Grantland's Shane Ryan Slams Duke Again

[slower]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...he-royal-blues

This guy has taken Jay Bilas' overcompensation to a ridiculous level. He's an '05 grad, but says he has a "complicated" relationship with Duke. I guess it's time to officially treat him as a "hostile witness."

[Dev11]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...he-royal-blues

This guy has taken Jay Bilas' overcompensation to a ridiculous level. He's an '05 grad, but says he has a "complicated" relationship with Duke. I guess it's time to officially treat him as a "hostile witness."

I don't think the piece is unfair, because no, we really don't know what we're getting consistently from the team, but I was similarly confused by his comment about his relationship with his alma mater. If this is about him not getting a press pass for the UNC game last year, then he's just ridiculously petty. If it's something else, he might as well explain himself if he's going to mention it.

To that end, one of my critiques of Grantland, which is a critique I have in general of ESPN and belongs in that Off-Topic discussion of the organization, is the trend of letting the sportswriters reveal their favorite teams and openly use those preferences in their writing. If they want a 'senior college basketball writer,' it doesn't help the credibility of the publication if said writer is an overt fan of one of the traditional powerhouses in the sport. Shane Ryan is a clever guy and clearly watches a lot of college basketball, but I don't need every college basketball fan article of his to include a note about him being a Duke fan (or not a fan, whatever he is these days). This was another reminder that I should stay away from his college basketball writing.

Whatever, prove the media wrong, get to work and win the national championship. Go DUKE!

[Jderf]

I don't think the piece is unfair, because no, we really don't know what we're getting consistently from the team, but I was similarly confused by his comment about his relationship with his alma mater. If this is about him not getting a press pass for the UNC game last year, then he's just ridiculously petty. If it's something else, he might as well explain himself if he's going to mention it.

I don't think it was unfair either, as a whole. Although I disagree pretty strongly about this group's ceiling (Sweet 16 "at best?" Please.), he certainly makes some valid points about the team and their prospects for this season. There are a lot of unknowns. But what really caught me off guard was this:

[Seth Curry] could also show the petty jealousy and dramatic predilections that emerged as early as the Blue/White scrimmage last year, and, to be fair, may have had a lot to do with Austin Rivers.

What on Earth is he talking about? If you're going to try to throw out a statement like that, why not back it up?

[slower]

I don't think the piece is unfair, because no, we really don't know what we're getting consistently from the team, but I was similarly confused by his comment about his relationship with his alma mater. If this is about him not getting a press pass for the UNC game last year, then he's just ridiculously petty. If it's something else, he might as well explain himself if he's going to mention it.

To that end, one of my critiques of Grantland, which is a critique I have in general of ESPN and belongs in that Off-Topic discussion of the organization, is the trend of letting the sportswriters reveal their favorite teams and openly use those preferences in their writing. If they want a 'senior college basketball writer,' it doesn't help the credibility of the publication if said writer is an overt fan of one of the traditional powerhouses in the sport. Shane Ryan is a clever guy and clearly watches a lot of college basketball, but I don't need every college basketball fan article of his to include a note about him being a Duke fan (or not a fan, whatever he is these days). This was another reminder that I should stay away from his college basketball writing.

Whatever, prove the media wrong, get to work and win the national championship. Go DUKE!

What's maddening about Ryan (and Bilas, to some extent), though, is that he is an "anti-homer." I just don't see that many other schools that have as many anti-homers as Duke.

Grantland has writers like Jay Kang (an egregious Tar Heel homer) and, of course, Simmons himself (one of the worst homers - for all things Boston - that you'll ever find). Grantland has some VERY good writers under the masthead, some with more substance than others. So, I didn't start the thread to criticize Grantland, but to marvel at the degree to which the general anti-Duke media sentiment has cowed so many Duke grads into being almost apologetic for their association with the university. I can't think of another school that has a similar situation.

[Mike Corey]

He doesn't back it up because in that setting, there's no "need" to--his is a casual approach, as is the rest of Grantland, IMO. Rightly or wrongly.

Re: his complicated relationship with Duke, I would suspect that he's referencing the media credential situation, but who's to say...aside from Shane, I guess.

This is all part of the Bill Simmonsization of sportswriting. Editors need not apply, off the cuff, sometimes hilarious analysis, biases worn on your sleeves, sometimes insightful and sometimes puzzling, but almost always highly readable and engaging.

At least, to many.

[Kedsy]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...he-royal-blues

This guy has taken Jay Bilas' overcompensation to a ridiculous level. He's an '05 grad, but says he has a "complicated" relationship with Duke. I guess it's time to officially treat him as a "hostile witness."

My problem with Shane Ryan is that for a basketball writer he knows shockingly little about basketball.

I'm also surprised nobody has brought up the following quote:

I can almost guarantee that [UNC's] stalwart perimeter defenders will produce two regular-season wins over Duke.

Really, he can almost guarantee that? What a maroon.

[Monmouth77]

What's maddening about Ryan (and Bilas, to some extent), though, is that he is an "anti-homer." I just don't see that many other schools that have as many anti-homers as Duke.

Grantland has writers like Jay Kang (an egregious Tar Heel homer) and, of course, Simmons himself (one of the worst homers - for all things Boston - that you'll ever find). Grantland has some VERY good writers under the masthead, some with more substance than others. So, I didn't start the thread to criticize Grantland, but to marvel at the degree to which the general anti-Duke media sentiment has cowed so many Duke grads into being almost apologetic for their association with the university. I can't think of another school that has a similar situation.

I agree with this sentiment. And I also enjoy a lot of what is written at Grantland, including art and film criticism. I especially like Chuck Klosterman.

Anyway, "cowed" is exactly the right word.

After several years of really over-the-top negative press coverage for Duke Basketball from various media sources (e.g., ESPN's "which Duke player do you hate the most poll" or anything written or stated on the radio by Bill Simmons about Duke) I have stopped caring what the true haters say.

But it is infinitely more irritating to find Jay Bilas or Shane Ryan qualifying and apologizing for just about every positive Duke basketball analysis they engage in. Seth Davis is not quite as bad, but he does it too.

Jason Williams is the closest thing we have to a nationally broadcast alumni college hoops analyst who doesn't tie himself up in knots trying to avoid the apperance of Duke homerism.

The result of this, in my opinion, is that the loudest and most visible voice of unbridled Duke praise becomes Dick Vitale, and his grating over-praise becomes a straw man to support the contention that Duke is over-loved and over-hyped, etc.

I do wish some of our own guys would stop worrying so much about how they are perceived, and fight back a bit more in the media.

An example for what I wish we'd see is Mike Golic's approach to Notre Dame. I am no big Notre Dame fan, and their football program gets a bit of the same treatment that Duke receives from the media in basketball-- both positive and negative. But I feel like Golic uses his radio platform to advocate for Notre Dame in a measured way that does not drive people crazy, and which is a credit to the University.

[nyesq83]

Quoting Les Miz lyrics within a men's pre season assessment.

How twee.

Why do I waste time reading such drivel? I am a stooge sometimes, I guess.

[jv001]

I agree with this sentiment. And I also enjoy a lot of what is written at Grantland, including art and film criticism. I especially like Chuck Klosterman.

Anyway, "cowed" is exactly the right word.

After several years of really over-the-top negative press coverage for Duke Basketball from various media sources (e.g., ESPN's "which Duke player do you hate the most poll" or anything written or stated on the radio by Bill Simmons about Duke) I have stopped caring what the true haters say.

But it is infinitely more irritating to find Jay Bilas or Shane Ryan qualifying and apologizing for just about every positive Duke basketball analysis they engage in. Seth Davis is not quite as bad, but he does it too.

Jason Williams is the closest thing we have to a nationally broadcast alumni college hoops analyst who doesn't tie himself up in knots trying to avoid the apperance of Duke homerism.

The result of this, in my opinion, is that the loudest and most visible voice of unbridled Duke praise becomes Dick Vitale, and his grating over-praise becomes a straw man to support the contention that Duke is over-loved and over-hyped, etc.

I do wish some of our own guys would stop worrying so much about how they are perceived, and fight back a bit more in the media.

An example for what I wish we'd see is Mike Golic's approach to Notre Dame. I am no big Notre Dame fan, and their football program gets a bit of the same treatment that Duke receives from the media in basketball-- both positive and negative. But I feel like Golic uses his radio platform to advocate for Notre Dame in a measured way that does not drive people crazy, and which is a credit to the University.

I think the G-Man can put in the same category as Golic, but he does not get as much air time as Mike Golic. He does not go overboard with his praise for Duke and in no way does he apoligize for that praise. GoDuke!

[miramar]

I can see where he is coming from, but while I see tremendous potential for this team, Ryan says that we can't be sure that the pieces will fall in place. There is no question that Mason and Seth need to play more consistently, but they are now seniors and I am confident they will do so. There is also no doubt that Quinn, Alex, Rasheed, and Amile are question marks as college players, but that didn't seem to bother Ryan with Kentucky so there is no need to worry about it with Duke.

The jealousy quote seems a bit over the top, but even Coach K has admitted that there were chemistry, toughness, and defensive issues last year. But that doesn't mean that history will repeat itself.

As he says, 'Would it be too glib to say "we'll see" and leave it at that?' Ryan seems concerned about Duke, but I can't wait for the season to start. Duke had the best team in the country in 2009-2010 and again in 2010-11 until Kyrie went down. Ryan seems to think that 2010 was an aberration, but with the kind of talent Coach K is attracting of late the anomaly may have been 2012. I really didn't know what to make of the 2012 team the entire season, and I don't see that happening again.

[sagegrouse]

But it is infinitely more irritating to find Jay Bilas or Shane Ryan qualifying and apologizing for just about every positive Duke basketball analysis they engage in. Seth Davis is not quite as bad, but he does it too.

Jason Williams is the closest thing we have to a nationally broadcast alumni college hoops analyst who doesn't tie himself up in knots trying to avoid the apperance of Duke homerism.

.

I think, sir, your statement re Bilas is preposterous and a canard: Jay Bilas is an absolute professional. I believe virtually everything he says about college basketball is his considered judgment. But, in some quarters around here, anything he says that is remotely critical of Duke is attributed to his being totally unprofessional. That's what "homerism" and "anti-homerism" is -- an absence of professional standards. I mean, for heaven's sakes, the guy is an attorney, a Duke law grad, a litigator and an employee of ESPN. I believe he understands and carries out his responsibilities with the utmost care. And the fact that he has a wicked sense of humor doesn't hurt one bit.

Shane Ryan couldn't carry Jay Bilas's jock strap. Moreover, his downplaying of Duke's chances this year is an absolute frigging joke. Did you read where he said that UNC rookie PG Marcus Paige, all 157 pounds of him, "may" be better this year than Kendall Marshall? "Better," you might ask -- how is that? Kendall Marshall was the best college passer I have ever seen. Plus, he could shoot a bit. And he was h-u-u-g-e compared to Marcus Paige. If Paige were in a Duke uniform, the Boards would be awash with handwringing about his being posted up by Michael Snaer and the larger guards in the ACC.

Nevertheless, I welcome Shane's comments because I really enjoy being "misunderestimated."

sagegrouse
'And although I adore Les Mis, the lyrics don't scan properly. It was written originally in French and it shows'

[Duvall]

"It starts on the perimeter, where Reggie Bullock and Dexter Strickland — the best lockdown guys in the ACC outside of FSU's Michael Snaer — give Carolina the stingiest backcourt defense in the conference."

How did someone that understands basketball so little get a job writing about basketball so much?

He doesn't back it up because in that setting, there's no "need" to--his is a casual approach, as is the rest of Grantland, IMO. Rightly or wrongly.

Grantland's been around long enough that we can safely say that the answer is wrongly.

[Monmouth77]

I think, sir, your statement re Bilas is preposterous and a canard: Jay Bilas is an absolute professional. I believe virtually everything he says about college basketball is his considered judgment. But, in some quarters around here, anything he says that is remotely critical of Duke is attributed to his being totally unprofessional. That's what "homerism" and "anti-homerism" is -- an absence of professional standards. I mean, for heaven's sakes, the guy is an attorney, a Duke law grad, a litigator and an employee of ESPN. I believe he understands and carries out his responsibilities with the utmost care. And the fact that he has a wicked sense of humor doesn't hurt one bit.

Shane Ryan couldn't carry Jay Bilas's jock strap. Moreover, his downplaying of Duke's chances this year is an absolute frigging joke. Did you read where he said that UNC rookie PG Marcus Paige, all 157 pounds of him, "may" be better this year than Kendall Marshall? "Better," you might ask -- how is that? Kendall Marshall was the best college passer I have ever seen. Plus, he could shoot a bit. And he was h-u-u-g-e compared to Marcus Paige. If Paige were in a Duke uniform, the Boards would be awash with handwringing about his being posted up by Michael Snaer and the larger guards in the ACC.

Nevertheless, I welcome Shane's comments because I really enjoy being "misunderestimated."

sagegrouse
'And although I adore Les Mis, the lyrics don't scan properly. It was written originally in French and it shows'

Wait a minute. I never said Bilas was not an absolute professional. He is. And he's one of the best college basketball analysts out there. For sure. As far as ESPN analysts go, I think only Bob Knight brings more to the table in terms of understanding and commenting on the game of basketball.

I am also not sure what being a Duke grad, a lawyer, and a litigator has to do with anything: I am all of those things too. So what?

My point is that in his capacity as an ESPN employee, he is often put in the position -- and in my view, too readily accepts the position -- of tiptoeing around his affiliation with Duke to the point of bending backwards to avoid the appearance of bias.

I do not think it's unprofessional.

But it's not a "canard." It's what I see when I watch him on TV, and it's my well-informed opinion, having watched him call games and analyze NCAA hoops for as many seasons as he's had the job. It's obviously also the opinion of many other Duke fans who think he's a great and otherwise commendable analyst and a great representative of Duke.

I actually think that in some ways it's great-- he's trying to be unbiased. Good for him. But that's not how anyone else with a school affiliation behaves on ESPN. Van Pelt, Digger Phelps, Hubert Davis (gone now I realize) Doug Gottlieb (who I find very annoying and nowhere near as good as Bilas) all wear it on their sleeves.

In this context, Duke has no champion. And Jay just kind of absorbs the "Duke-boy" treatment. It's annoying.

Now, Ryan is in another category altogether. I think he's mainly trying to make a name for himself, and his analysis lacks real insight.

If (as he suggests) Dexter Strickland and Reggie Bullock end up as the #1 and #2 vote getters on the ACC All-Defensive Team I'll eat my hat.

[MartyClark]

This guy has taken Jay Bilas' overcompensation to a ridiculous level. He's an '05 grad, but says he has a "complicated" relationship with Duke. I guess it's time to officially treat him as a "hostile witness."

[/QUOTE]

In partial defense of the guy, I really liked his Grantland article about Duke's win at Chapel Hill last year.

[Sir Stealth]

I'm not embarrassed by Shane Ryan's anti-homerism of Duke (though I am annoyed by it), but I am very embarrassed by him for being a visible Duke grad/fan who just comes off as not being very likable. I'm a big fan of Grantland and enjoy the fan perspective, casual writing style. I'll pretty much read everything on the site, but I'll never so much as click on anything Ryan writes anymore, whether it's his ill-informed college basketball material or his incredibly lame, cheesy "about last night" articles.

The worst part about his writing is not that he has a different opinion or style or is critical of our players in an insulting way (though he is), it's that he does this while still trying to come off as somehow being representative of Duke's alumni or fan base (e.g. testifying last season that Duke fans' most hated Tarheel was Tyler Zeller, which was laughable). When writing about Duke, he seems to try to use the fact that he's a fan to convey "insider" type insights, such as his completely made up Curry-Rivers feud, which are really just dumb speculation/fantasy. If you're a Ryan defender, just imagine Coach K dressing him down and ask yourself whether you didn't enjoy the thought - I'll bet you did.

[slower]

Wait a minute. I never said Bilas was not an absolute professional. He is. And he's one of the best college basketball analysts out there. For sure. As far as ESPN analysts go, I think only Bob Knight brings more to the table in terms of understanding and commenting on the game of basketball.

I am also not sure what being a Duke grad, a lawyer, and a litigator has to do with anything: I am all of those things too. So what?

My point is that in his capacity as an ESPN employee, he is often put in the position -- and in my view, too readily accepts the position -- of tiptoeing around his affiliation with Duke to the point of bending backwards to avoid the appearance of bias.

I do not think it's unprofessional.

But it's not a "canard." It's what I see when I watch him on TV, and it's my well-informed opinion, having watched him call games and analyze NCAA hoops for as many seasons as he's had the job. It's obviously also the opinion of many other Duke fans who think he's a great and otherwise commendable analyst and a great representative of Duke.

I actually think that in some ways it's great-- he's trying to be unbiased. Good for him. But that's not how anyone else with a school affiliation behaves on ESPN. Van Pelt, Digger Phelps, Hubert Davis (gone now I realize) Doug Gottlieb (who I find very annoying and nowhere near as good as Bilas) all wear it on their sleeves.

In this context, Duke has no champion. And Jay just kind of absorbs the "Duke-boy" treatment. It's annoying.

Now, Ryan is in another category altogether. I think he's mainly trying to make a name for himself, and his analysis lacks real insight.

If (as he suggests) Dexter Strickland and Reggie Bullock end up as the #1 and #2 vote getters on the ACC All-Defensive Team I'll eat my hat.

Sorry - I didn't intend for my initial post to be a slam against Jay. I guess what I meant to say was that it seems Duke supporters (and, in particular, alumni) in the media have to always be conscious of not SEEMING to be pro-Duke, which does not seem to plague supporters of any other program to the same degree.

[NSDukeFan]

I'm not embarrassed by Shane Ryan's anti-homerism of Duke (though I am annoyed by it), but I am very embarrassed by him for being a visible Duke grad/fan who just comes off as not being very likable. I'm a big fan of Grantland and enjoy the fan perspective, casual writing style. I'll pretty much read everything on the site, but I'll never so much as click on anything Ryan writes anymore, whether it's his ill-informed college basketball material or his incredibly lame, cheesy "about last night" articles.

The worst part about his writing is not that he has a different opinion or style or is critical of our players in an insulting way (though he is), it's that he does this while still trying to come off as somehow being representative of Duke's alumni or fan base (e.g. testifying last season that Duke fans' most hated Tarheel was Tyler Zeller, which was laughable). When writing about Duke, he seems to try to use the fact that he's a fan to convey "insider" type insights, such as his completely made up Curry-Rivers feud, which are really just dumb speculation/fantasy. If you're a Ryan defender, just imagine Coach K dressing him down and ask yourself whether you didn't enjoy the thought - I'll bet you did.

I also like some Grantland stuff, though I mostly look for Simmons' pro basketball stuff. I am very interested to see Zach Lowe writing for them now as I have always enjoyed his stuff from SI.

[Dukeblue91]

First I want to say hallo to everyone here.

I'm a very longtime reader from way back before the new forum but I never posted here as someone usually writes what I'm thinking.

But this time I have to write as I'm really upset by what Shane Ryan wrote and can't believe nobody has mentioned this as of yet.

Tyler Thornton, who, aside from one mind-boggling hero turn on what will forever be known as Thorns-giving, doesn't belong in a D-I starting five.

I'm sorry but I can't disagree any more then I do now.
TT had saved our bacon several times last year and not only with the last shot but by starting runs and bringing the team together, doing the dirty work for the team nobody wanted to do.
I am proud to have a kid like him on our team and I will defend him as such.
I have no use for people like Shane Ryan when they go on and berate young kids that give their all no matter what school they go to.
People seem all to often to forget that these players are kids and have feelings too.

Also let me say something about the love fest so many writers are on about Kentucky and their rankings.
Not one kid has proven anything or even played one game and if any or all be on different teams it would be pointed out at every turn.

Yes Cal has done a great job the last few years and did win the NCAA last year but this will not continue for ever, freshmen are just that and at some point will hit that wall for the most part.
Just take a look around the country over the years and how many highly touted freshmen did not translate their game from high school to college.
So no I can't already anoint this group of kids till they have proven something.

I'm very excited about this years team and I'm also happy that we do not have this automatic one and done type player that everything has to go through this year.
I like it better when Duke has talent that is spread throughout the team where everybody has to be their best and everybody shares the ball to win.
Like we did in 2010 and so many times before that.
Don't get me wrong I loved watching Kyrie and Rivers as they where incredible talents but I feel that this kind of player takes away from the team concept and all to often the team relies to much on that one player.

Anyway I can't wait for this season to get going and I wholeheartedly believe we will surprise many people this year.

Sorry for so much writing for my very first post here.

[Monmouth77]

Sorry - I didn't intend for my initial post to be a slam against Jay. I guess what I meant to say was that it seems Duke supporters (and, in particular, alumni) in the media have to always be conscious of not SEEMING to be pro-Duke, which does not seem to plague supporters of any other program to the same degree.

That's the basic point that I intended to co-sign. I also intended no slam on Jay.

[sagegrouse]

Wait a minute. I never said Bilas was not an absolute professional. He is. And he's one of the best college basketball analysts out there. For sure. As far as ESPN analysts go, I think only Bob Knight brings more to the table in terms of understanding and commenting on the game of basketball.

I am also not sure what being a Duke grad, a lawyer, and a litigator has to do with anything: I am all of those things too. So what?

My point is that in his capacity as an ESPN employee, he is often put in the position -- and in my view, too readily accepts the position -- of tiptoeing around his affiliation with Duke to the point of bending backwards to avoid the appearance of bias.

I do not think it's unprofessional.

But it's not a "canard." It's what I see when I watch him on TV, and it's my well-informed opinion, having watched him call games and analyze NCAA hoops for as many seasons as he's had the job. It's obviously also the opinion of many other Duke fans who think he's a great and otherwise commendable analyst and a great representative of Duke.

I actually think that in some ways it's great-- he's trying to be unbiased. Good for him. But that's not how anyone else with a school affiliation behaves on ESPN. Van Pelt, Digger Phelps, Hubert Davis (gone now I realize) Doug Gottlieb (who I find very annoying and nowhere near as good as Bilas) all wear it on their sleeves.

In this context, Duke has no champion. And Jay just kind of absorbs the "Duke-boy" treatment. It's annoying.

Now, Ryan is in another category altogether. I think he's mainly trying to make a name for himself, and his analysis lacks real insight.

If (as he suggests) Dexter Strickland and Reggie Bullock end up as the #1 and #2 vote getters on the ACC All-Defensive Team I'll eat my hat.

You know, I don't see any anti-Duke bias in any Jay Bilas comments. Your comments (and Slower's) were mild by comparison to the complaints that "nobody loves Duke, not even Jay Bilas," that appear here more than I would like to see. The repetition of this "lie" leads naturally to the term "canard" (which we all understand is French for turkey vulture). [That last statement wasn't true -- "canard" is actually Hindi for "Billy Packer."]

As a professional sports commentator (and being an attorney, I believe, makes one truly understand professional responsibility), he is expected to call the game objectively and without personal bias, either positively or negative. And I am willing to bet that no one from ESPN cautions him one way or the other.

sagegrouse
'Admit it, guys and gals, that as fans sitting on our divans, we are far more critical of Duke than of any other team on the tube'

'Everyone in Colorado thinks I am a lawyer, but that is only because they have never met an economist'