive linemen. We should, however, have one of our strongest defensive lines in a number of years. We also return our middle linebacker who has lead our team in tackles two years in a row. We should be decent against the run, and our pass defense will be huge question mark.

    As many have pointed out, this years schedule is simply brutal. Although we were 0-12 last year, the record is somewhat misleading. We dominated Wake Forest for most of the game and were in position to win the game on a relatively easy last second field goal. Unfortunately, Field Goals and extra points turned out to be anything but easy for us last year, costing us not only the Wake Forest game, but also the UNC game. We also played Miami tough and again had a chance to win the game on the final play. Interspersed with those strong performances were real stinkers, including being shutout at home by a Division I-aa school in the opener and watching Vandy score at will.

    The talent is in place this year, but our team has been dogged by poor execution, e.g. stupid penalties, bad turnovers and at times little to no effort. As of now, we would be underdogs in every game on our schedule, based on last years results.

    That said, UConn is an extremely winnable game. The have a very good young running back that ran for more than 200 yards against Louisville and Rutgers last year. Their QB situation, however, is not that strong. Given that the strength of our defensive will be stopping the run, we should have a decent shot at pulling out a win. The game will be decided by how much we have improved in the areas of discipline.

  12. #52
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    Harvard (41 varsity sports -- the most anywhere...)
    In Division I, maybe, but it only ties them with the Division III school down the street, MIT.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Watching carolina Go To HELL!

    Arrow 5 - 7 last year

    Quote Originally Posted by rtnorthrup View Post
    Although we were 0-12 last year, the record is somewhat misleading. We dominated Wake Forest for most of the game and were in position to win the game on a relatively easy last second field goal. Unfortunately, Field Goals and extra points turned out to be anything but easy for us last year, costing us not only the Wake Forest game, but also the UNC game. We also played Miami tough and again had a chance to win the game on the final play.
    As I posted last year, if EVERYTHING had gone right instead of wrong, we could have won 5 games last year.
    1. Richmond. If we played this game anytime but first, we would have won. Yes, we should have won it anyway.
    2. Wake. You said it well above.
    3. Alabama. We were within one score midway through the 4th quarter. We committed turnovers - things went horribly wrong in the last few minutes. It would have been a minor miracle, but if things went right, we could have won.
    4. Miami. We could have won by completing a pass and scoring as the clock ran out.
    5. carolina. Arggghhh!
    Ozzie, your paradigm of optimism!

    Go To Hell carolina, Go To Hell!
    9F 9F 9F
    https://ecogreen.greentechaffiliate.com

  14. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Quote Originally Posted by GrayHare View Post
    In Division I, maybe, but it only ties them with the Division III school down the street, MIT.
    You may be right, but the MIT Athletics website lists "only" 38. Either way, the point is obviously made that a number of highly prestigious universities take issue with Duvall's claim that sports is a superfluous luxury for top schools. Moreover, to the extent that the student body ignores sports other than basketball (or even skips hoop games in the early part of the season or when the team is "down"), it fosters the prevalent stereotype of Duke students as posers rather than real fans, "in it" only for the supposed glamor, experience and TV exposure. Irrespective of what that means as a matter of policy (I'll leave that argument to FDA), it's bad for football and football recruiting.

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Maryland

    it's my other alma mater

    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    You may be right, but the MIT Athletics website lists "only" 38.
    No, no, no... the other MIT Athletics website. But your point is taken.

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Quote Originally Posted by GrayHare View Post
    No, no, no... the other MIT Athletics website.
    Touché. Well done.

    Quote Originally Posted by GrayHare View Post
    But your point is taken.
    Thanks.

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA

    Again, with the "Fans" thing

    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    Moreover, to the extent that the student body ignores sports other than basketball (or even skips hoop games in the early part of the season or when the team is "down"), it fosters the prevalent stereotype of Duke students as posers rather than real fans, "in it" only for the supposed glamor, experience and TV exposure.
    RPS, I know I've said it before, but why would football fans even think of applying to Duke? It's one thing to be supportive of your classmates, it's another to take a whole Saturday to go out and cheer on an 0-fer team. If I wanted to enjoy watching a football game in person as a student, I would have stayed in Nebraska.

    Again, being a basketball fan is a different level of passion for the sport, for the Duke BBall Family; it has relatively little to do with being a fan of all sports.

    As for stereotyping Duke students as posers,... when did you jump on the "Hate Duke for being elitist" bandwagon?

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAlumna View Post
    RPS, I know I've said it before, but why would football fans even think of applying to Duke?
    It's not a matter of being a football fan. It's a matter of being a Duke fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAlumna View Post
    It's one thing to be supportive of your classmates, it's another to take a whole Saturday to go out and cheer on an 0-fer team.
    Other schools with weak teams support them well. For example, in 2005 a hardly stalwart 4-7 WFU team (3-5 at the time) came to WW and Wake students outnumbered Duke students by a huge margin. That's a disgrace.

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAlumna View Post
    If I wanted to enjoy watching a football game in person as a student, I would have stayed in Nebraska.
    That's almost like saying you won't go see your kids play in the Saturday league because you don't like soccer.

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAlumna View Post
    Again, being a basketball fan is a different level of passion for the sport, for the Duke BBall Family; it has relatively little to do with being a fan of all sports.
    If it's a matter of being a basketball fan (or a fair weather fan) I agree. But you're wrong for Duke fans.

    Quote Originally Posted by DevilAlumna View Post
    As for stereotyping Duke students as posers,... when did you jump on the "Hate Duke for being elitist" bandwagon?
    I didn't offer it as my idea and I hope it's false. But you don't have to look very hard to find that view in any number of places. Why offer fuel for the fire and throw gasoline on it as well?

  19. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by RPS View Post
    It's not a matter of being a football fan. It's a matter of being a Duke fan.

    Other schools with weak teams support them well. For example, in 2005 a hardly stalwart 4-7 WFU team (3-5 at the time) came to WW and Wake students outnumbered Duke students by a huge margin. That's a disgrace.

    That's almost like saying you won't go see your kids play in the Saturday league because you don't like soccer.

    If it's a matter of being a basketball fan (or a fair weather fan) I agree. But you're wrong for Duke fans.

    I didn't offer it as my idea and I hope it's false. But you don't have to look very hard to find that view in any number of places. Why offer fuel for the fire and throw gasoline on it as well?

    What is a "Duke" fan? Does that mean that everyone who doesn't attend the student play or jazz band concert, or dance recital, or debate club, or whatever other student activity, ISN'T a Duke fan, or is it only around Duke Football?

    You do realize that there are about 6,000 undergraduates at Duke, right? What makes the 70-80 who are on the football team any more special than the other 200-300 athletes, or any other student who otherwise represents Duke in a public arena? I doubt you'd harp as much on the "disgrace" that was the minimal fan turnout for the women's last rowing outing.

    As for your soccer-mom analogy, puh-lease. Cheering on YOUR OWN CHILD in an activity you support them attending is in NO WAY comparable to attending a sporting event at your academic institution. Newsflash -- people go to top-tier education institutions for other reasons than sports. It's not like at Duke, there's some special essay you have to write about why you should be accepted because you're an awesome FAN. I know some Duke grads who actually (gasp) DISLIKE watching sports (most preferred to play themselves.)

    As for Wake Football in 2005, they were on a roll! It was exciting! They had bandwagon fans, located a short hour's drive away! I have no doubt that if Duke looks like it has a chance to win against UNC this year, maybe goes in with 3 wins to its final game of the season, Dukies would come out in force. It's called momentum, and 0-fer doesn't generate it.

    Now, i understand that in your case, you are cheering on your own child. Good for you, good for him. It's great you're such a supportive, passionate, enthusiastic booster for your outstanding student-athlete son, and that he has so many doors open to him at this point in his life.

    Does that mean that all 6,000 other Duke undergrads (plus nearly the same amout of grad students) should care the same about him, and cheer as hard for him as you would? Hardly. He's not *that* special, sorry. And just because they don't, doesn't give you the right to look down upon them.

    You've made it quite clear on the LAX board that Duke in general, and Duke Football in particular, is "lacking" for your athlete, so I'm not quite sure why you're coming here to bash my fellow alums anyway...

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Watching carolina Go To HELL!

    Thumbs up FDA will be very pleased with this news

    If you haven't read the story linked on the front page of the DRB about Duke Football working with the Fuqua School of business, do so.
    http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/637028.html

    Of prime interest is the tidbit near the end of the story:
    "The Blue Devils already had one change in the works that fits in with their new strategy -- a renovation project for Wallace Wade Stadium. The plans call for updated pavilion buildings to house more concession stands and restrooms, indoor luxury boxes, and the removal of the track with seats added closer to the field.

    I guess his pleading hasn't fallen on deaf ears after all! The article doesn't say how long these changed will take to complete. I doubt fund raising has publicly started, so don't hold your breath (except when you are in the rest rooms.)
    Ozzie, your paradigm of optimism!

    Go To Hell carolina, Go To Hell!
    9F 9F 9F
    https://ecogreen.greentechaffiliate.com

Similar Threads

  1. K on Duke football
    By jimsumner in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 11-26-2007, 06:58 PM
  2. Duke Football is so bad...
    By tecumseh in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-28-2007, 12:38 PM
  3. Duke football
    By 6th Man in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 09-07-2007, 12:56 PM
  4. Duke football self-destructing again
    By chrishoke in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-06-2007, 10:47 PM
  5. Duke football loses $2 million/yr, Duke athletics makes money
    By bluedevil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-31-2007, 10:20 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
  •