The reaction that people have to someone who went or goes to Duke, and the image that people have built up about the university are not a joke. These views are often directly influenced by the negative feelings that have been drummed up about the basketball program, and it doesn't matter how completely irrational that is because it is reality. Being sensitive about that is not the reason why people hate Duke, just as overcritical microanalysis of depth in a key win on a Duke message board is not the reason why people hate Duke (as someone suggested after the Marquette win). If these were the reasons, it would be a lot less of a problem and certainly not confined to Duke. The Duke hating crap has gotten pretty out of control and it's not sensationalizing it to be p*ssed off about it. Bringing the lax thing into it in order to find some new reason why Coack K supposedly has no soul is a decent example of how being irrational about Duke's basketball program has spilled over into being irrational about Duke in real life -way beyond displeasure about fan heckling, negative effects on recruiting, or unfair officiating backlashes.
The success is a large part of it, but our collective high-and-mighty routine is also a contributor.
A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
---Roger Ebert
Some questions cannot be answered
Who’s gonna bury who
We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
---Over the Rhine
You said all we have to do is start losing and people would stop talking, well we had our fair share of it last year and the end result is that the media talks more negatively than ever before. There are people out there who do not like us and want us to disappear. All of the evidence is there, this is no conspiracy, the sad thing is that no one from Duke seems to stand up about it. It is very frustrating.
A season in which a team goes 22-11 would only be considered a "fair share" of losing in the world of the spoiled Duke fan.
Are there people that want to see Duke basketball disappear? Sure. Heck, there are thousands of them 8 miles down the road. But guess what? Jason Evans notwithstanding, there are lots of people that took great joy in seeing UNC completely meltdown six years ago. Why did we all take such joy? Mostly because the UNC program has enjoyed a great deal of success.
It isn't a conspiracy for lots of people to want to see the downfall of a powerful sports program. It is just human nature.
I don't think so. I don't remember Kentucky getting this kind of treatment in the mid 1990s when it was winning two out of three titles and losing in the title game the third year. And I don't recall UNC ever getting this treatment. And although I am not old enough to remember, I don't think UCLA had any of these issues. It's the media - and the media - especially ESPN - has changed a lot in the last 10 years (since Kentucky's run), which just happens to coincide with the development of the internet.
Most mainstream folks assume/expect integrity from the media -- news media and also sports media. Most casual observers, who aren't huge b-ball fans like those of us posting here aren't always aware how the "news" is being colored. That is why integrity in the media is so very important -- people depend on and TRUST the media.
So there are impacts if a major or dominant player like ESPN reports, often as "fact," that: (1) Duke gets all of the calls (even as part of their coverage - recall Stew Scott story a couple years ago after the FSU game) even when Duke is getting charged with 2x the fouls called on an opponent and fouling out their entire starting lineup; or that (2) Duke is a rich-kids elitist school with terrible relations with a mostly poor, black city (almost those exact words, again from any number of ESPN LAX stories where they were among the leaders in the anti-Duke stampede over a year ago); (3) ESPN diagramming in-detail (thank you again Mr. Scott) how G. Henderson "MUST" have run all the way across the court with the intent to harm Tyler Hansborough's nose (spot shadow and all); (4) The more recent spate of anti-Duke anti-K rif's posted in ESPN Magaazine.; etc, etc.
Jason - I truly like your generally well-informed and reasoned "let's all put the toches down..." tone on this board - you clearly know your stuff - but I simply don't buy it. The anti-Duke bias (no, not conpiracy) at ESPN, through sheer volume and virility, couldn't be more obvious. I tend not to believe in conspiracy junk, as I think most professionals desperately like to think of themselves first and foremost as just that - professional. But I wonder if there isn't some sort of "groupthink" going on over there, given a critical mass of UCONN and UNC-CH alums/fans, that serves to "shape" the News department's view of the world.
I live in the DC area now. Many MD and UVA and VPI friends used to grumble - usually after a loss to Duke - about Duke getting so many close calls, etc. It was generally a few grumbles and then gone (maybe MORE than just a few if in a large crowd of Terp fans, etc). But nowadays, I so often hear it much more persistently from these same people, who explain/justify the change by saying "even the Post..." or "even ESPN was talking about it..." I also hear this MUCH more from the casual fans who never cared about Duke one way or the other before...
And I agree - somebody at Duke HAS to speak up about it. The same as you confront racial bigotry -- it cannot stand the light of day (or scrutiny).
Just my thoughts. Go Duke!
Regards,
-BDBD
Feldspar -
Re Duke-hating and racism. Of course not. (I'm sorry if I implied otherwise.) I was simply saying that neither can stand close (or even not-so-close) scrutiny. So this unprofessional, agenda-based approach by certain media members needs to be confronted and pointed out for what it is. What it is is unprofessional.... or worse.
I would actually like to hear opinions from those on this board working in/with media. Is it past the realm of plausibility that a media outlet could pander to a certain group, such as Duke-bashers, in the interest of ratings and interest? Does it never happen elsewhere?
-BDBD
P.S. I noted, belatedly, a typo in my earlier note. I intended to say, "I wonder if there isn't some sort of "groupthink" going on over there (at ESPN), given a critical mass of UCONN and UNC-CH alums/fans, that serves to "shape" the News department's view of their world."
A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
---Roger Ebert
Some questions cannot be answered
Who’s gonna bury who
We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
---Over the Rhine
One good thing about the Pessah article was the first section, about Prosser's funeral.
Think about what a survivor K must feel like. Valvano's dead. Prosser's dead. Cremins is in the minor leagues again. Other age contemporaries like Odom have left the conference.
Coach K is the Watcher.
A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
---Roger Ebert
Some questions cannot be answered
Who’s gonna bury who
We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
---Over the Rhine
What's a guy have to do around here to get a link?
Kyle Singler named by ESPN as national player of the week:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/notebo.../weeklywatch03
Sure, you're thinking this is pro-Duke, what is Chambers complaining about?
See, it's really a thinly-veiled attempt to influence Kyle to go pro next Spring!
Matt
P.S. As Pynchon observed, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
My only thought here is that if (a big if) "Duke haters" truly hate those who attend(ed) Duke, root for Duke, like Duke, etc. then there really isn't much difference. The hatred is just as baseless. There probably aren't many that fit that description but I would wager that there are some.
And I thought I was out of a year plus preoccupation with the nightmare of the lacrosse case and could return to my first love of Blue Devil basketball!
But here is Pessah of ESPN attacking Coach K on the lacrosse case because "by staying silent he lost some credibility”? Give me a break! ESPN broadcasted the lies that underlay the Lacrosse Hoax. In his 4/11/2006 piece in ESPN The Magazine, Eric Adelson reported an anonymous source who was “present at the hospital” as indicating that Mangum had bruising on her neck (supporting her story she was strangled), bruises on her face (supporting her story she was beaten) and pelvic injuries (supporting her rape and sodomy stories).
All of these stories have been shown to be lies yet Adelson has never acknowledged he was suckered and never revealed his so-called source. (I’m excluding the possibility that he just made it up!) Nor has ESPN ever issued an apology for their role in thus propagating the Lacrosse Hoax.
Since Pessah is ill-equipped and in the wrong company to write about the lacrosse case, might I suggest something that might be more suitable to his background as a Maryland graduate and basketball writer? Why doesn’t he use his inside knowledge to examine the reasons for and implications of the zero graduation rate for D1 basketball players entering his alma mater in the 1997-2000 period?
From Pessah's article: “I’ve never been a fan of nondecisions,” says Tom Butters, the former Duke athletic director, who hired Krzyzewski, then a little-known coach at Army, in 1980. “If you can’t support these boys, who can you support? There are times when you have to put your [rear end] on the line...“Did I anticipate Mike would step forward?” {Butters] says. “Yes, because he has stepped forward so many times on so many issues, and because of the gravity of the situation. I am in no way critical of the way he responded, but I was surprised. He is so powerful, and he is not one to be shy about his views. I would have thought he would anguish in his silence.”
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2491696Since Pessah is ill-equipped and in the wrong company to write about the lacrosse case...
http://insider.espn.go.com/ncaa/insi...3fid%3d2563683