FB: Duke 28, Wake Forest 21 Post-Game Thread

[devildeac]

Just watched some of the highlights. Boone's TD toss to Crowder traveled over 55 yards in the air and just seemed to float into his hands. Beautifully thrown ball and excellent catch.

[burnspbesq]

Isn't it odd (in a nice way) to quibble about how Duke wins instead of simply celebrating the win?

[UrinalCake]

Man, it's still hard for me to put into words how amazing it is for Duke to be in this position. I was a freshman in 1995 and we won nine games TOTAL in my four years there. We were an absolute laughingstock. I was on the field in 2002 when we tore down the goalposts for breaking the 23-game losing streak by beating ECU. After consecutive 0-11 seasons, it was not considered unreasonable to suggest that we didn't belong in Division 1-A (or whatever it's called now). We had terrible facilities, poor coaching, and impossible recruiting sell, and no hope of ever being relevant.

What a coup to not only bring in Cutcliffe but keep him when Tennessee offered him their head coaching job the following year. If he doesn't win National Coach of the Year for what he's done with this team, I mean they may as well not have the award.

[nyesq83]

Ross Cockrell with the pick to seal it. I remember the 2010 game (I think) at Wake where Ross was thrown at time after time and one of the Wake WR telling him he wasn't good enough to play in the ACC or able to cover him. I talked with Ross' dad and an uncle after the game today. They both remembered the barking, too. Friends of ours who sat behind his dad at the game today said he was quite the cheerleader and erupted when Ross got the INT. Justice. Vindication. Well done, Mr. Cockrell.

I sat with Kieth and Serena Cockrell (Ross' parents).

Kieth led us in a few WE ARE....DUKE! cheers today. He was so animated, Serena was cracking up.

So proud of Ross - after a rough initiation four years ago.

I told Kieth, if anybody asks what his son does for a living, say "He makes history!"

[-bdbd]

I sat with Kieth and Serena Cockrell (Ross' parents).

Kieth led us in a few WE ARE....DUKE! cheers today. He was so animated, Serena was cracking up.

So proud of Ross - after a rough initiation four years ago.

I told Kieth, if anybody asks what his son does for a living, say "He makes history!"

Just got done watching the game on the DVR a little bit ago - was busy at gametime today and paid hell trying to avoid TV's all day so I could enjoy the "live" feel (and had a nephew successfully mess with my head telling me I'd be "disappointed" afterwards - and was really surprised at all of the Wake Forest chippiness. Lots of yapping from Wake players early on after plays (though we eventually started joining in), several incidents of Duke players getting thrown down well after whistles were blown, and the "tackle" against Crowder on the long TD pass (where the Wake safety wouldn't let go for 4-5 seconds after the play as they lay on the ground). I always had thought of Wake as a good "character" school with good academics, etc. How long have they been cheap-shotting us like this. From the posts above it doesn't sound like this was the first year...

[Kimist]

...However, the fumble I have no gripe with at all. Blakeney gave up the ball, pure and simple. The question of whether or not his knee was touching the turf prior to the time he gave up the ball is pure semantics. I'm really old school in this regard -- protect the ball until you are down and motionless and there is no question at all regarding the call.

I'm not one to whine over calls made by the refs, but I disagree with your assessment. It has always been MY understanding that "the ground cannot cause a fumble." The knee of the Duke player was definitely down before the ball came loose. What bothers me is the refs WERE able to view the video which clearly showed that. How could the ruling NOT be overturned??

Another thing I noted late in the game: A WF player was near the first down line, and as he was being tackled short of the first down stretched his arms forward to advance the ball ...which is where it was marked for a first down, instead of an unconverted third down. Is that correct? ? ?

Again, I'm not in the School of Whiners but calls such as these could be extremely costly in any games ahead of us. (Dare I even mention that our next game is being played in Kenan Stadium??)

k

[OldPhiKap]

I'm not one to whine over calls made by the refs, but I disagree with your assessment. It has always been MY understanding that "the ground cannot cause a fumble." The knee of the Duke player was definitely down before the ball came loose. What bothers me is the refs WERE able to view the video which clearly showed that. How could the ruling NOT be overturned??

I do not recall if the call was "confirmed" (meaning the replay shows that the call was correct) or "upheld" (meaning that there was insufficient evidence to say that the call was clearly wrong). I agree with your assessment, the question is whether the replay showed that the call on the field was indisputably wrong. I agree with you but I am admittedly biased.

Another thing I noted late in the game: A WF player was near the first down line, and as he was being tackled short of the first down stretched his arms forward to advance the ball ...which is where it was marked for a first down, instead of an unconverted third down. Is that correct? ? ?

the call is correct so long as the play was not whistled dead for lack of forward progress, or his knee/hip did not hit the ground prior to the ball extending over the spot given.

Again, I'm not in the School of Whiners but calls such as these could be extremely costly in any games ahead of us. (Dare I even mention that our next game is being played in Kenan Stadium??)

k

Response above, as I understand the rules to be.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

I still maintain that a reasonable person (let alone a competent referee) cannot look at the replays we saw on TV and conclude anything other than that was not a fumble. The knee was obviously down before the ball came out, and, while you could debate this part, it certainly seemed to me that it was his elbow hitting the ground that jarred the ball loose. But obviously, once his elbow is down, the player is down, and anything that happens afterwards shouldn't matter. The only explanation that excuses the replay booth from the just total incompetence is that they couldn't see what we saw on TV, which would at least allow me to understand how that call could have been made.

As a response to the previous post, I believe the wording was "the ruling on the field stands" not that the call was confirmed. They didn't see enough to overturn.

[jjasper0729]

Just watched some of the highlights. Boone's TD toss to Crowder traveled over 55 yards in the air and just seemed to float into his hands. Beautifully thrown ball and excellent catch.

Watch it again though and though it was a very good read and pass by Boone, it was a little underthrown. Crowder had a full step easily on the defender and had to slow down to catch the ball which allowed the defender to catch up and wrestle with him as he crossed the goal line. That's some great strength and a credit to Crowder to adjust AND hold on to the ball in that.

[roywhite]

I still maintain that a reasonable person (let alone a competent referee) cannot look at the replays we saw on TV and conclude anything other than that was not a fumble. The knee was obviously down before the ball came out, and, while you could debate this part, it certainly seemed to me that it was his elbow hitting the ground that jarred the ball loose. But obviously, once his elbow is down, the player is down, and anything that happens afterwards shouldn't matter. The only explanation that excuses the replay booth from the just total incompetence is that they couldn't see what we saw on TV, which would at least allow me to understand how that call could have been made.

As a response to the previous post, I believe the wording was "the ruling on the field stands" not that the call was confirmed. They didn't see enough to overturn.

Yeah, just a really bad call IMO. The video evidence to overturn seemed very strong.

I wonder if we'll hear some followup from the ACC this week; in the past, they have admitted some significant mistaken calls and even disciplined the officials.

Very glad that Duke was able to overcome the poor start; just another example of the resilience and maturity of this team.

[Indoor66]

We won the game. Next play.

[wilson]

We won the game. Next play.

You make a good point, Indoor--the best point, really--but I agree with others that the officiating in yesterday's game is cause for concern. Even my Deac-fan brother admitted that several pivotal calls were just objectively bad. Like others, I worry that such mistakes might be more costly in the future, even cost Duke a game at some point, which would really be a shame.
It also doesn't reflect well on the ACC. In fact, I thought that the officiating, the television commentary, and the general lack of in-stadium atmosphere made the whole game look pretty amateurish at times. Like just about everybody else, we grouse sometimes about being the SEC's little brother. But given the comparison, I can totally see why the casual fan would be more interested in, say, Tennessee-Ole Miss than in Duke-Wake Forest.

[brevity]

But given the comparison, I can totally see why the casual fan would be more interested in, say, Tennessee-Ole Miss than in Duke-Wake Forest.

We should ALL be more interested in a Tennessee-Ole Miss matchup. That's the Cutcliffe Bowl!

[wilson]

...given the comparison, I can totally see why the casual fan would be more interested in, say, Tennessee-Ole Miss than in Duke-Wake Forest.

We should ALL be more interested in a Tennessee-Ole Miss matchup. That's the Cutcliffe Bowl!

Well there's quite the Freudian slip. I totally did not mean to do that. I was just looking for a couple of SEC teams sitting in more or less analogous positions to Duke and Wake in their conference race.

[DU82]

Quote Originally Posted by Kimist View Post

I'm not one to whine over calls made by the refs, but I disagree with your assessment. It has always been MY understanding that "the ground cannot cause a fumble." The knee of the Duke player was definitely down before the ball came loose. What bothers me is the refs WERE able to view the video which clearly showed that. How could the ruling NOT be overturned??

I do not recall if the call was "confirmed" (meaning the replay shows that the call was correct) or "upheld" (meaning that there was insufficient evidence to say that the call was clearly wrong). I agree with your assessment, the question is whether the replay showed that the call on the field was indisputably wrong. I agree with you but I am admittedly biased.

Another thing I noted late in the game: A WF player was near the first down line, and as he was being tackled short of the first down stretched his arms forward to advance the ball ...which is where it was marked for a first down, instead of an unconverted third down. Is that correct? ? ?

the call is correct so long as the play was not whistled dead for lack of forward progress, or his knee/hip did not hit the ground prior to the ball extending over the spot given.

Again, I'm not in the School of Whiners but calls such as these could be extremely costly in any games ahead of us. (Dare I even mention that our next game is being played in Kenan Stadium??)
.

On the WF touchdown, the refs definitely said that the play stands, meaning they did not see conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field. How/why they couldn't see what everybody else in the stadium saw, I don't know, but that's the definition.

[nocilla]

I'm not one to whine over calls made by the refs, but I disagree with your assessment. It has always been MY understanding that "the ground cannot cause a fumble." The knee of the Duke player was definitely down before the ball came loose. What bothers me is the refs WERE able to view the video which clearly showed that. How could the ruling NOT be overturned??

Another thing I noted late in the game: A WF player was near the first down line, and as he was being tackled short of the first down stretched his arms forward to advance the ball ...which is where it was marked for a first down, instead of an unconverted third down. Is that correct? ? ?

Again, I'm not in the School of Whiners but calls such as these could be extremely costly in any games ahead of us. (Dare I even mention that our next game is being played in Kenan Stadium??)

k

Just a couple notes for clarity; The rule that the ground can't cause a fumble means that the ball can't be jarred loose by hitting the ground. If any body part, like an elbow, is between the ball and the ground then the rule doesn't apply. So in this case the ground causing the fumble wasn't in play, just whether the ball came loose before the runner was down. I don't know what replay the officials looked at, but it must of been the same ones that Bob Harris and company saw because they thought it was the right call and correctly predicted on the radio broadcast that it wouldn't be overturned.

The ball placement is based on where the ball is when the runner goes down. So players can extend the ball out as they are being tackled and the ball will be placed where it was as his knee touches the ground. There is a risk to this though because the ball can still be knocked loose by the defense as the runner sticks it out.

[loran16]

I still maintain that a reasonable person (let alone a competent referee) cannot look at the replays we saw on TV and conclude anything other than that was not a fumble. The knee was obviously down before the ball came out, and, while you could debate this part, it certainly seemed to me that it was his elbow hitting the ground that jarred the ball loose. But obviously, once his elbow is down, the player is down, and anything that happens afterwards shouldn't matter. The only explanation that excuses the replay booth from the just total incompetence is that they couldn't see what we saw on TV, which would at least allow me to understand how that call could have been made.

As a response to the previous post, I believe the wording was "the ruling on the field stands" not that the call was confirmed. They didn't see enough to overturn.

PS: I'm not sure about this, but I don't think the refs can sync videos together on replay. And it certainly seemed on TV like they couldn't tell when the knee was down on the angle which showed when the ball came loose - that angle only showed Blakeny on top of the player.

Regardless, we won, and it was a dumb play by Blakeny to juke instead of get the easy first down on 3rd down. Coincidentally, he never was thrown at again and I'm not sure he played another snap.

[Mal]

It also doesn't reflect well on the ACC. In fact, I thought that the officiating, the television commentary, and the general lack of in-stadium atmosphere made the whole game look pretty amateurish at times. Like just about everybody else, we grouse sometimes about being the SEC's little brother. But given the comparison, I can totally see why the casual fan would be more interested in, say, Tennessee-Ole Miss than in Duke-Wake Forest.

Yeah, there are several issues here that aren't helping us. For starters, Duke and Wake's football histories speak for themselves. We're not national names in college football, and for good reason. Our program's clearly improved immeasurably, of course, but while we're ranked, we'll need to be in the rankings the next three or four seasons, too, before anyone cares about Duke football other than in this year's "Oh, isn't that cute? Good for them. Remember when a Texas high school team could beat Duke?" way. And then when you combine that with the fact that they're both private schools with alumni bases that don't, by and large, stay in the area, it's really tough to get a decent game day atmosphere or a full stadium. I mean, Wally Wade looked half empty last weekend when we were in the middle of getting the program's biggest win in two decades. Even if every undergrad is in attendance, we've still got another 28,000 seats to fill, and clearly we're not yet filling them. If we continue winning, we can start getting local people who want to see a Little Engine That Could play quality big conference football, coming out regularly. But it took Northwestern a good 7 or 8 years of consistent success under Fitzgerald to do that, and they've got a lot more people in their backyard who will take the train up to watch their own B1G alma mater playing in Evanston to draw from, too.

You're right about the ACC not getting the marquee in terms of TV coverage, but that comes with success and a good TV contract. The ACC is right now clearly the 5th most appealing/successful of the big 5 conferences in football. I mean, Duke's apparently the 3rd best team in the conference this season, and we're barely ranked, having beaten two teams that were ranked at game time and have since fallen totally off voters' radars, one of them having utterly imploded. Contrast with the third highest BCS standing teams in other conferences right now: Wisconsin, Oregon, Oklahoma and Missouri (who's not a huge name still but is ranked No. 5, and plays a big name almost every week). Then you throw in some of the big names that are below those teams but still ranked ahead of or at parity with us, like Texas, Texas A&M, LSU, USC, UCLA, Notre Dame and on and on. Almost all huge, public, "football" schools. It's no wonder no one cares about Duke/Wake and we get a crummy announcing team on the JV part of the network. The ACC's not good, outside of FSU and Clemson, and has not been good for a number of years now.

The good news, however: if we win this Saturday, we'll have big time coverage for the last two games of the season, for sure! The bad news is that one of those is not likely to reflect well on how much we've improved. I mean, I want to beat Carolina badly. And I'd love to see us in the CCG, in theory. I'm just a little apprehensive about he way FSU's been absolutely destroying teams by the time the first quarter's over. We'd be in good company if that were to happen to us, I guess.

[Gewebe14]

PS: I'm not sure about this, but I don't think the refs can sync videos together on replay. And it certainly seemed on TV like they couldn't tell when the knee was down on the angle which showed when the ball came loose - that angle only showed Blakeny on top of the player.

Regardless, we won, and it was a dumb play by Blakeny to juke instead of get the easy first down on 3rd down. Coincidentally, he never was thrown at again and I'm not sure he played another snap.

Did anyone else see on Twitter that the replay booth was down for this play? Or was that a joke...?

[tux]

Yeah, there are several issues here that aren't helping us. For starters, Duke and Wake's football histories speak for themselves. We're not national names in college football, and for good reason. Our program's clearly improved immeasurably, of course, but while we're ranked, we'll need to be in the rankings the next three or four seasons, too, before anyone cares about Duke football other than in this year's "Oh, isn't that cute? Good for them. Remember when a Texas high school team could beat Duke?" way. And then when you combine that with the fact that they're both private schools with alumni bases that don't, by and large, stay in the area, it's really tough to get a decent game day atmosphere or a full stadium. I mean, Wally Wade looked half empty last weekend when we were in the middle of getting the program's biggest win in two decades. Even if every undergrad is in attendance, we've still got another 28,000 seats to fill, and clearly we're not yet filling them. If we continue winning, we can start getting local people who want to see a Little Engine That Could play quality big conference football, coming out regularly. But it took Northwestern a good 7 or 8 years of consistent success under Fitzgerald to do that, and they've got a lot more people in their backyard who will take the train up to watch their own B1G alma mater playing in Evanston to draw from, too.

You're right about the ACC not getting the marquee in terms of TV coverage, but that comes with success and a good TV contract. The ACC is right now clearly the 5th most appealing/successful of the big 5 conferences in football. I mean, Duke's apparently the 3rd best team in the conference this season, and we're barely ranked, having beaten two teams that were ranked at game time and have since fallen totally off voters' radars, one of them having utterly imploded. Contrast with the third highest BCS standing teams in other conferences right now: Wisconsin, Oregon, Oklahoma and Missouri (who's not a huge name still but is ranked No. 5, and plays a big name almost every week). Then you throw in some of the big names that are below those teams but still ranked ahead of or at parity with us, like Texas, Texas A&M, LSU, USC, UCLA, Notre Dame and on and on. Almost all huge, public, "football" schools. It's no wonder no one cares about Duke/Wake and we get a crummy announcing team on the JV part of the network. The ACC's not good, outside of FSU and Clemson, and has not been good for a number of years now.

The good news, however: if we win this Saturday, we'll have big time coverage for the last two games of the season, for sure! The bad news is that one of those is not likely to reflect well on how much we've improved. I mean, I want to beat Carolina badly. And I'd love to see us in the CCG, in theory. I'm just a little apprehensive about he way FSU's been absolutely destroying teams by the time the first quarter's over. We'd be in good company if that were to happen to us, I guess.

BTW: Wallace Wade was almost full two weekends ago vs. Miami. Definitely not "half empty" -- although I realize you're talking about what it looked like on TV. I think a revamped WW could stand to have less seats, but move all the seats much closer to the field. I know that's not going to happen, but I'd love to create the football equivalent of the intimate atmosphere in Cameron. Focus on creating a stadium that gets very loud despite a smaller crowd. My fear is that the redesign is basically just going to bring us up to par with other schools, without attempting to think outside the box and create something unique...