ESPN.com article on the decline of recent basketball powerhouses

[nyr484]

For those of you who have been freaking out in the wake of Duke's 2nd consecutive year of what we consider to be an early bow out of the tournament, consider this ESPN.com article:

"What ever happened to teams which became the toast of the tourney, only to all but disappear from the Dance scene?" Mark Schlabach http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaato...ark&id=3293539

Overall, it's pretty good to be a Duke fan.

[BCGroup]

Well worth a few minutes. It's really a good reminder of how tenuous success can be, how dependent it is on changing personnel (nice to see we aren't the only one who lose players), and that our situation is not that bad at all. I'm guessing this is going to be moved to the half full/half empty thread, and if so, this definitely tilts things to half full!

[freedevil]

I can only imagine that ESPN was urged to write that article by the many Duke fans who responded to Dana O'Neil's article who are sick and tired of the "mystique is gone" stuff when there are as many programs out there - as included in this article - that have (1) actually fallen off [like out of the tourney completely] and (2) never get the attention Duke does when it loses.

[SMO]

I can only imagine that ESPN was urged to write that article by the many Duke fans who responded to Dana O'Neil's article who are sick and tired of the "mystique is gone" stuff when there are as many programs out there - as included in this article - that have (1) actually fallen off [like out of the tourney completely] and (2) never get the attention Duke does when it loses.

I love it. Finally an objective article from ESPN about truly challenged programs. Too bad Schlabach seems to be an exception in ESPN's college hoops coverage.

[Edouble]

I think the article is about how a handful of programs (not necessarily even quality programs) haven't done much since their last Final Four. The programs aren't spoken of as "powerhouses". Indiana and Syracuse are clearly traditional basketball mainstays, but c'mon... LSU? Let's not get ahead of ourselves and say that we (Duke) are in a good situation because we're ahead of Illinois and Oklahoma State. No, the Duke program is not over, but we still need to be looking at and comparing ourselves to the cream of the crop, not the second tier programs that this article mostly deals with.

[freedevil]

I agree with you to some extent EDouble. I thought it was interesting that UConn and Kentucky were not mentioned in this article.

[AtlDuke72]

Overall, it's pretty good to be a Duke fan.

It is going to get better real soon! The Heels reign on top will be short lived. Go to this for some great news. Sorry I could not put it in as a link - technology challenged.
http://sportspickle.com/features/vol...0326-duke.html

[Edouble]

It is going to get better real soon! The Heels reign on top will be short lived. Go to this for some great news. Sorry I could not put it in as a link - technology challenged.
http://sportspickle.com/features/vol...0326-duke.html

That's stupid. Like, there's nothing funny about it. Maybe if it had been written differently it might have been funny, but it wasn't. Also, it's incorrect to quote Hubert Davis as a person to say how floor slapping is stupid, b/c UNC has floor slapped just as long as Duke.

[greybeard]

This article is driven by ratings, TV ratings that is. The question is, how was it possible for Davidson's 6'6" front line players to effectively shut down all those much bigger front lines. Shut em down.

Would Davidson have beat the team that Duke played in the first round (sorry I don't remember the name)? I think that there's much more than a decent chance that they wouldn't have. I think that there's a decent chance that mid-majors, except for the JMU team which really could play with anyone gets to be competitive by deploying defensive tactics that would in other contexts be called fouls. How does Georgetown get four, off-the-ball pushing fouls called against their guys in the post? Why would they even consider "pushing" a defender away when they all had several inches to a half foot on them?

I do not think that the way the littles vs the bigs in the NCAAs were called was deliberate bias. But I do think that that is the elephant in the closet. ESPN and the other sports moguls don't like the results so they write about which team that might have drawn the audience the moguls are after had they been up to par are not, and how "ain't that a shame." A bunch of bull if you ask me.

[shadowfax336]

This article is driven by ratings, TV ratings that is. The question is, how was it possible for Davidson's 6'6" front line players to effectively shut down all those much bigger front lines. Shut em down.

Would Davidson have beat the team that Duke played in the first round (sorry I don't remember the name)? I think that there's much more than a decent chance that they wouldn't have. I think that there's a decent chance that mid-majors, except for the JMU team which really could play with anyone gets to be competitive by deploying defensive tactics that would in other contexts be called fouls. How does Georgetown get four, off-the-ball pushing fouls called against their guys in the post? Why would they even consider "pushing" a defender away when they all had several inches to a half foot on them?

I do not think that the way the littles vs the bigs in the NCAAs were called was deliberate bias. But I do think that that is the elephant in the closet. ESPN and the other sports moguls don't like the results so they write about which team that might have drawn the audience the moguls are after had they been up to par are not, and how "ain't that a shame." A bunch of bull if you ask me.

No offense meant, but what in the world are you talking about? I don't really understand what this had to do with the rest of the thread at all, and yet it seems to be replying to something else...
I'm very confused

[Edouble]

I think that there's a decent chance that mid-majors, except for the JMU team which really could play with anyone gets to be competitive by deploying defensive tactics that would in other contexts be called fouls.

Do you mean George Mason (GMU, I suppose?)?

[Classof06]

I can only imagine that ESPN was urged to write that article by the many Duke fans who responded to Dana O'Neil's article who are sick and tired of the "mystique is gone" stuff when there are as many programs out there - as included in this article - that have (1) actually fallen off [like out of the tourney completely] and (2) never get the attention Duke does when it loses.

Nice callout, I really hope Dana O'Neill read this article. She's had it out for Duke ever since that Roy-Coach K "injurygate" spectacle.

[AtlDuke72]

That's stupid. Like, there's nothing funny about it. Maybe if it had been written differently it might have been funny, but it wasn't. Also, it's incorrect to quote Hubert Davis as a person to say how floor slapping is stupid, b/c UNC has floor slapped just as long as Duke.

Whoa! I thought it was pretty funny. Also, thought the made up quote from Davis was very funny. It might be missing the point to start ranting about UNC also slapping the floor. Maybe you need to lighten up a bit.

[Edouble]

Whoa! I thought it was pretty funny. Also, thought the made up quote from Davis was very funny. It might be missing the point to start ranting about UNC also slapping the floor. Maybe you need to lighten up a bit.

How is what I wrote a "rant", and how do I need to lighten up? It's not a rant if you point out a mistake. It's stupid for a fake Hubert Davis to comment about floor slapping when UNC floor slaps too. The guy who wrote the article doesn't know enough about college hoops. Maybe you need to lighten up if you can't deal with someone not finding humor in an unfunny article that you posted.

[-jk]

Gentlemen,

Let's play nicely please.

-jk

[Duvall]

Let's not get ahead of ourselves and say that we (Duke) are in a good situation because we're ahead of Illinois and Oklahoma State. No, the Duke program is not over, but we still need to be looking at and comparing ourselves to the cream of the crop, not the second tier programs that this article mostly deals with.

Well, who do you consider cream of the crop? Kansas and UCLA? I think we have a decent chance of catching and passing both by next year - they'll be losing quite a few players.

[Crazie'11]

I find it quite interesting how many of these teams could be tied to the Duke curse. Take LSU for example.