Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 4121314
Results 261 to 273 of 273
  1. #261
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by CrazyNotCrazie View Post
    Dealing with the uncertainty of juniors leaving early, whether or not recruits will actually show up or will go straight to the pros, and rationing out partial scholarships is not easy - managing one-and-done basketball players is nothing compared to that.
    Yep. Top programs deal with this all the time. Duke hasn't had to deal with this until recently, because Duke hasn't been a top program. This was the first time Duke has still been playing when the MLB draft took place. Think about that. The first time. Ever.

    The only thing worse for a college program than losing players to the pros after their junior years is having juniors the pros don't want. Those are the programs that go a half-century without going to the NCAAs.

  2. #262
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC

  3. #263
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    There has been much discussion about how many years since Duke played in a CWS. I seem to recall that there was a period where Duke could not participate because the administration (university or athletic I don't recall) would not let players (or at least seniors) compete after the semester ended (or graduation occurred). Maybe Jim can refresh this. I know it was not the whole period, but not being able to participate in post-season play would certainly be a wet blanket on recruiting. (And this ban may have included all spring sports.)

  4. #264
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy View Post
    There has been much discussion about how many years since Duke played in a CWS. I seem to recall that there was a period where Duke could not participate because the administration (university or athletic I don't recall) would not let players (or at least seniors) compete after the semester ended (or graduation occurred). Maybe Jim can refresh this. I know it was not the whole period, but not being able to participate in post-season play would certainly be a wet blanket on recruiting. (And this ban may have included all spring sports.)
    Duke won the ACC in 1956, 1957 and 1961 and participated in the NCAAT all three years. I don't recall any sort of post-graduation ban but it may have happened.

    There are a lot of parallels between Duke football and Duke baseball. A national power for decades but fell victim to administrative indifference and occasional administrative hostility.

  5. #265
    Quote Originally Posted by jimsumner View Post
    There are a lot of parallels between Duke football and Duke baseball. A national power for decades but fell victim to administrative indifference and occasional administrative hostility.
    Yep, and all the while, the people at NC State, The Cheats, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, etc, were waking up to the advantages to the entire school in having a good football program, especially. It seemed to me, as a fan but not an insider, that at times there was almost a perverse pride among some at Duke that the football team was a disaster. Maybe I'm over reaching here, but the thought crossed my mind more than once. I'm sure Jim, Bob and others around here can verify or deny that with credibility.
    "...with Kam Fong as Chin Ho..."

  6. #266
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by HereBeforeCoachK View Post
    Yep, and all the while, the people at NC State, The Cheats, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, etc, were waking up to the advantages to the entire school in having a good football program, especially. It seemed to me, as a fan but not an insider, that at times there was almost a perverse pride among some at Duke that the football team was a disaster. Maybe I'm over reaching here, but the thought crossed my mind more than once. I'm sure Jim, Bob and others around here can verify or deny that with credibility.
    I'm over-simplifying here.

    But several things happened around the same time.

    In the 1960s, Duke began to make a concerted effort to go from respected regional university to international behemoth.

    Part of that was hiring a lot of young Ivy and Ivy-equivalent doctorates.

    The Ivies had de-emphasized football in the 1950s, while schools like Chicago and MIT weren't in the big-time football business at all.

    Many of the junior faculty--not all but a good many--felt that bigtime football was incompatible with academic excellence. Thus, the indifference, sometimes animosity. In the late 1960s, the faculty senate formally recommended that Duke drop out of the ACC and de-emphasize football.

    I've always thought that the decision to replace Bill Murray with Tom Harp, an Ivy League mediocrity (Cornell), was an attempt to placate this sentiment.

    Around the same time, the NCAA removed all restrictions on substitutions in football. The two-way player largely disappeared. This meant a school needed to recruit more talented players in order to remain competitive.

    This hurt academically elite, expensive schools at a time when Duke was becoming more academically elite and more expensive.

    The prevailing narrative of Duke football when I was there (1968-1972) and the remainder of Mike McGee's tenure was that Duke's first team was as good as anyone's. Leo Hart, Wes Chesson, Ernie Jackson, Steve Jones, Bob Grupp, Ed Newman, Billy Bryan, Troy Slade, Mike Dunn, Carl McGee, et. al.

    But there was no depth. When the inevitable injuries occurred, the drop-off was greater for Duke than for the competition. Promising seasons routinely fell apart.

    An example. Mike McGee's first season, 1971, my senior year. Duke jumped to a 4-0, 5-1 start, national ranking, big upset at Stanford.

    Then QB Dennis Satyshur broke an arm. There was no Plan B. McGee moved Rich Searl, an All-ACC DB, to QB, while keeping him at DB. Searl hadn't played QB since high school. He was a great college DB but couldn't hit the proverbial broad side of a barn as a passer. And he was playing both ways.

    Duke ended 6-5 and was not ranked again until Spurrier.

    For decades, Duke tried to run a football program on the cheap. Wade was allowed to deteriorate, coaching salaries were inadequate, the recruiting budget wasn't competitive.

    It stayed this way for a long time. Ever wonder about Carl Franks. No one more qualified was interested in the job at the salary Duke offered. UVA assistant Tom O'Brien was approached before Goldsmith was hired and told Duke thanks but no thanks.

    Not all of this applies to baseball. The substitution changes for example. But a lot does.

    Some of the faculty and administration remained hostile but I think it was more indifference. And, IMO, embarrassing, A university that proclaimed its desire to be great in all things trotted out a football program that simply wasn't even close to competitive.

  7. #267
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Meeting with Marie Laveau
    Quote Originally Posted by HereBeforeCoachK View Post
    Yep, and all the while, the people at NC State, The Cheats, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, etc, were waking up to the advantages to the entire school in having a good football program, especially. It seemed to me, as a fan but not an insider, that at times there was almost a perverse pride among some at Duke that the football team was a disaster. Maybe I'm over reaching here, but the thought crossed my mind more than once. I'm sure Jim, Bob and others around here can verify or deny that with credibility.
    As recently as 2005, I attended Duke hosted events during which academic deans or other Duke faculty made mean spirited jokes about the football players and program. Every Saturday for years ESPN announced another Duke loss added to the longest losing streak in the country at that time. No administrators seemed concerned, embarrassed or even aware.

  8. #268
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    I had a lengthy discussion about this with a trustee a few years ago, and along the with aforementioned points, it was noted that The Nanster had zero interest in football while Brodhead had considerable interest.
    This was not insignificant.

  9. #269
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    I have long thought, with no evidence, that there was a connection between the lacrosse hoax and the resurrection of football. If you remember, the BOT was all in to support Brodhead and the university's treatment of the players. It is also known that there were some trustees who really wanted to resurrect the football program, but had been unable to carry the day. The BOT stayed unified, and Cutcliffe (and commitment) came in 2008. I expect the faculty that so misjudged lacrosse were not in as strong a position as before to oppose football.

  10. #270
    These last few posts deserve a better location than this thread. No offense intended to the baseball team.

    I'm probably being petty in another thread.

  11. #271
    Wish we had capability to Like what Jim Sumner has posted (almost always). Guess Im too lazy to write a post that says "Like."

    I agree that Nan was indifferent at best and Broadhead was more aware of what a competitive football program brings to Duke. Nan wanted to make Duke consist of only the most top scholars while Broadhead understood that well rounded top students end up providing Duke with the best eventual reflection back on our school.

    A competitive college football team attracts a lot of sports-minded kids that might otherwise go to Stanford or others like NW, TX, MI or ND

  12. #272
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    Nan's first action as president was to investigate the basketball program. I don't think that sent very far.

    And yes, this is far afield from baseball. Probably need a new thread. I enjoyed this season, and although the last game was disappointing, these guys played hard all year and never quit. They established a high standard to which I hope future teams can exceed. As I have said before, it was flawed in some respects--mediocre and inconsistent starting pitching, but with generally lights out bullpen. Bottom of the order was weak, but did manage to scratch out runs. Infield defense was beautiful. I will really miss Kone and Miller--they made it look easy. I don't expect Crabtree to hit .714 (his Athens average), but a solid .280 with pop will be a real help. The loss of Proctor will hurt. It is always said that strength up the middle is essential, and with Proctor, Kone, and Miller moving on that is a lot of pieces to replace. I have faith in Pollard (although I did question his use of pitchers--particularly going to Labosky in situations that took the bat out the hands of his hottest hitter), but he is an excellent coach who we are lucky to have. Now on to a long, hot summer with no games. Ugh

  13. #273
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil in the Blue Dress View Post
    As recently as 2005, I attended Duke hosted events during which academic deans or other Duke faculty made mean spirited jokes about the football players and program. Every Saturday for years ESPN announced another Duke loss added to the longest losing streak in the country at that time. No administrators seemed concerned, embarrassed or even aware.
    Imagine you're at the top of your field as an engineer, scientist, or historian working at Duke. And Ted Roof is getting paid five times more than you to go 0-12. I mean, I would understand getting paid a lot less than Nick Saban or Coach K. But I also understand frustration with athletics salaries.

    You guys know from my posts over the years in the fall that I like college football and am glad we have a good program and great coach. But it is not super obvious and simple that pouring tons of cash into a football program is the best or most efficient overall route for a university to take.

Similar Threads

  1. Marcus Smart shoves Texas Tech fan, supsended three games
    By vick in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 156
    Last Post: 02-10-2014, 03:38 PM
  2. Texas Tech Coach Mike Leach fired
    By DukeFencer in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 05:51 AM
  3. MBB: Stanford/Texas Tech
    By Ders24 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-31-2008, 12:21 AM
  4. Texas Tech @ Kansas
    By mr. synellinden in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-04-2008, 11:36 PM
  5. another duke alum acting super professional
    By NovaScotian in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-27-2008, 10:34 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
  •