PDA

View Full Version : Duke Hatred Tsunami - 2008-09 collector thread



jwillfan
11-10-2008, 02:15 PM
He was on NPR this AM and "lamented" the demise of the ACC, calling it a "one-team conference in basketball". Listen and be enraged: :mad:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96805504

Why's he gotta be a hater?

killerleft
11-10-2008, 02:56 PM
I wouldn't be too surprised at anything Negative Nancy Feinstein has to say about Duke. Remember, he was right up there with Nancy Grace and Wahneema Lubiano in crucifying Duke lacrosse players.

billybreen
11-10-2008, 02:58 PM
I wouldn't be too surprised at anything Negative Nancy Feinstein has to say about Duke. Remember, he was right up there with Nancy Grace and Wahneema Lubiano in crucifying Duke lacrosse players.

Word to that. He has similar emotional baggage to Doyel, IIRC.

Johnboy
11-10-2008, 02:59 PM
He was on NPR this AM and "lamented" the demise of the ACC, calling it a "one-team conference in basketball". Listen and be enraged: :mad:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96805504

Why's he gotta be a hater?

Maybe he's just giving the team some bulletin board material.

Seriously, though, if the pattern post-expansion holds up and years go by with no one other than Carolina advancing to the FF, then the ACC will become, for NCAA purposes, a one-team conference. The problem with the argument is that, there aren't that many datapoints - expansion was in 2005, for crying out loud. We just gotta go out and show him the error of his ways.

I'm sorry JF has gone so anti-Duke in recent years, though.

JasonEvans
11-10-2008, 03:00 PM
I am surprised he is this lame. Calling the ACC a one-team conference in basketball is just plain silly when everyone has Duke in the top ten and most folks think Miami and Wake are serious Sweet 16 contenders too. C'mon, John. You can do better than this.

--Jason "the Sagarin and other rankings will again have the ACC as easily the top rated conference this year... just like every year" Evans

COYS
11-10-2008, 03:02 PM
He was on NPR this AM and "lamented" the demise of the ACC, calling it a "one-team conference in basketball". Listen and be enraged: :mad:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96805504

Why's he gotta be a hater?

I'm perfectly fine with this type of press. I've got no problem with Duke sneaking up on people, and especially the press. It's rare that we get to be in that situation. Let him talk all he wants . . .

juise
11-10-2008, 03:06 PM
Well, if by "one team conference," he means that there is a heavy favorite, then he is probably correct. UNC is the first team to be unanimously voted #1 in the pre-season coaches' poll. I guess that we could then call the NCAA Division 1, a "one team division." :rolleyes:

COYS
11-10-2008, 03:13 PM
Well, if by "one team conference," he means that there is a heavy favorite, then he is probably correct. UNC is the first team to be unanimously voted #1 in the pre-season coaches' poll. I guess that we could then call the NCAA Division 1, a "one team division." :rolleyes:

Yeah, call off the rest of the games. Men's NCAA basketball is a one-team sport.

arnie
11-10-2008, 03:25 PM
I didn't find his statements off that much - he was focusing on tournament success since 2005 and let's face it - we haven't had much success since then.

Of course, I just finished listening to Bomani Jones on local radio refer to Duke as "a sorry school". So in comparison, John is not much of a hater.

greybeard
11-10-2008, 03:33 PM
There is a significant body of evidence that the guy is actually mutiple personalities. He hangs with the big people, Bobby, the guys on the tour, etc, and then writes books undermining at least some of them.

He oh so loves the littles, the purity of sport that they represent, and well, son of a gun, sells a lot of books extolling their virtue, except that he drops an F bomb when a Navy guy makes an amateurish misstake.

The thing is, I figured that there were only two of them in there, but now it seems like, as in the movie "The Three Faces of Eve," we belatedly find a third.

Here we have a Duke team that is all about the purity of the game. Hell, even Junior's hero, Red, would have had to love how Duke plays the game--it takes the way that the game was played when Red was in his prime as a coach to new levels, with superior athletes and skills. So, Feinstein had to create yet another persona to deal with this Devil: he had to find a way to not only screw the school that bore him (Freud or Oedipus you take your pick), but also in doing so besmearch the tradition and game he purports to love.

Man, I thought I had problems. ;)

SmartDevil
11-10-2008, 03:36 PM
JF is irrated at Duke, with or without reason.

One or two diplomatic loyal Duke fans need to take him out for a long lunch at a very nice restaurant and let him get it ALL off his chest, satisfy his ego, and reel him back in.

Probably a good idea if someone from the Administration or the AD did that as well.

dukegirlinsc
11-10-2008, 03:39 PM
Why am I not shocked?

sagegrouse
11-10-2008, 03:41 PM
John Feinstein was attacking the ACC and the decision to expand to 12 teams by pointing out that the ACC was no longer the best conference. To do that, he mentioned that only UNC had been to the final 8 in the NCAA-T since 2005, when the conference expanded.

Seems like a non sequitur to me. Why does the expansion of the conference immediately drag down the performance of teams like Duke and MD?

Oh well. One can reasonably expect the author of Season on the Brink to throw a Molotov cocktail at anything that displeases him.

When he goes after Duke, it has invariably been the choice of football coach and the performance of the AD. Since Joe Speedboat is gone and Coach Cut is doing great, I expect he will now pick on the men's basketball program. This NPR reference to Duke was pretty subtle (for John), and I doubt that his heart was in it.

sagegrouse

RelativeWays
11-10-2008, 03:42 PM
People who are ready to crown the 08/08 UNC team as NCAA super champions needs to look up 1991 UNLV and (as much as I hate to say it) 1999 Duke. Each expected to stomp the competition into a sticky paste-like substance in the tournament and each went home championship-less.

roywhite
11-10-2008, 03:43 PM
Any wonder that JF is known by some as "Fredo"?

As in:
"Fredo, you're nothing to me now. You're not a brother, you're not a friend"

billybreen
11-10-2008, 03:44 PM
People who are ready to crown the 08/08 UNC team as NCAA super champions needs to look up 1991 UNLV and (as much as I hate to say it) 1999 Duke. Each expected to stomp the competition into a sticky paste-like substance in the tournament and each went home championship-less.

Or the 2002 Duke team. Ugh, now I need a drink.

killerleft
11-10-2008, 03:49 PM
JF is irrated at Duke, with or without reason.

One or two diplomatic loyal Duke fans need to take him out for a long lunch at a very nice restaurant and let him get it ALL off his chest, satisfy his ego, and reel him back in.

Probably a good idea if someone from the Administration or the AD did that as well.

So you think he's worth that much trouble?

Why not just watch him become the King of Pomposity? He certainly has the cred to be one of the all-time greats.

weezie
11-10-2008, 06:32 PM
Poor John-boy. Always had to work so hard, typing away at his little stories and books. Never could crack the big TV money, now could he?

miramar
11-10-2008, 06:36 PM
To think this guy used to be interesting to hear and read.

greybeard
11-10-2008, 11:39 PM
Any wonder that JF is known by some as "Fredo"?

As in:
"Fredo, you're nothing to me now. You're not a brother, you're not a friend"

This is good, and I didn't even go to Duke.

studdlee10
11-11-2008, 12:21 AM
I didn't find his statements off that much - he was focusing on tournament success since 2005 and let's face it - we haven't had much success since then.

Of course, I just finished listening to Bomani Jones on local radio refer to Duke as "a sorry school". So in comparison, John is not much of a hater.

How does Bomani Jones still have a job? Nothing he writes is even remotely original. He just spews the typical racist reverse BS and doesn't even remotely try to be objective. He is a talentless hack. I am all for freedom of speech and differing viewpoints, but he just plain sucks. What did he say about Duke now? The pure hate spewing from him is ridiculous.

devilirium
11-11-2008, 12:50 AM
Feinstein was on 850 the Buzz this morning and termed Duke Football as equivalent to the McCain/Palin campaign---started off well, and then went south---never saw the logic in that analogy. I never sensed that the GOP getting a serious bump with that combination.

Something that I learned tonite is that Feinstein is going through a divorce as we write and it's likely that he'll be taken to the cleaners. This may or may not explain his ultra edginess toward Duke lately. I'm not sure. I don't sense that K's had much contact with him or anyone from Duke. He seems to refer to K in a more distant way now. I'm thinking that K didn't appreciate John's attitude about the lacrosse team, and maybe K felt that John went too far with his Alleva bashing (those are more guesses than anything).

Gunnar Kaufman
11-11-2008, 01:04 AM
Feinstein was on 850 the Buzz this morning and termed Duke Football as equivalent to the McCain/Palin campaign---started off well, and then went south---never saw the logic in that analogy. I never sensed that the GOP getting a serious bump with that combination.

Something that I learned tonite is that Feinstein is going through a divorce as we write and it's likely that he'll be taken to the cleaners. This may or may not explain his ultra edginess toward Duke lately. I'm not sure. I don't sense that K's had much contact with him or anyone from Duke. He seems to refer to K in a more distant way now. I'm thinking that K didn't appreciate John's attitude about the lacrosse team, and maybe K felt that John went too far with his Alleva bashing (those are more guesses than anything).

Feinstein has burned many, many bridges in the athletic department...

davekay1971
11-11-2008, 10:04 AM
John who? Oh, didn't he used to write sports books? Haven't heard about him doing anything noteworthy in a long time. Did he retire?

arnie
11-11-2008, 10:26 AM
How does Bomani Jones still have a job? Nothing he writes is even remotely original. He just spews the typical racist reverse BS and doesn't even remotely try to be objective. He is a talentless hack. I am all for freedom of speech and differing viewpoints, but he just plain sucks. What did he say about Duke now? The pure hate spewing from him is ridiculous.

Yea, I usually change stations when Bomani is on - I can only assume he appeals to various deadbeats and Carolina fans (or are they the same) around the Triangle.

He was discussing the poor attendance at Duke football and specifically the fact that WW was primarily red on Saturday. Of course he exaggerated that! After discussing that and someother subject, he stated "Duke is a sorry school". I guess it was sort of in the context of football, but it stood out from that. Typical stuff from him though.

Dr. Rosenrosen
11-11-2008, 10:42 AM
Something that I learned tonite is that Feinstein is going through a divorce as we write and it's likely that he'll be taken to the cleaners.

So it appears even his wife can't stand him.

miramar
11-11-2008, 10:47 AM
John who? Oh, didn't he used to write sports books? Haven't heard about him doing anything noteworthy in a long time. Did he retire?

Yes he did, but unfortunately he still seems to be on the payroll.

Come to think of it, he reminds me of some of my colleagues.

Bluedog
11-11-2008, 11:37 AM
How does Bomani Jones still have a job? Nothing he writes is even remotely original. He just spews the typical racist reverse BS and doesn't even remotely try to be objective. He is a talentless hack. I am all for freedom of speech and differing viewpoints, but he just plain sucks. What did he say about Duke now? The pure hate spewing from him is ridiculous.

Well, Duke did hire him to teach a course at Duke! :eek: I think last semester...

roywhite
11-11-2008, 11:47 AM
Well, Duke did hire him to teach a course at Duke! :eek: I think last semester...

Really?? Do you happen to know what the subject matter was?

Don't live in the Triangle, but get there fairly often on business and listen to the various sports-related radio programs; Bomani is awful.

Going back a little bit, did Bomani weigh in on the lacrosse case, or was that before his time on local radio?

Bluedog
11-11-2008, 12:45 PM
Really?? Do you happen to know what the subject matter was?

Don't live in the Triangle, but get there fairly often on business and listen to the various sports-related radio programs; Bomani is awful.

Going back a little bit, did Bomani weigh in on the lacrosse case, or was that before his time on local radio?

He taught in the African and African American Studies department:

AAAS 132 BLACK POPULAR CULTURE
8626 Sec. 01 LEC TTH 08:30 AM-09:45 AM Freidl Building 240 Jones,Bomani B
Topic: BLACK ATHLETES IN AMERICA

http://www.registrar.duke.edu/registrar/studentpages/student/schedule/spring2008.pdf

See also Duke Professor Bomani Jones? (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5499&highlight=bomani+jones)

And, yes, he heavily weighed in regarding the LAX case, but I don't want to add anything else as I don't want to move this thread to PPB.

Inonehand
11-11-2008, 02:11 PM
He taught in the African and African American Studies department:

AAAS 132 BLACK POPULAR CULTURE
8626 Sec. 01 LEC TTH 08:30 AM-09:45 AM Freidl Building 240 Jones,Bomani B
Topic: BLACK ATHLETES IN AMERICA

http://www.registrar.duke.edu/registrar/studentpages/student/schedule/spring2008.pdf

See also Duke Professor Bomani Jones? (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5499&highlight=bomani+jones)

And, yes, he heavily weighed in regarding the LAX case, but I don't want to add anything else as I don't want to move this thread to PPB.


I actaully like listening to Bomani. Find him relatively funny and while I think he disses Duke WAY too much, he pretty much does that to everybody in some form or fashion.

His stance during the Crystal Mangum drunken, drug-addled frame up was never from the angle that the players had assaulted the woman. He simply came out against the overwhelming support for the players when they hit the playing field again. I thought he was entirely wrong in holding the players in any way responsible for the mess that it became, but I don't believe he was ever in the 'something happened' crowd.

camion
11-11-2008, 02:44 PM
"I am shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!" --Renault.

Or Duke bashing by Feinstein.

godukecom
11-11-2008, 03:08 PM
Bomani Jones is at the end of a long line of bad hosts at 850...

BlueintheFace
11-11-2008, 03:22 PM
http://www.sportsline.com/collegebasketball/story/11098344/1

He wants Paulus to start games and Nolan to finish them...

houstondukie
11-11-2008, 03:36 PM
http://www.sportsline.com/collegebasketball/story/11098344/1

He wants Paulus to start games and Nolan to finish them...

The more I think about it, the more I tend to agree with Paulus starting and Nolan finishing. But not necessarily for the same reasons that the article mentions, although I think he is right to some extent.

Greg runs the offense better and is a better shooter than Nolan at this stage in the season. We didn't get off to a good start last game and I think Greg starting can ensure better play at the start of games. Perhaps one reason why Gerald didn't play well was due to this poor start. It just seemed like G never got in any rhythm and it's the PG job to get his teammates involved first.

Nolan is the better defender and penetrator. At the end of games, you don't need 3 point shooting as much as lock-down defense and attacking the rim.

dukelifer
11-11-2008, 03:45 PM
The more I think about it, the more I tend to agree with Paulus starting and Nolan finishing. But not necessarily for the same reasons that the article mentions, although I think he is right to some extent.

Greg runs the offense better and is a better shooter than Nolan at this stage in the season. We didn't get off to a good start last game and I think Greg starting can ensure better play at the start of games. Perhaps one reason why Gerald didn't play well was due to this poor start. It just seemed like G never got in any rhythm and it's the PG job to get his teammates involved first.

Nolan is the better defender and penetrator. At the end of games, you don't need 3 point shooting as much as lock-down defense and attacking the rim.

Why do I get the feeling that if Paulus was starting- the article would have been about taking a player with starting skills (Smith) and relegating him to the bench and hoping he embraced that role as a sophomore being risky as well. Somehow I trust the coaches on this. Not to mention, Paulus may still have a nagging knee injury from the summer. Having Paulus come into the middle of games with a lead- and hitting deep threes to extend the lead is actually a pretty good strategy. Paulus is a great shooter with his feet set and could be used in many games to gain separation. Also what better time to get Nolan used to running the show than in early games. K knows what he is doing here.

Inonehand
11-11-2008, 03:55 PM
The more I think about it, the more I tend to agree with Paulus starting and Nolan finishing. But not necessarily for the same reasons that the article mentions, although I think he is right to some extent.

Greg runs the offense better and is a better shooter than Nolan at this stage in the season. We didn't get off to a good start last game and I think Greg starting can ensure better play at the start of games. Perhaps one reason why Gerald didn't play well was due to this poor start. It just seemed like G never got in any rhythm and it's the PG job to get his teammates involved first.

Nolan is the better defender and penetrator. At the end of games, you don't need 3 point shooting as much as lock-down defense and attacking the rim.

Aren't we a little early in stating that Greg runs the offense better and that we can get off to a better start with him in the game? We have played one game.

momoneymopride
11-11-2008, 04:04 PM
im gonna go a new direction here and say I want them to play alongside each other, with scheyer too in a deadly perimeter attack where nolan can create and kick it out to those too. at least against smaller teams.

Matches
11-11-2008, 04:07 PM
I liked them together too. I only recall that happening for the last few minutes of the first half but I thought they looked fluid playing together.

Greg hit so many BIG shots last year I'd hate to think of him not being in the game at crunch time, at least on an offense/ defense basis.

Kedsy
11-11-2008, 04:20 PM
At the end of games, you don't need 3 point shooting as much as lock-down defense and attacking the rim.

Personally, I think 3-point shooting is pretty important at the end of a close game.

BlueintheFace
11-11-2008, 04:38 PM
I liked them together too. I only recall that happening for the last few minutes of the first half but I thought they looked fluid playing together.

Greg hit so many BIG shots last year I'd hate to think of him not being in the game at crunch time, at least on an offense/ defense basis.

My feelings exactly.

houstondukie
11-11-2008, 05:05 PM
Aren't we a little early in stating that Greg runs the offense better and that we can get off to a better start with him in the game? We have played one game.

Tell that to the posters who are freaking out about "What's wrong with Henderson" and the endless posts of Zoubek after only one game. With your logic, we shouldn't even have a post-game thread.

If you read my post, I say that Greg is better running the offense "at this point in the season." And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Paulus, who has been running this team since his Fr. year is better right now than Nolan at running the offense as a whole.

I don't disagree with Nolan starting, I'm just saying that Paulus starting and Nolan finishing may have its advantages.

houstondukie
11-11-2008, 05:06 PM
Personally, I think 3-point shooting is pretty important at the end of a close game.

Not when you're giving up easy baskets at the other end.

Kedsy
11-11-2008, 07:35 PM
Not when you're giving up easy baskets at the other end.


Well, first of all, it sounds like you think Paulus plays no defense at all, which is not my impression.

Second of all, as long as you make two three-pointers for every three easy baskets you let up, it's a wash.

If you're down two with 15 seconds to go, would you rather have a defender or a three-point shooter on the floor? It's all about situations.

DownEastDevil
11-11-2008, 07:52 PM
I was watching ESPNU today and Colin Cowherd of ESPNRadio was talking about Charlie Wies and the poor job he was doing at Notre Dame. He said he felt that Wies' job was on the line. He also talked about how the media has talked about how good Notre Dame's recrutting classes have been but have not lived up to expectations. He said he compares that to Duke basketball recrutting ever year. He said Duke goes after the Wendy's All American class but just because they're recrutted by Duke the media makes them McDonalds All Americans. He said he was sure he would get bashed for saying that, but look at what caliber of players ever make it in the NBA from Duke. Don't you just love these sports (Duke Hater) experts.

kramerbr
11-11-2008, 08:09 PM
I was watching ESPNU today and Colin Cowherd of ESPNRadio was talking about Charlie Wies and the poor job he was doing at Notre Dame. He said he felt that Wies' job was on the line. He also talked about how the media has talked about how good Notre Dame's recrutting classes have been but have not lived up to expectations. He said he compares that to Duke basketball recrutting ever year. He said Duke goes after the Wendy's All American class but just because they're recrutted by Duke the media makes them McDonalds All Americans. He said he was sure he would get bashed for saying that, but look at what caliber of players ever make it in the NBA from Duke. Don't you just love these sports (Duke Hater) experts.

He's a flip-flopper. A couple weeks from now he'll have Elton Brand or Boozer on and praise them and Duke. He likes to get a rise out of people people because it improves ratings.

houstondukie
11-11-2008, 08:29 PM
Well, first of all, it sounds like you think Paulus plays no defense at all, which is not my impression.

Second of all, as long as you make two three-pointers for every three easy baskets you let up, it's a wash.

If you're down two with 15 seconds to go, would you rather have a defender or a three-point shooter on the floor? It's all about situations.

Of course in that situation I would want Greg in the game, but we're not talking about the last play of the game but rather the last 5 minutes or so, when defense and taking high % shots (e.g. non-3 point shots) matter most.

Defense wins championships, not 3 point shooting, especially this year with line being pushed back.

Inonehand
11-12-2008, 08:12 AM
Tell that to the posters who are freaking out about "What's wrong with Henderson" and the endless posts of Zoubek after only one game. With your logic, we shouldn't even have a post-game thread.

If you read my post, I say that Greg is better running the offense "at this point in the season." And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Paulus, who has been running this team since his Fr. year is better right now than Nolan at running the offense as a whole.

I don't disagree with Nolan starting, I'm just saying that Paulus starting and Nolan finishing may have its advantages.

Ok, coach away! However, I do think a post-game thread could talk about that sick dunk, huge block, big hustle play and jerk on the other team, but if you want to provide Coach K some tips, feel free.

Dr. Rosenrosen
11-17-2008, 03:51 PM
Normally I would not comment on poll results, especially this early in the year when they are essentially meaningless. But... I find it interesting that the coaches kept Duke at #5 while the media dropped Duke to #10 after yesterday's scare from URI.

So, are the coaches wrong? Or is this a case of the media having a good time with a little early hating on Duke? UCLA barely held off Miami (OH) at home but didn't budge from their #4 spot in the media poll. Hmmm...

Clipsfan
11-17-2008, 04:00 PM
Normally I would not comment on poll results, especially this early in the year when they are essentially meaningless. But... I find it interesting that the coaches kept Duke at #5 while the media dropped Duke to #10 after yesterday's scare from URI.

So, are the coaches wrong? Or is this a case of the media having a good time with a little early hating on Duke? UCLA barely held off Miami (OH) at home but didn't budge from their #4 spot in the media poll. Hmmm...

Maybe they just don't watch west coast games...I was at the UCLA game, and while Miami played well, UCLA didn't look like a top 5 team in that game. It's funny to contrast the comments on here following the RI game with what I thought of the UCLA game. Put simply, I thought that Duke played significantly better than UCLA, although both were pushed to the limit by a game opponent. If Miami had shot anything like RI did, UCLA wouldn't be in the top 10 anymore (and I wouldn't get to see them in NYC).

Namtilal
11-17-2008, 04:03 PM
I think that the coach's poll votes much earlier, meaning that the voters had less time to learn about the game.

We were completely lost on offense and defense for long stretches of the game. Being number 10 is mostly on potential, and not reality, right now.

Wander
11-17-2008, 04:11 PM
If Miami had shot anything like RI did, UCLA wouldn't be in the top 10 anymore (and I wouldn't get to see them in NYC).

Perhaps UCLA played better defense than Duke.

du_bb1
11-17-2008, 04:23 PM
I actually thought we played decent defense, hit a team with a couple of players who were very hot-it happens and it will get better !

Dr. Rosenrosen
11-19-2008, 11:47 PM
Okay, now that's pretty darn interesting that Gary Williams was saying the same thing about Duke and UCLA's rankings by the media this past week. I can't believe I'm agreeing with something he actually said!

sagegrouse
11-20-2008, 02:55 PM
Okay, now that's pretty darn interesting that Gary Williams was saying the same thing about Duke and UCLA's rankings by the media this past week. I can't believe I'm agreeing with something he actually said!

Gary Williams's comments are totally predictable from the standpoint of Maryland's best interests. If Duke is ranked high (or low) the other ACC teams down the standings will be ranked correspondingly higher (or lower).

sagegrouse

huied
01-29-2009, 10:29 AM
Not sure if this has already been posted, so forgive me if it has, but this is a horrible article by SI.

While her general argument may have some truth to it, the points she brings up to back it are terrible. She didn't even notice that we outrebounded them. Crazy.

The good thing at least is the comments on the article generally feel the same way I do about it.


http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/in_the_paint/posts/45321-wake-win-shows-dukes-inside-game-still-wanting

JG Nothing
01-29-2009, 10:42 AM
Not sure if this has already been posted, so forgive me if it has, but this is a horrible article by SI.

While her general argument may have some truth to it, the points she brings up to back it are terrible. She didn't even notice that we outrebounded them. Crazy.

The good thing at least is the comments on the article generally feel the same way I do about it.


http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/in_the_paint/posts/45321-wake-win-shows-dukes-inside-game-still-wanting

Why is there so much complaining on this site ("whining" is probably a better word for it). First, the media in general, then the fans of other teams, then Jay Bilas, then Jason Williams, then the referees, and now the posts on DBR (this last one is courtesy of me).

killerleft
01-29-2009, 11:14 AM
Why is there so much complaining on this site ("whining" is probably a better word for it). First, the media in general, then the fans of other teams, then Jay Bilas, then Jason Williams, then the referees, and now the posts on DBR (this last one is courtesy of me).

Well, in this case, it might be because the article in question was pretty horrible.

Duvall
01-29-2009, 11:17 AM
Why is there so much complaining on this site ("whining" is probably a better word for it). First, the media in general, then the fans of other teams, then Jay Bilas, then Jason Williams, then the referees, and now the posts on DBR (this last one is courtesy of me).

I completely agree that there's too much whining around here. That said, it really was a terrible article - the writer apparently forgot the less than impressive performance (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=290110154) of UNC's frontline against Wake in a similar effort.

RPS
02-23-2009, 04:11 PM
Despite crowing from The Chronicle (http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2009/02/19/MBasketball/Duke-Offers.Its.Own.Story-3638232.shtml) about Duke Blue Planet (http://dukeblueplanet.com/) lessening the hate, the Duke gets all the calls meme is getting more play in the blogosphere today (e.g., The Big Lead (http://thebiglead.com/?p=11790) and Deadspin (http://deadspin.com/5158931/its-not-traveling-unless-duke-says-its-traveling)) on account of this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LFDIkJKDXM&eurl=http://thebiglead.com/) video. Has it been altered?

Mods: Apologies if this has already been posted. Move as appropriate.

pfrduke
02-23-2009, 04:16 PM
Despite crowing from The Chronicle (http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2009/02/19/MBasketball/Duke-Offers.Its.Own.Story-3638232.shtml) about Duke Blue Planet (http://dukeblueplanet.com/) lessening the hate, the Duke gets all the calls meme is getting more play in the blogosphere today (e.g., The Big Lead (http://thebiglead.com/?p=11790) and Deadspin (http://deadspin.com/5158931/its-not-traveling-unless-duke-says-its-traveling)) on account of this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LFDIkJKDXM&eurl=http://thebiglead.com/) video. Has it been altered?

Mods: Apologies if this has already been posted. Move as appropriate.

No, not altered. I noticed that play during the game last night, and thought he was lucky to get away with pre-dribble shuffling.

Of course, one non-called travel does not a "Duke gets all the calls" argument make.

edit: watching it again, it may have been slightly altered. But he does have a tendency to shuffle his feet a touch when he gets the ball. That was the only time I thought it maybe should have been called a travel, but he needs to settle that stuff down a touch.

loran16
02-23-2009, 04:23 PM
FTR, i get all worked up about this. Every non-major college bball site it seems (so Rush the court or storming the floor, or deadspin/the big lead) has Duke hate brimming in its posts.

And it pisses me off since there's so little freaking reason for it. Ironically, on the 850 website that had a posting of this youtube video, a guy listed as "TarHeel Fan" mentioned that this sort of thing probably happens and gets missed all the time throughout college bball. I couldn't have said it better....but of course, the haters find something to single out about Duke and start to whine.

Matches
02-23-2009, 04:25 PM
Clearly any player who travels with the ball should immediately be ejected and a technical foul should be called on Daniel Ewing.

The youtube video is making its way around my office now. I'm all up for some good-natured Duke ribbing, but this is pretty weak.

FireOgilvie
02-23-2009, 04:30 PM
No, not altered. I noticed that play during the game last night, and thought he was lucky to get away with pre-dribble shuffling.

Of course, one non-called travel does not a "Duke gets all the calls" argument make.

edit: watching it again, it may have been slightly altered. But he does have a tendency to shuffle his feet a touch when he gets the ball. That was the only time I thought it maybe should have been called a travel, but he needs to settle that stuff down a touch.


Haha it wasn't "altered." You were right the first time. I noticed the same play live, and it really was that obvious. Williams does shuffle his feet on occasion, including on the finish from the full-court pass from Lance against St. John's.

Traveling no-calls always even out. Hansbrough travels literally almost every time he touches the ball. Look at his popular youtube videos... he travels on the dunk over Kenny George (the announcer even points it out) and he travels on his layup to pass Phil Ford for all-time scoring leader at UNC.

sivartrenrag
02-23-2009, 04:31 PM
The thing I hate most about this stuff is that no matter how illogical it is to extrapolate one missed call to the argument that 'Duke gets all the calls' or that 'this only seems to happen for Duke' or etc. is that UNC fans (and other fans) never seem to realize how illogical it really is. You can tell them things like "this happens to every team, it's just that nobody cares enough to make Youtube videos of it because it is common mistake" but they never listen.

alteran
02-23-2009, 05:12 PM
The thing I hate most about this stuff is that no matter how illogical it is to extrapolate one missed call to the argument that 'Duke gets all the calls' or that 'this only seems to happen for Duke' or etc. is that UNC fans (and other fans) never seem to realize how illogical it really is. You can tell them things like "this happens to every team, it's just that nobody cares enough to make Youtube videos of it because it is common mistake" but they never listen.

Yeah, their were A LOT of lessons a sane person could have learned from that game about officiating. Duke getting all the calls was not one of them.

rsvman
02-23-2009, 05:22 PM
I noticed the play in real time, too, and couldn't believe he didn't get called for travelling.


But how is this an argument for "Duke gets all the calls" when, in fact, no call was made at all?;):D





By the way, if you counted all the steps EWill has taken in all the games he has played at Duke and compared that total with all the steps Hansbrough has taken at UNC, it would be like the salary of a part-time McDonald's employee versus all the money in the Madoff Ponzi scheme. I'm jus' sayin.'

yancem
02-23-2009, 05:26 PM
I don't know, that was a pretty terrible miss call. I'm not sure he took 12 steps like the video post claims but 7-8 wouldn't surprise me, he drifted about 2 feet during the process. I actually notice a couple of other times last night when Williams shuffled his feet (not nearly as bad) and if he doesn't figure out how to keep his feet "calm" the refs will start picking up on it.

Of course along the "these kind of calls are missed all the time" line, I thought Johnson had a pretty obvious double dribble right before he banked his 3pt shot. This was also obviously missed. Also, for all of the hand checking the refs called on Smith, they seemed to be blind to the pushing off on drives by Teague.

Skitzle
02-23-2009, 05:31 PM
I don't know, that was a pretty terrible miss call. I'm not sure he took 12 steps like the video post claims but 7-8 wouldn't surprise me, he drifted about 2 feet during the process. I actually notice a couple of other times last night when Williams shuffled his feet (not nearly as bad) and if he doesn't figure out how to keep his feet "calm" the refs will start picking up on it.

Of course along the "these kind of calls are missed all the time" line, I thought Johnson had a pretty obvious double dribble right before he banked his 3pt shot. This was also obviously missed. Also, for all of the hand checking the refs called on Smith, they seemed to be blind to the pushing off on drives by Teague.

There was also a play in the first half where, IIRC, LD Williams got trapped/doubled in the post. He definitely shuffled his feet/took some steps before jumping and bouncing the ball of Thomas and out of bounds... I was pretty heated during that play, but I guess it just goes to show it goes both ways.

DukieInKansas
02-23-2009, 05:38 PM
I'm glad to know I wasn't imagining things. I thought he traveled when watching the game and when it wasn't called, I thought I just didn't see his dribble.

I think the announcers during the game pointed out the double dribble that wasn't called.

Did anyone notice when Kyle set a screen in the first half and the Wake player ran into him and then just pushed him down with his forearm? No call on that one either. I think these things usually end up even over the course of the game - if you take of your colored glasses.

DevilCastDownfromDurham
02-23-2009, 08:45 PM
and it turns out that many players have taken more than 2 steps without a whistle over the years.

Like Larry Drew (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQlbXT-WfJU)

and some NBA guys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4D9Z1wAwQtM&feature=related)

and even gritty ol' Tyler Hansbrough (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O4Kp4A1PiU)

Who knew?

unwrinkled ear
02-26-2009, 01:56 PM
I'm not sure if you guys noticed this in Harper's, but in the March 2009 issue they have an excerpt from a leaked casting call memo from ad agency Anomaly, contracted by ESPN for a college basketball commercial. For the Duke rep, this what they wanted:
Male. He is smart, young, and white. He's handsome. He's from money. He is, in short, the kind of guy everyone can't stand, the kind of guy everyone wants to be.

For comparison, the UNC rep:
Female counterpoint to Duke. She's a Southern belle. She's sharp, pretty, and charming. Not a dingbat. Evryone wants to be around her.

(Also, just for reference as to how bad this memo was, for Tennesse they want "A slutty girl who would hang out at the Cowgirl Hall of Fame." 5 other schools were in the published excerpt.)

Now, obviously this is all disgusting. But it concretizes the way the media shapes the view of Duke basketball, and other programs around the country; the ad agency simply condensed and amplified the stereotypes. But a recent conversation I had at a superbowl party also shows how successful these misleading characterizations are, and how firmly rooted in the media, not reality, these characterizations are.

I ran into the typical "I hate duke" guy. I asked him if he had any reasons or if he had simply been brainwashed by the media. These were his reasons: Duke doesn't produce pros (when i asked if he knew that duke had more pros in the NBA right now than any other team, he responded with "they only have white guys" etc.) Clearly unenlightened about reality, but completely reflective of the portrait the media draws (despite the incredibly diverse look of the crowd/ students at cameron during games.)

Amazing just how successfully integrated into our sports culture the mischaracterizations about Duke bball have become.

CameronBornAndBred
02-26-2009, 02:05 PM
I looked this up, and the campaign has been yanked, due to obviously poor taste. Here is a follow up to it.
http://deadspin.com/5087516/ and
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2008-11-13-espn-ad-campaign-killed_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip

hurleyfor3
02-26-2009, 02:08 PM
Male. He is smart, young, and white. He's handsome. He's from money. He is, in short, the kind of guy everyone can't stand, the kind of guy everyone wants to be.

I fail to take umbrage at this stereotype.

BlueintheFace
02-26-2009, 02:13 PM
I fail to take umbrage at this stereotype.

Why argue with the truth

SilkyJ
02-26-2009, 02:17 PM
I ran into the typical "I hate duke" guy. I asked him if he had any reasons or if he had simply been brainwashed by the media. These were his reasons: Duke doesn't produce pros (when i asked if he knew that duke had more pros in the NBA right now than any other team, he responded with "they only have white guys" etc.)


why does Duke not producing pros make you "hate" them? Its become really difficult for me to understand all this hatred. It used to be the "arrogant/smart" thing, now there is just no reasonable rationale.

Incidentally, EarlJam's observation about ESPN not replaying questionable calls where Duke got the short end of the stick has been in full effect as of late. The goaltend @ Clemson jumps to mind. There were a couple last night where we discussing how they wouldn't show a replay, though I can't remember which ones specifically off-hand. I'll rewatch that game this weekend and see if I can't spot them. What a game!

Mal
02-26-2009, 08:51 PM
Silky - I think the argument, such as it is, in the Dukehater mind, goes: "Duke doesn't produce good professional players, ergo Duke's players simply aren't that good, ergo Duke must get all the calls to win so many games and remain on TV constantly to be incessantly overhyped by Dukie Vitale, which makes me hate them. And it's all because their incredibly foul-mouthed coach swears at the refs and they cower before him because they, too, are brainwashed to love Duke and Coach K by the ESPN publicity machine. And possibly even paid better or offered higher exposure games if they swallow the whistle when Elliott Williams travels on the most important play ever." Or something like that. It's all interconnected, see?

devildeac
02-26-2009, 11:25 PM
why does Duke not producing pros make you "hate" them? Its become really difficult for me to understand all this hatred. It used to be the "arrogant/smart" thing, now there is just no reasonable rationale.

Incidentally, EarlJam's observation about ESPN not replaying questionable calls where Duke got the short end of the stick has been in full effect as of late. The goaltend @ Clemson jumps to mind. There were a couple last night where we discussing how they wouldn't show a replay, though I can't remember which ones specifically off-hand. I'll rewatch that game this weekend and see if I can't spot them. What a game!

Who's EarlJam?:rolleyes:

Seriously. Did the replay of the bogus goaltend against us get replayed last PM? You know, the one where the ball was below the rim and had zero chance of going in...

DevilCastDownfromDurham
03-01-2009, 12:10 AM
Do we not have PR people? Does our AD (heck, our President) not have any connections? Does not having a J-School hurt us this much? Tonight:

-Kyle Singler was knocked to the floor by a blatantly intentional elbow. No foul.

-Gerald Henderson was whistled for a phantom T after absorbing 2-3 clear fouls on a drive

-Jon Scheyer was mauled repeatedly while driving to the basket. No call.

-Tyler Hansbrough broke the all-time record for most FT's given to a player.

But what led ESPN's coverage? Jon Scheyer sliding his feet while he's being held, bumped, clawed and shoved by two VTech players with announcers carping about "missed calls" that "gave" Duke the win (never mind that we were up 3 at the time).

I hate making officiating an issue and even though I spent the entire game screaming about the thug-fest VTech sent out tonight, I'm deeply uninterested in talking about what I thought was a horrendously officiated game.

Unfortunately, now this is the story. The media, the fans, and the coaches have another "data point" and we're another step closer to the 2006 fiasco where officials were suspended if Duke got a close call. We're another step closer to 2002 and 2004 where the "Duke gets all the calls" meme cost us 2 legit shots at a title. We're back to spending every game defending how we are officiated even (especially) when we've had the short end of the stick.

Duke needs to do something about our media coverage or there will simply be a ceiling on how well we can do before Swofford goes back to stacking the deck and ESPN goes back to airing "special reports" on every close call that goes our way. This is unfair to our players. It's unfair to the staff. And it's very, very bad for college basketball. Something needs to be done.

_Gary
03-01-2009, 09:48 AM
Do we not have PR people? Does our AD (heck, our President) not have any connections? Does not having a J-School hurt us this much? Tonight:

-Kyle Singler was knocked to the floor by a blatantly intentional elbow. No foul.

-Gerald Henderson was whistled for a phantom T after absorbing 2-3 clear fouls on a drive

-Jon Scheyer was mauled repeatedly while driving to the basket. No call.

-Tyler Hansbrough broke the all-time record for most FT's given to a player.

But what led ESPN's coverage? Jon Scheyer sliding his feet while he's being held, bumped, clawed and shoved by two VTech players with announcers carping about "missed calls" that "gave" Duke the win (never mind that we were up 3 at the time).

I hate making officiating an issue and even though I spent the entire game screaming about the thug-fest VTech sent out tonight, I'm deeply uninterested in talking about what I thought was a horrendously officiated game.

Unfortunately, now this is the story. The media, the fans, and the coaches have another "data point" and we're another step closer to the 2006 fiasco where officials were suspended if Duke got a close call. We're another step closer to 2002 and 2004 where the "Duke gets all the calls" meme cost us 2 legit shots at a title. We're back to spending every game defending how we are officiated even (especially) when we've had the short end of the stick.

Duke needs to do something about our media coverage or there will simply be a ceiling on how well we can do before Swofford goes back to stacking the deck and ESPN goes back to airing "special reports" on every close call that goes our way. This is unfair to our players. It's unfair to the staff. And it's very, very bad for college basketball. Something needs to be done.


AMEN, AMEN, and AMEN!!! It's the same old song and dance. I really thought we had gotten past this crap since we've flamed out several years in a row in the NCAA's. But no. Guess not. I swear I don't think this is ever going to end. I still say ESPN is generally anti-Duke in the booth, and even when we have guys in positions to take a stand for us it doesn't happen. For goodness sake, can't someone stand up and make this a point of emphasis in one of their takes or analysis (Jay, Coach Knight, someone)?!!! Please!!! It's so one-sided I just can't stand it anymore.

Real simple question. Why can't Jay or Coach Knight or someone take footage from the VT game and show a national audience on SC all the spots were Duke did NOT get the call and then ask the question: "Why is the one non-call on Scheyer the only one my colleagues here at ESPN decided to focus on? Seems very one-sided to me."

Something like that would certainly bring in ratings and hopefully shake up things a bit. Anything is better than silence. That has not worked! We've tried it for years now and it's doing us no good. We need an advocate to speak out nationally and pull the mask off this anti-Duke bias once and for all.

DUKIE V(A)
03-01-2009, 10:38 AM
Anti-Dukeism seems to be at an all-time high in the D.C. area where I live. It is sad that it so uncomfortable to be a Duke graduate and fan around here. When we win, Duke gets all the calls and besides we are a school full of rapists anyway. When we lose, the taunting is out of control.

Today's article in the Washington Post focused primarily on the non-travel call on Scheyer and Tech's missed opportunities. I thought the officiating was bad for both teams at points BTW. The Post article failed to mention the non-calls on the numerous muggings that took place as we drove to the basket, our missed opportunites, and the fact that we outplayed Tech for the balance of the game. If I only read the article and hadn't seen the game, I would have felt it amazing that we escaped with a victory. The article ended with a statement about Tech missing Thorns. Guess whose absence wasn't mentioned?

Biased and Infuriating!:mad:

Son of Mojo
03-01-2009, 10:46 AM
Nessler going on about a "flop" on Scheyer earlier in the game (play where Scheyer was run over after he got to his defensive spot) really got to me as well as the harping on this travel. Yes, he walked. You'd walk too if you were getting fouled like he was on that play. The bias has to end. Like it was brought up before, how about some more national mentioning of Beaker Hanstravel's FT attempts........THAT is ridiculous. Breathe on him *whistle* Watch him with the ball shoulder and elbow his way to the rim while taking 4 steps *whistle--defensive foul* There does need to be someone on a national scale to step up and have the pelotas to say "Duke does not get all the calls. This is a myth. They are as susceptible to bad/missed calls as any other team in the NCAA (Hendo's being fouled at the end of WF game 1 but ruled a travel comes to mind.....helped to set up the game-ending play)." Officiating on the whole isn't an easy job but there are missed/botched calls all the time--it happens. I'd love for it to improve and hope that it does but to hear that our team gets every call their way is wrong and untrue. Look 8 miles the other direction for the last 50 years for a team that could have some validity to that claim........ :p haha

loran16
03-01-2009, 12:34 PM
After a tip from me, Rush The court now has positive duke coverage, in the form of the video of the elbow on singler that was non called...unfortunately its in their sunday running thoughts thread under the jump. Meh, can't win em all.

weezie
03-01-2009, 01:05 PM
Today's article in the Washington Post......

We live in outerburbs DC and get the early edition of the Post each day. Anybody who reads the WaPo for sports information is wasting their time. Even including the piously bleating, self-styled baseball expert Tommy Boswell, the WaPo "sports" section is garbage.

Kewlswim
03-01-2009, 02:44 PM
Hi,

A game consists of two twenty minute halves and over-time if teams are tied at the end of regulation. For arguments sake, let's say Jon traveled and was not fouled, the refs just missed the call plain and simple. What about the other 39 minutes and fifty-five seconds of the game? There are numerous calls one way or the other, no one call makes or breaks a game. Sure there are momentum swings and calls that come at good or bad times, but the Hokies had a lot of time to make sure that it did not come down to one play (and even if they get the ball they are still down three). Jon's walk (or not) was just one of many, many plays in a game.

GO DUKE!

DukieInKansas
03-01-2009, 02:50 PM
AMEN, AMEN, and AMEN!!! It's the same old song and dance. I really thought we had gotten past this crap since we've flamed out several years in a row in the NCAA's. But no. Guess not. I swear I don't think this is ever going to end. I still say ESPN is generally anti-Duke in the booth, and even when we have guys in positions to take a stand for us it doesn't happen. For goodness sake, can't someone stand up and make this a point of emphasis in one of their takes or analysis (Jay, Coach Knight, someone)?!!! Please!!! It's so one-sided I just can't stand it anymore.

Real simple question. Why can't Jay or Coach Knight or someone take footage from the VT game and show a national audience on SC all the spots were Duke did NOT get the call and then ask the question: "Why is the one non-call on Scheyer the only one my colleagues here at ESPN decided to focus on? Seems very one-sided to me."

Something like that would certainly bring in ratings and hopefully shake up things a bit. Anything is better than silence. That has not worked! We've tried it for years now and it's doing us no good. We need an advocate to speak out nationally and pull the mask off this anti-Duke bias once and for all.

Jay can't do it - everyone would say he is biased. Needs to be Coach Knight or Hubert Davis or Brad Daugherty. Bring back Brad & have him do it!

loran16
03-01-2009, 04:22 PM
After a tip from me, Rush The court now has positive duke coverage, in the form of the video of the elbow on singler that was non called...unfortunately its in their sunday running thoughts thread under the jump. Meh, can't win em all.

Sigh. Guess not....now that video is being posted over the internet on places like Thebiglead, cheering over the elbow.

Wow. God, people are a-holes

alteran
03-01-2009, 07:45 PM
Sigh. Guess not....now that video is being posted over the internet on places like Thebiglead, cheering over the elbow.

Wow. God, people are a-holes

Think PT Barnum-- letting people see that we're getting shafted is good, even if they are cheering. It's pushing back against the tide.

roywhite
03-01-2009, 08:09 PM
Yikes...anyone else hear Tim Brando's comments ref: Dave Neal and the Nolan Smith KO? Brando and G-man are doing the NC State--Maryland game and Brando was talking about Neal---laughingly said that friends of Neal were coming up to Neal on campus, making contact with him and then pretending to faint.

A little concussion humor in Terp-land, I guess. Ugh.

Newton_14
03-01-2009, 09:08 PM
So add Josh Hailey of WRAL to the list of "Professional Media" that hate Duke. Josh has posted a video on WRAL of the Scheyer play from the vatech game. In the write up he mentions E-Will's walk in the Wake game as well. Great to see the local media join in the hatred huh?

By the way, no mention of the flagrant elbow to Singler, nor any of the other "blatant" missed calls in the game that went against Duke. I guess those are not news worthy. Tried to find an email address for him so I could post it and let everyone send him a love note but did not see one.

http://www.wralsportsfan.com/colleges/blog/3572041/

roywhite
03-01-2009, 10:08 PM
Duke gets all the calls?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/132466-duke-gets-all-the-calls-the-oldest-complaint-in-college-basketball?service=facebook&username=jmcteer%40hishandschurch.com&password=9qq2mvrb

Nice piece from the bleacher report

_Gary
03-01-2009, 10:40 PM
Duke gets all the calls?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/132466-duke-gets-all-the-calls-the-oldest-complaint-in-college-basketball?service=facebook&username=jmcteer%40hishandschurch.com&password=9qq2mvrb

Nice piece from the bleacher report

Wonderful article. Now, if only we could get Knight or Bilas or someone to actually devote one solid, fact-filled segment on SportsCenter to this myth.


Gary

Devilsfan
03-01-2009, 10:56 PM
Most newspapers are so biased and awful that that they seem to be going ou of business weekly. Good news for all of us "Barnaby" Jones fans, maybe his paper is next. The announcers on tv are just as bad for the most part. That is what makes Bilas, G Man, JWill and Knight appear so great. No intelligent competition.

gotham devil
03-03-2009, 01:58 AM
AMEN, AMEN, and AMEN!!! It's the same old song and dance. I really thought we had gotten past this crap since we've flamed out several years in a row in the NCAA's. But no. Guess not. I swear I don't think this is ever going to end. I still say ESPN is generally anti-Duke in the booth, and even when we have guys in positions to take a stand for us it doesn't happen. For goodness sake, can't someone stand up and make this a point of emphasis in one of their takes or analysis (Jay, Coach Knight, someone)?!!! Please!!! It's so one-sided I just can't stand it anymore.

Real simple question. Why can't Jay or Coach Knight or someone take footage from the VT game and show a national audience on SC all the spots were Duke did NOT get the call and then ask the question: "Why is the one non-call on Scheyer the only one my colleagues here at ESPN decided to focus on? Seems very one-sided to me."

Something like that would certainly bring in ratings and hopefully shake up things a bit. Anything is better than silence. That has not worked! We've tried it for years now and it's doing us no good. We need an advocate to speak out nationally and pull the mask off this anti-Duke bias once and for all.

Early last season, I had heard from someone that Coach K specifically requested Jimmy Dykes not do any of our ESPN games because he felt after watching the tape that Mr. Dykes was propagating the "Duke gets away with foul calls" perception/myth. For the remainder of the season, he didn't broadcast one of Duke's games. Unfortunately, the droning sounds of Len Elmore became the frequent soundtrack for our games.

It was therefore with interested bemusement to hear Mr. Dykes' irksome twang on the recent "Scheyer video," but, if Duke flexes its ratings generating muscle, I don't think we'll be hearing from him for a while.

_Gary
03-03-2009, 09:03 AM
Early last season, I had heard from someone that Coach K specifically requested Jimmy Dykes not do any of our ESPN games because he felt after watching the tape that Mr. Dykes was propagating the "Duke gets away with foul calls" perception/myth. For the remainder of the season, he didn't broadcast one of Duke's games. Unfortunately, the droning sounds of Len Elmore became the frequent soundtrack for our games.

It was therefore with interested bemusement to hear Mr. Dykes' irksome twang on the recent "Scheyer video," but, if Duke flexes its ratings generating muscle, I don't think we'll be hearing from him for a while.

Wow! That's an interesting and refreshing revelation. I'm glad Coach K takes notice of these things. I realize some people would probably have the opinion that he shouldn't care at all or be concerned with it, but I take the opposite view. Without being overly heavy-handed, I think Coach ought to do everything within his power to take care of the biased, anti-Duke announcing that goes on so much. I know he can't do it all though, that's why I wish one of the top College Basketball announcers at ESPN really would devote a segment to this and really pound this myth into dust once and for all. Us ignoring it, or taking the so-called "high road", hasn't helped one iota.

Gary

OldSchool
03-03-2009, 09:33 AM
Early last season, I had heard from someone that Coach K specifically requested Jimmy Dykes not do any of our ESPN games because he felt after watching the tape that Mr. Dykes was propagating the "Duke gets away with foul calls" perception/myth.

That would help explain why Dykes was about ready to suit up and take the floor in order to try to beat Duke.

Listening to the game, as Dykes became more strident, I began to wonder if he didn't have a big pile of dough riding on a VT victory.

vlove
03-03-2009, 06:21 PM
Hello all, looooong time reader checking in here (back from the juliovision days) that hasn't posted since Sir James Armstrong manned these boards!

Surprisingly, here's yet another nice link debunking the myth that Duke gets all the calls:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/sioncampus/03/03/mythbusters/index.html

I wish the author had actually addressed the Scheyer "walk" more in depth- if you're gonna use that as an example about missed calls in a game, you may want to direct your eyes slightly above where they're currently focused to see what the nice VT chaps are doing with their arms during the "walk".

All in all though, nice to see some objectivity and measured discussion on the matter. Now if ESPN Page 2 were to run a similar piece, I'll know the end of the world is nigh.

natedog4ever
03-03-2009, 06:26 PM
That would help explain why Dykes was about ready to suit up and take the floor in order to try to beat Duke.

Listening to the game, as Dykes became more strident, I began to wonder if he didn't have a big pile of dough riding on a VT victory.

I watched the game again last night - he actually referred to VT as "we" when talking about them getting into their halfcourt offense, etc. Does he have any previous association with VT?

Billy Dat
03-12-2009, 01:58 PM
Disclaimer - I am a BIG Bill Simmons fan, despite the fact that he hates every team that I love, especially Duke. Despite all of that, I still really like him, his style, POV, etc... especially his podcasts.

So...I was listening to his interview this week with Houston Rockets' GM Daryl Morey, the wunderkind stats wonk prominently featured in the NYTimes mag piece about Shane, and Morey said Shane would probably never go on the Sports Guy's podcast....the resulting exchange went something like this:

Simmons:
Why?

Morey:
Because you are always bashing Duke.

Simmons:
I'll say it right now, I hate Duke.

Morey:
(laughing)

Simmons:
Right now, I am going to send you a photo of me wearing a "Duke Sucks" tshirt that I bought at a vintage store and I want you to forward it to Shane

Amidst this bile, I screamed "*%#*& You!" at the stereo.

We as fans need to be on edge this week...hungry...surly...our team needs our collective energy...I thought this might fan the flames a little!!!

MulletMan
03-12-2009, 02:07 PM
Feel free to be uspet that Bill Simmons hates Duke, but really... what's the point? I mean, its not like Coach K or Grant Hill said they hate Duke. It's Bill Simmons. A guy who is coined the term "jump the shark" simply so that, after years of writing the same column over and over again, people would know how to describe Bill Simmons.

Example: "Geez, did you see Simmons' column about NBA player trade value (or worst NBA GM) (or worst NBA contract) (or how it is awesome to be a Sox fan) (or how it is awful to be a Sox fan)? Man, that guy has really jumped the shark."

Just because idiots get air time on TV and radio, doesn't mean you need to let them upset you. Look... enjoy being a Duke fan. Don't get angry because people hate Duke. Let them hate. It will most likely shorten thier life spans. All that negativity and whatnot!

Bostondevil
03-12-2009, 02:26 PM
And he wonders why Shane won't go on his show?

Please.

Alas, if we all sent him pictures of signs saying 'Holy Cross Sucks' he'd probably agree with us.

Still, according to his own 'Fan Manifesto' he hasn't earned the right to hate Duke. He hates Duke because some of his friends are Carolina fans. Lame, lame, lame. But he fits the profile of Duke haters, white frat boy type that went to college in the early '90s, well Duke haters that didn't go to Carolina.

Billy Dat
03-12-2009, 03:00 PM
I don't think Simmons is really a frat boy type. He usually likens Duke students to the character "Chaz", the diving team pretty boy played by Billy Zabka in "Back to School". So, he is playing on the rich, douchy stereotype that often is pinned to Duke. Having gone there myself in the early 90s, there were plenty of Chaz types...especially in the frats....especially certain frats....but they weren't the majority.

I also agree that Simmons has some Carolina friends and he has said that he felt he needed to choose sides. One of his good friends is also a Terp.

But, he also has a bug up his back about K - he always slams him.

CLT Devil
03-12-2009, 03:30 PM
Disclaimer - I am a BIG Bill Simmons fan, despite the fact that he hates every team that I love, especially Duke. Despite all of that, I still really like him, his style, POV, etc... especially his podcasts.

So...I was listening to his interview this week with Houston Rockets' GM Daryl Morey, the wunderkind stats wonk prominently featured in the NYTimes mag piece about Shane, and Morey said Shane would probably never go on the Sports Guy's podcast....the resulting exchange went something like this:

Simmons:
Why?

Morey:
Because you are always bashing Duke.

Simmons:
I'll say it right now, I hate Duke.

Morey:
(laughing)

Simmons:
Right now, I am going to send you a photo of me wearing a "Duke Sucks" tshirt that I bought at a vintage store and I want you to forward it to Shane

Amidst this bile, I screamed "*%#*& You!" at the stereo.

We as fans need to be on edge this week...hungry...surly...our team needs our collective energy...I thought this might fan the flames a little!!!


I also like BS to an extent...his mustings during the 2003 playoffs and why a team shouldn't talk smack to Steve Smith before a game was brilliant. He did write an article last year that said if Coach K won the Gold Medal he would stop the Duke bashing...I think he toned it down for a while after the Olympics but maybe his ratings were slipping so he went back on his word. The article was actually pretty funny (sorry no link).

It's just like the Tarhole grad who made the 'I kissed a boy video' about Paulus....his rap career apparently wasn't going too well so he went with the one thing that he knew would at least get passed around MD and UNC circles; hating Duke and GP. Sad.

AnimalFriendly
03-12-2009, 03:38 PM
Hi,

A game consists of two twenty minute halves and over-time if teams are tied at the end of regulation. For arguments sake, let's say Jon traveled and was not fouled, the refs just missed the call plain and simple. What about the other 39 minutes and fifty-five seconds of the game? There are numerous calls one way or the other, no one call makes or breaks a game. Sure there are momentum swings and calls that come at good or bad times, but the Hokies had a lot of time to make sure that it did not come down to one play (and even if they get the ball they are still down three). Jon's walk (or not) was just one of many, many plays in a game.

GO DUKE!

I agree with this analysis. And you can just as easily make this type of argument that Duke, as someone stated earlier in this thread, wasn't denied a possible national championship due to one or two calls that didn't go their way during, say, the 2004 national semifinal vs. UCONN. Duke had a fairly substantial lead in the 2nd half of that game and yet failed to maintain it down the stretch. I don't know what the reason for that failure was but it wasn't due to officiating although many Duke fans over the past 5 years have claimed just the opposite. Even IF Duke did get a bad call at the very end of that game, it never should have come to that in the first place.

Atlanta Duke
03-12-2009, 04:42 PM
He hates Duke because some of his friends are Carolina fans. Lame, lame, lame. But he fits the profile of Duke haters, white frat boy type that went to college in the early '90s, well Duke haters that didn't go to Carolina.

I have enjoyed Simmons over the years, although his time is about up if his self-indulgent and interminable podcasts with college buds such as House and Jack-O are any indication as to where his career is heading. But Simmons makes no pretense about being a college sports fan and saves his sincere venom for teams such as the Colts, Steelers, Yankees, and Lakers that are foes of his beloved Boston pro teams.

Simmons trashes Duke because it is an easy diss and does not care enough about college sports to put any emotion into it. I save my animosity for those who bring the hatred with sincerity.:D

ArnieMc
03-13-2009, 09:45 AM
Simmons trashes Duke because it is an easy diss and does not care enough about college sports to put any emotion into it. I save my animosity for those who bring the hatred with sincerity.:D I'm just the opposite. I hate those who diss Duke just because it's in vogue. I actually admire those who bring the hatred with sincerity.

Bostondevil
03-13-2009, 12:05 PM
I'm just the opposite. I hate those who diss Duke just because it's in vogue. I actually admire those who bring the hatred with sincerity.

I'm with you, much as I dislike the supposedly 'fair' book by Will Blythe, I give him the right to hate Duke. Just like I've earned the right to hate all things light blue. EARNED IT I tell you! (Will Blythe's book is somewhat fair towards Coach K and the players, who he treats extremely unfairly are, you got it, Duke students. Reread the bit where he lets a Duke law professor go on and on about how awful all the 'Double Dukes' are. Does he interview and of them? I still can't believe I spent money on that book.)

Bill Simmons is a bandwagon hater of the worst sort. And he even published an article recently (on Kobe Bryant) where he states the he isn't a hater. I think that makes him both a hater and a hypocrit. Yet, I still read his column, so what does that say about me? (I even made a mailbag once, but since I'm female he ragged on me.) Actually, he's a hater and a hypocrit and a misogynist. Now I feel really dirty, why do I read his column? Oh yeah, I love the Red Sox.

Billy Dat
03-13-2009, 03:20 PM
I really got a kick out of Blythe's book. I thought it was well written, funny and generally entertaining. I think what made the difference is that he is a child of the rivalry...he doesn't try to pretend that his Duke loathing is based on anything rational except for the general hatred that comes along with being invested on one side or the other. He is over the top with tongue firmly in cheek, not that he doesn't really feel those feelings, but he amped them up in a cartoonish way. I thought the sections where he actually spent time with K, Duke students, and Duke fans - the feeling he left was "I am sorry I did that because now they are harder to hate". I find myself picking up the book all the time - especially because it describes one of the last great Duke wins in the series - the first game in 2005.

Bostondevil
03-13-2009, 03:25 PM
I'm a child of the rivalry too which is why I understand Will Blythe and why I think Bill Simmons should shut up and go away. I'll say it again, I think Will Blythe was fair to Coach K, the players, even Crazy Towel Guy. But he wasn't fair to the people he didn't talk to, like the law students, he let a biased LAW professor speak negatively about an entire group of people he had never met without giving them a voice. He should have left that anecdote out of the book. And he never should have brought his sister to a game in Cameron. Fearless? Not in my book. Incredibly selfish and rude? You bet.

I was the only Duke fan in my third grade class. Duke lost in football to Carolina that year in a close game. My teacher, a UNC alum, got up in my face on Monday morning and she was my favorite teacher too. I earned my hatred.

_Gary
03-13-2009, 03:45 PM
I'll stop believing the hatred is more massive than most realize from a media standpoint the next time Duke is only sitting on 2 or 3 fouls with less than a minute to go in a physical tourney game and the announcers don't take note of it in a negative way. But what are the chances, right? :rolleyes:

killerleft
03-13-2009, 04:17 PM
I'll stop believing the hatred is more massive than most realize from a media standpoint the next time Duke is only sitting on 2 or 3 fouls with less than a minute to go in a physical tourney game and the announcers don't take note of it in a negative way. But what are the chances, right? :rolleyes:

Yep, at the very least there would be an ESPN segment about that on Pardon the Interruption.

captmojo
03-13-2009, 06:28 PM
I'm a child of the rivalry too.........

I was the only Duke fan in my third grade class. Duke lost in football to Carolina that year in a close game. My teacher, a UNC alum, got up in my face on Monday morning and she was my favorite teacher too. I earned my hatred.

Dang, this sounds very familiar. I would not doubt this same type of thing continues today.




[insert old picture of school class group with kid in Duke shirt all alone]






Stay strong.

MarkD83
03-15-2009, 08:07 PM
The only ESPN analyst that gives Duke any love is Hubert Davis.

Everyone else only talked about how to beat Duke and most of it was reading from the preseason scouting report. This is one of my pet peeves in March.

"The way to beat Duke is to spread them out and drive them"
Have they even watched Williams, Smith, McClure, etc lately!!!


"Play a zone like Michigan did in December."
That was ancient history.

"If you change point guard this late in the year it does not look good"
That was 9 games ago!!!!

Bring it on!!!!

DukeCO2009
03-15-2009, 08:10 PM
I absolutely LOVE that everyone is counting us out. I think we're about to turn a few heads and witness something special.

MChambers
03-15-2009, 08:12 PM
"Duke. Mike Krzyzewski used to own the keys to the NCAA tournament. Now he's been locked out of the Elite Eight the past four tourneys, losing to lower-seeded teams every time. This is his best Blue Devils squad since J.J. Redick and Carlos Boozer powered a run to the 2004 Final Four, which means losing to another LSU or Texas or West Virginia won't play well."

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=3982298&sportCat=ncb

Who can forget JJ and Carlos together? :) Maybe he meant Sheldon and Reddick?

Oriole Way
03-15-2009, 08:13 PM
Who cares what the experts think? They're wrong about 90% of the time.

As someone above said, it will let us fly under the radar, and there won't be any pressure and crazy expectations put on the team

I really like our region and I think we can have a very nice run.

RainingThrees
03-15-2009, 08:14 PM
So even Bilas is counting us out? oh wait...

TNDukeFan
03-15-2009, 08:15 PM
He named T Douglas, Kyle and G as players who could really light up the tournament. Two Dukies and 3 ACCers! Wow!

RainingThrees
03-15-2009, 08:17 PM
He also has an unhealthy obsession with Ashley Judd. He writes about her in every one of his minute things. Kinda creepy.

BlueintheFace
03-15-2009, 08:19 PM
"Duke. Mike Krzyzewski used to own the keys to the NCAA tournament. Now he's been locked out of the Elite Eight the past four tourneys, losing to lower-seeded teams every time. This is his best Blue Devils squad since J.J. Redick and Carlos Boozer powered a run to the 2004 Final Four, which means losing to another LSU or Texas or West Virginia won't play well."

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=3982298&sportCat=ncb

Who can forget JJ and Carlos together? :) Maybe he meant Sheldon and Reddick?

ummm, no. I think he meant what he said. Duhon or Deng probably should have been mentioned instead of Boozer but... he just happened to be completely wrong.

dukemsu
03-15-2009, 08:22 PM
Forde is an unapologetic UK and Pitino homer. Take nothing he says seriously.

dukemsu

FireOgilvie
03-15-2009, 08:35 PM
The only ESPN analyst that gives Duke any love is Hubert Davis.

Everyone else only talked about how to beat Duke and most of it was reading from the preseason scouting report. This is one of my pet peeves in March.

"The way to beat Duke is to spread them out and drive them"
Have they even watched Williams, Smith, McClure, etc lately!!!


"Play a zone like Michigan did in December."
That was ancient history.

"If you change point guard this late in the year it does not look good"
That was 9 games ago!!!!

Bring it on!!!!

I'm pretty sure it was Hubert Davis that made the changing point guard comment.

Also, I agree with the comment about spreading our defense out and driving. That is probably the best way to beat us. Spread and drive on defensive mismatches from switches... also, kick out and hit 3s.

I don't really have a problem with what anyone on ESPN has been saying. Everyone knows that Duke is a really tough team right now, but we definitely have some major weaknesses. Weaknesses, in general, become more evident the more you know about a team... and all of those guys have seen Duke play about 25 times this year. It's harder to point out weaknesses about a team you don't know as much about.

DukeChapel'90
03-15-2009, 08:49 PM
If the NCAA committee wants to keep the conference tourneys relevant, they need to give them more weight come seedling time. 3 #1 seeds did not even make it to their respective conference finals! 2 of them did not even win a game in their tourneys, why are they still #1 seeds! Let's compare SOS and non-conference SOS, what did Pitt and UConn do to deserve this much love?

Pitt's best non-conference win was at FSU by the same margin we beat them by at their place. And then they went out and played that powerhouse Robert Morris in mid conference schedule.

UConn had neutral court wins over Miami and Gonzaga, and road win over Wisconsin and home win over Michigan. If the Big East were not over-rated in my opinion, these guys would not be #1 seeds.

Louisville deserves the #1 seed. Memphis has a good case and so do we. If seeds depended more on conference tourneys, maybe ole Roy doesn't hold out Lawson. I bet attendance would be better also if there were a #1 seed on the line.

This has always bothered me. Now the experts are picking against us again...GREAT!! No one picked us to beat UNLV in 1991 either. All the I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.ies!!!!!!

dukestheheat
03-15-2009, 08:54 PM
I absolutely LOVE that everyone is counting us out. I think we're about to turn a few heads and witness something special.

K (Superman) thrives on motivating our guys in this very type of environment; he can create this 'Duke versus the world' attitude going in, and this will work to our benefit!

We are ready for this! We have all the momentum we need going forward and I really do think that we all are in for a great ride this NCAA tourney.

GO DUKE! BEAT BINGHAMTON!

dth.

dukie8
03-15-2009, 09:01 PM
If the NCAA committee wants to keep the conference tourneys relevant, they need to give them more weight come seedling time. 3 #1 seeds did not even make it to their respective conference finals! 2 of them did not even win a game in their tourneys, why are they still #1 seeds! Let's compare SOS and non-conference SOS, what did Pitt and UConn do to deserve this much love?

Pitt's best non-conference win was at FSU by the same margin we beat them by at their place. And then they went out and played that powerhouse Robert Morris in mid conference schedule.

UConn had neutral court wins over Miami and Gonzaga, and road win over Wisconsin and home win over Michigan. If the Big East were not over-rated in my opinion, these guys would not be #1 seeds.

Louisville deserves the #1 seed. Memphis has a good case and so do we. If seeds depended more on conference tourneys, maybe ole Roy doesn't hold out Lawson. I bet attendance would be better also if there were a #1 seed on the line.

This has always bothered me. Now the experts are picking against us again...GREAT!! No one picked us to beat UNLV in 1991 either. All the I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.ies!!!!!!

why would the committee want to create some hidden agenda and make conference tourney "relevant?" it's not its job -- its job is to pick the top 34 at large teams and then seed all 65. conference tourneys are what they are -- artificial concoctions created to make more money and venues for teams to play a few more games that the committee then reviews. auto bids should go to the regular season winner because winning the regular season is much more indicative of the best team than the team that won 3 or 4 games in 3 or 4 consecutive games. it never will happen because too much money is made off the conference tournaments.

dukie8
03-15-2009, 09:03 PM
I'm pretty sure it was Hubert Davis that made the changing point guard comment.

it didn't seem to hurt duke in 2001.

DukeUsul
03-15-2009, 09:08 PM
auto bids should go to the regular season winner because winning the regular season is much more indicative of the best team than the team that won 3 or 4 games in 3 or 4 consecutive games.

I can no longer buy this argument since we went to the unbalanced schedule.

roywhite
03-15-2009, 09:11 PM
None of the Bristol wise men (Digger, Hubert, Jay Bilas, Gottleib, and Vitale) picked Duke to reach the Final Four. Digger further distinguished himself by picking a 1 vs 4 matchup (Pitt vs Xavier) in the regional finals, which is guaranteed not to happen.

I like our chances and I like being an underdog.

MarkD83
03-15-2009, 09:20 PM
I'm pretty sure it was Hubert Davis that made the changing point guard comment.

Also, I agree with the comment about spreading our defense out and driving. That is probably the best way to beat us. Spread and drive on defensive mismatches from switches... also, kick out and hit 3s.

I don't really have a problem with what anyone on ESPN has been saying. Everyone knows that Duke is a really tough team right now, but we definitely have some major weaknesses. Weaknesses, in general, become more evident the more you know about a team... and all of those guys have seen Duke play about 25 times this year. It's harder to point out weaknesses about a team you don't know as much about.

you think one person would at least point out that Kyle and G could be nightmare matchups for the other team. Jay did mention that Jon has very few turnovers so that was at least a positive.

gwwilburn
03-16-2009, 06:58 PM
Now they're really reaching.
http://friendsoftheprogram.net/2009/03/15/the-ncaa-tournament-exhausts-even-the-greatest-champions/
p.s. Deadspin, one of the most read sports blogs, as many of you know, has a link to this on their front page today. No one is spared from their antics, but Duke seems to be hit especially hard, which is not surprising.

Maxwell1977
03-16-2009, 07:03 PM
The people responsible for Deadspin are buffoons. I quit reading it when they ~said that Jon Scheyer was a disgrace as a college athlete, I forget the exact wording.

KrazyKfan
03-16-2009, 10:20 PM
Feinstein was on early in the morning talking about how UNC was weak, so I don't really have a problem with him.

Magnolia888
03-19-2009, 07:39 PM
Teams We Hate (http://www.slate.com/id/2213975/pagenum/all/) from Slate.

Guess who is #1.

I don't know how Jay Bilas could be described as a "team" but he gets some hate for being "condescending" to poor Dickie V. :rolleyes:

Pacer
03-20-2009, 09:53 AM
It's a little late, I know...

http://www.slate.com/id/2213974

Clipsfan
03-20-2009, 10:06 AM
I am hoping to cash in on the Duke hate, and think that the premise of the article is simple yet true...in anything with large numbers, you have to swing for the fences if you hope to win. I'm hoping that Duke beats Wake in the finals!

captmojo
03-20-2009, 10:28 AM
It's a little late, I know...

http://www.slate.com/id/2213974

This is a duplication from the "hatred tsunami" thread.

Stay off this site to keep from over-working your pop-up blocker. :D

davekay1971
03-20-2009, 11:08 AM
A small matter in the midst of more pressing things (ie: cheering Duke 2009 on as we strive for the final four), but CNNSI has up two NCAA tournament history photo series: Best NCAA starting 5s, and great tournament comebacks.

The 2001 team, which had, IMHO, one of the really great starting 5s, is on neither list. I'm not sure how Carolina 2005 or Michigan State's title team can be more highly regarded than the 5 of Boozer (future NBA all-star), Battier (future NBA all-star), JWill (2 time NCAA POY), Dunleavy (NBA starter), and Duhon (NBA playa).

In the other photo series, the 2001 semifinal comeback win over Maryland is not mentioned (though the 1998 KY Jelly win over us and the 2002 Indiana win over us are...)

I'm not sure why (perhaps because of the core of the 2001 team remaining then being upset by Indiana in 2002, or perhaps because the 1999 Duke team gets so much attention as a great team that fell one game short) but the Duke 2001 team seems to not get much respect in the annals of NCAA tournament history.

Well, I'm here to tell CNNSI, that was one of the best starting 5s in tournament history, AND they posted one of the all time great NCAA tournament comebacks. So there...:D

davekay1971
03-20-2009, 11:10 AM
One kind of neat thing about the starting 5s photo series: the SI cover of the 1981-1982 UNC team from Nov 1981...the UNC starting 5 and Deano, minus one little-regarded freshman who ended up making some noise in the tournament later that year...

devildownunder
03-20-2009, 02:11 PM
A small matter in the midst of more pressing things (ie: cheering Duke 2009 on as we strive for the final four), but CNNSI has up two NCAA tournament history photo series: Best NCAA starting 5s, and great tournament comebacks.

The 2001 team, which had, IMHO, one of the really great starting 5s, is on neither list. I'm not sure how Carolina 2005 or Michigan State's title team can be more highly regarded than the 5 of Boozer (future NBA all-star), Battier (future NBA all-star), JWill (2 time NCAA POY), Dunleavy (NBA starter), and Duhon (NBA playa).

In the other photo series, the 2001 semifinal comeback win over Maryland is not mentioned (though the 1998 KY Jelly win over us and the 2002 Indiana win over us are...)

I'm not sure why (perhaps because of the core of the 2001 team remaining then being upset by Indiana in 2002, or perhaps because the 1999 Duke team gets so much attention as a great team that fell one game short) but the Duke 2001 team seems to not get much respect in the annals of NCAA tournament history.

Well, I'm here to tell CNNSI, that was one of the best starting 5s in tournament history, AND they posted one of the all time great NCAA tournament comebacks. So there...:D

Great starting fives are always highly debatable but missing the 2001 team's FF comeback against the terps is inexcusable. I think that's still the biggest comeback ever, that late in the tournament.

Spret42
03-20-2009, 02:47 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2007/03/21/VI2007032101985.html

Really interesting discussion. Pretty much nails it too.

77devil
03-20-2009, 08:27 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2007/03/21/VI2007032101985.html

Really interesting discussion. Pretty much nails it too.

I guess. Wilbon's bloviating at the end, however, that some of the 2,3, and 4 seeds were going down to the "disrespected" smaller schools was just dead wrong (no surprise there). At least so far.

Newton_14
03-20-2009, 08:43 PM
A small matter in the midst of more pressing things (ie: cheering Duke 2009 on as we strive for the final four), but CNNSI has up two NCAA tournament history photo series: Best NCAA starting 5s, and great tournament comebacks.

The 2001 team, which had, IMHO, one of the really great starting 5s, is on neither list. I'm not sure how Carolina 2005 or Michigan State's title team can be more highly regarded than the 5 of Boozer (future NBA all-star), Battier (future NBA all-star), JWill (2 time NCAA POY), Dunleavy (NBA starter), and Duhon (NBA playa).

In the other photo series, the 2001 semifinal comeback win over Maryland is not mentioned (though the 1998 KY Jelly win over us and the 2002 Indiana win over us are...)

I'm not sure why (perhaps because of the core of the 2001 team remaining then being upset by Indiana in 2002, or perhaps because the 1999 Duke team gets so much attention as a great team that fell one game short) but the Duke 2001 team seems to not get much respect in the annals of NCAA tournament history.

Well, I'm here to tell CNNSI, that was one of the best starting 5s in tournament history, AND they posted one of the all time great NCAA tournament comebacks. So there...:D

I have maintained from the moment it happened until present day, that the coaching job K did in 2001 was the single greatest job of coaching in one year I have ever seen in college hoops.

We all know the story, Duke loses Boozer in the next to last game of the regular season to a broken foot. The coaching staff stays up all night and Coach K redesigns the entire offense and they begin implementing the new scheme in the very next practice. He inserts two new starters (Duhon, Sanders), moves Nate to the 6th man role, and implements a run and shoot offense with Casey Sanders becoming Battier's "Dancing Partner" and setting high screens for him. Coach tells the team in that first practice "If you do what I say and believe in it, we will win the National Title". I wasn't sure they would win another game, but they destroy the heels in the first game of the new season in Chapel Hill, beat the twerps and the heels to win the ACC Tourney, and the rest as they say "is history"...

I have never seen a coaching job come close to matching that by anyone, ever. That team was special and should get the deserved recognition. Both players and coaching staff...

TNDukeFan
03-22-2009, 09:47 AM
Unbelievable...

"And when the two got near the ball all the way down at the other end of the court, the whistle blew, and I don't have to tell you who fouled whom, because one of the teams was Duke, and the other was Texas, and this game was in the final minute in Greensboro, and that's just the way it goes."

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/11534043

roywhite
03-22-2009, 10:02 AM
Unbelievable...

"And when the two got near the ball all the way down at the other end of the court, the whistle blew, and I don't have to tell you who fouled whom, because one of the teams was Duke, and the other was Texas, and this game was in the final minute in Greensboro, and that's just the way it goes."

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/11534043

You'll have to forgive him; it was a tough day for the Duke haters. :)

Let's hope they have a few more tough days.

pamtar
03-22-2009, 10:03 AM
He turned what could have been a really great assessment into a laughable piece of writing with that one line.

dyedwab
03-22-2009, 10:06 AM
among the "Duke gets all the call" haters, this is among the most egregious things anyone of them has said....CBS Sports should be bombarded with commentary and at least an apology should be demanded.


The GAME ANNOUNCERS looked at the replay and thought it was the right call....that never happens.

captmojo
03-22-2009, 10:09 AM
I heard this as well, certainly seated with two agreeing heads, he does not acknowledge the fact that the contact gave the Texas player the advantage of recovering the ball. Tremendous. :cool:

BlueintheFace
03-22-2009, 11:27 AM
...just terrible

ice-9
03-22-2009, 11:38 AM
Parrish is off base in that quoted comment -- of that there's no doubt. There are three possibilities in that situation with Elliot and Johnson:
- No foul
- Elliot was fouled
- Elliot fouled

But only two of the three is valid; either Elliot was fouled, or no foul should have been called. There was no way that Elliot could've been called for fouling Johnson considering he was ahead of Johnson in the sprint, the one who ended up on the floor with Texas retaining possession of the ball. For Parrish to imply that Elliot could've been called for the foul is just plain erroneous and highly misleading.

However, that said, I don't think Parrish hates Duke. Consider that in his bracket he has Duke making the Final Four. He was also one of the few analysts that called for Duke to be considered a 1 seed.

Atlanta Duke
03-22-2009, 11:44 AM
"Duke gets all the calls" is an easy cliche for a lazy sportswriter on deadline to roll out - just remember the writer is looking to incite controversy and page hits, not make sense. I think my tipping point when I decided to just tune that tripe out was when Packer went into a Duke gets all the calls riff after a clean Battier block in the Arizona championship game.

As I get older I find I am simply watching the games while reading much less of the online CNN/ESPN dreck or the pre- and post-game TV chatter for all sports. With Packer being gone that is working well and will work even better if Vitale ever gives it up.

killerleft
03-22-2009, 12:04 PM
Parrish is off base in that quoted comment -- of that there's no doubt. There are three possibilities in that situation with Elliot and Johnson:
- No foul
- Elliot was fouled
- Elliot fouled

But only two of the three is valid; either Elliot was fouled, or no foul should have been called. There was no way that Elliot could've been called for fouling Johnson considering he was ahead of Johnson in the sprint, the one who ended up on the floor with Texas retaining possession of the ball. For Parrish to imply that Elliot could've been called for the foul is just plain erroneous and highly misleading.

However, that said, I don't think Parrish hates Duke. Consider that in his bracket he has Duke making the Final Four. He was also one of the few analysts that called for Duke to be considered a 1 seed.

His bracket decisions included the knowledge that Duke will get the calls.
:rolleyes:

CDu
03-22-2009, 12:10 PM
I honestly can't see how anyone can complain about that call. They were running downcourt, Johnson clearly gave Williams a forearm to the back.

It was a stupid foul by Johnson, as Williams had overrun the ball and UT was going to collect possession anyway. But that doesn't mean it wasn't still a foul.

Lord Ash
03-22-2009, 12:17 PM
Parrish is another in a long line of internet journalists who have realized that by putting Duke in your article you get attention, as the millions of moron Haters swarm in to type things like "U r so rite Do_k sucks adn flops!"

Look at Parrish and his last few articles... all Duke, all the time, and always including cute comments like blatantly accusing the refs of cheating because the games are in North Carolina (no idea what the logic there is, given that the refs aren't from North Carolina and most of North Carolina hates Duke, but whatever, don't let reality get in the way of a good internet blog entry!) and gems like this lead from a few days ago...

"The Duke Blue Devils won an NCAA tournament game late Thursday.

By a wide margin.

Convincingly.

And, yes, this qualifies as big news. "

... and of course he repeatedly blamed Jason Williams for all the woes of the business of sports and for massive payoffs a few weeks ago.

As someone who wrote in the world of real publishing and not internet publishing, I can say that Parrish is a class A no-talent hack who wouldn't make it if the internet didn't exist.

jdj4duke
03-22-2009, 12:30 PM
Being in a relatively good mood after the game, and no longer having to listen to the incredibly immature Heel fans, let's assume that Parrish meant that the call should not be a surprise only because the Duke player was in the right place at the right time with the game on the line. The opponent had no good way to escape the situation, and the only alternative was to foul. So in that respect, it is no surprise that Duke got what in fact was the correct call.

Let's assume that is what he meant. Otherwise, it's just another pointless, mean-spirited, and unnecessarily antagonistic comment that shows, if nothing else, the guy needs an editor.

captmojo
03-22-2009, 12:33 PM
Being in a relatively good mood after the game, and no longer having to listen to the incredibly immature Heel fans, let's assume that Parrish meant that the call should not be a surprise only because the Duke player was in the right place at the right time with the game on the line. The opponent had no good way to escape the situation, and the only alternative was to foul. So in that respect, it is no surprise that Duke got what in fact was the correct call.

Let's assume that is what he meant. Otherwise, it's just another pointless, mean-spirited, and unnecessarily antagonistic comment that shows, if nothing else, the guy needs an editor.

Right...and ty lawson is a total personification of a profile in courage. :rolleyes:

GoingFor#5
03-22-2009, 12:51 PM
It's just funny how sportswriters write about Duke. Any other team and they'd be criticizing Texas for making a dumb foul to send Duke to the line, but NOOOO it was Duke so the ref should just realize it was a dumb foul that Texas never meant to commit and not cave to the homer crowd (oh, wait, they were booing us!).

ice-9
03-22-2009, 01:20 PM
To defend Parrish -- and I only do this because I've been reading his stuff regularly this season, and I think he's one of the best college bball reporters -- he was assigned to cover Greensboro, which happens to have local UNC and Duke as the top two seeds. Is it surprising that both teams received the majority of his coverage? I don't think it was a play to get Duke haters out of the woodwork.

Further, Parrish wrote just as much, if not more, about UNC and the Lawson toe as he did Duke.

Parrish has also very consistently defended Duke over the regular season, at one point trying to debunk the idea that Duke gets all the calls. (That didn't make him very popular.)

The overall point of his article is to applaud Duke for its preparation, discipline and toughness. He made a mistake with that paragraph, but given his track record, I don't think it's fair to crucify him for it.

BWIV
03-22-2009, 01:33 PM
As someone who wrote in the world of real publishing and not internet publishing, I can say that Parrish is a class A no-talent hack who wouldn't make it if the internet didn't exist.

And this condescending attitude is a major reason why newspapers are closing on a daily basis.

Lord Ash
03-22-2009, 01:35 PM
There were more than 2 teams playing in Greensboro, and CERTAINLY more than two teams worth of interesting stories, especially when you consider how much press those two teams have gotten over the year compared to some of the other teams in the pod. Lazy journalism at BEST.

And I am sorry, I didn't get what you meant by this? Could you explain?


And this condescending attitude is a major reason why newspapers are closing on a daily basis.

BlueintheFace
03-22-2009, 01:40 PM
And this condescending attitude is a major reason why newspapers are closing on a daily basis.

Actually, "condescending attitude" has almost ZERO effect on why newspaper's are struggling to stay afloat these days. It's called Technological innovation and economics. In other words, you couldn't be more wrong.

Biscuit King
03-22-2009, 03:40 PM
Where was Gary Parrish on Kyle Singler's "foul" of AJ Abrams on a 3-pointer? The one that sent Singler to the bench with four and probably rescued Texas from getting blown out in the final six minutes? Did he go grab a coke during that stretch?

GarrickB28
03-22-2009, 04:01 PM
After reading this article, it reminds me of so many other cliche duke articles before it. I feel as if these no name sports writers write these polarizing pieces to bring more attention to themselves. Parrish wrote it so Duke lovers and haters would respond.

missfinch
03-22-2009, 08:23 PM
Where was Gary Parrish on Kyle Singler's "foul" of AJ Abrams on a 3-pointer? The one that sent Singler to the bench with four and probably rescued Texas from getting blown out in the final six minutes? Did he go grab a coke during that stretch?

I never saw a replay on this one and didn't get a good look during the play; does anyone have a link?

Newton_14
03-22-2009, 08:35 PM
I never saw a replay on this one and didn't get a good look during the play; does anyone have a link?

I do not have a link, hopefully someone will. I have the game recorded and I have watched that play about 10 times now. In my view Kyle never made contact with Abrams. Abrams did the classic "fall down" after the release even twisting a little to make it look worse. The ref actually blew the whistle late once he saw the ball come up short of the rim. He turned to see Abrams on the floor and blew the whistle.

It cost Duke only one point (James caught the airball and laid it in the basket without ever coming down), but it cost Duke a ton with it being Kyle's 4th foul. A major turning point in the game. Just glad it did not cost us the game...

BWIV
03-22-2009, 08:40 PM
Actually, "condescending attitude" has almost ZERO effect on why newspaper's are struggling to stay afloat these days. It's called Technological innovation and economics. In other words, you couldn't be more wrong.


Your argument is entirely illogical. Let me expound, so I can show you why I could in fact be more wrong. Newspapers had the opportunity to take advantage of technological innovation and be ahead of the curve on "new media." Instead, many journalists have thought that the Internet is beneath them, that it is for average plebians who don't understand the history and culture of journalism or source relations and reporting or writing on deadline. This attitude, that the Internet isn't good enough for real journalists, is a major factor in the death of traditional journalism. It's been the prevailing attitude for 10 years, and we're seeing the troubling impact of it today.

jipops
03-22-2009, 09:19 PM
I think this thread may be another one of the over-reactions from perceived "Duke-Hatred" in yet another internet article.

Yes, there is no doubt that Duke Hatred exists amongst many writers spread out all over the countries. Most attempt to over-simplify their thoughts on plays made in Duke games or perceived trends in Duke's season just as an angle for Duke hatred without any factual knowledge of what may have transpired.

But this Parrish article to me actually looks like a smirk pointed right back at the Duke haters - his main audience. It is impossible to argue against the call that was made. It was that obvious and I believe he knows it. The audience with Duke hate bias may not be intelligent enough to see that this may be a smirk right at them. Are we?

CDu
03-22-2009, 09:34 PM
I actually read this as a very complimentary article toward the Blue Devils. It's unfortunate that one chooses to focus on one sentence that hints at Duke catching a break, when the rest of the article goes on to say how Duke's effort is why they catch the breaks - not some sort of conspiracy. The author said Duke simply makes winning plays. That's a pretty big compliment.

Lord Ash
03-22-2009, 10:26 PM
I actually read this as a very complimentary article toward the Blue Devils. It's unfortunate that one chooses to focus on one sentence that hints at Duke catching a break, when the rest of the article goes on to say how Duke's effort is why they catch the breaks - not some sort of conspiracy. The author said Duke simply makes winning plays. That's a pretty big compliment.

Color me unimpressed. Between the assorted comments questioning whether or not it was the refs who won the game for us (he made at least two in this article and a few in previous articles, and when you question something like Parrish has you are, in many ways, implicitly acknowledging it exists) or the smirking nature of his previous articles, I don't think the author was going out of his way to compliment anyone. Impossible to argue against the call? All attempted rationalizations to the contrary, Parrish made sure to mention that refs apparently are biased towards Duke not once, but twice in the article. I think saying he was trying in some round-about way to take a jab at Duke haters is assuming FAR too much subtlety and thought on his part.

As for the death of the newspaper, maybe that is an off-topic comment, but you are simply wrong in saying that the reason print media is dying is because journalists don't value the internet.

First off, print media is dying for a simple reason; it is far cheaper to create on the internet, and far cheaper and simpler to get information from the internet.

However, the reason print journalism has a value far beyond that of internet journalism is because print journalism costs money to do. When something costs money to do (and money to buy) you have people like editors who ensure that the quality of the written piece is high; if quality is not upheld, the print media will be out of business, which ensures a certain level of quality. In internet writing, there is no cost at all; anyone can write whatever they want and then hit "publish" and voila! Just take a look at how it is almost impossible nowadays on sports sites to tell the difference between an actual article and a fan blog entry... they are presented by the sites as almost the same thing, except that they simply are not. DBR has actually linked a number of blog entries in the last few years and presented them almost as legit sports pieces. And this is a massive problem, as pieces are written without any editing, filter, or oversight, and then these pieces reach MASSIVE audiences almost instantly, and unfortunately what is in the pieces is considered the truth, because people "read it on the internet." THAT is what I am lamenting.

So no, print journalism is not dying because journalists think it is better than the internet... it is dying because the internet is generally free and instantaneous, and dying along with it is any sorts of journalistic standards imposed by editors and, frankly, capitalism.

Duke4Ever32
03-23-2009, 11:22 AM
I think this thread may be another one of the over-reactions from perceived "Duke-Hatred" in yet another internet article.

Yes, there is no doubt that Duke Hatred exists amongst many writers spread out all over the countries. Most attempt to over-simplify their thoughts on plays made in Duke games or perceived trends in Duke's season just as an angle for Duke hatred without any factual knowledge of what may have transpired.

But this Parrish article to me actually looks like a smirk pointed right back at the Duke haters - his main audience. It is impossible to argue against the call that was made. It was that obvious and I believe he knows it. The audience with Duke hate bias may not be intelligent enough to see that this may be a smirk right at them. Are we?

Like many, I wasn't happy with the paragraph in Parrish's article that seemed to suggest Duke was benefitting from a bad call on the Scheyer save and subsequent foul on EWill. So I emailed him and here is his response:

Subject: RE: Writer feedbacks: Gary Parrish
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 19:32:35 -0400
From: gparrish@cbs.com

You didn't mention that paragraph.

You called me a Duke hater ... which is, as you put it, lazy.

Either way, here's an explanation: The point of that graph-- and this has clearly been misconstrued, which is my fault for not being clear enough -- was that the home team tends to get calls late (a recent study showed this) and that since Duke was playing in Greensboro, I shouldn't have to tell you who fouled whom. Obviously, that's been interpreted differently, which, again, is my fault.

I should've been clearer.

Or left it out completely.

I hate that that one line has overshadowed the rest of the column.

gp

I then responded as follows:

To: gparrish@cbs.com
Subject: RE: Writer feedbacks: Gary Parrish
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 01:06:18 +0000

Gotcha.

You're right - the column would have been better without that paragraph, because most people would likely assume you're inferring that the call went Duke's way because "Duke gets all the calls", and not because they were the "home" team. I'm a pretty ardent college basketball fan, and I've never heard of the study you're referring to, so when I read that paragraph I wouldn't think you're saying Duke got the call as a home team. Apart from that paragraph, I thought the column was fine - and you should know that several people are defending you on the dukebasketballreport.com, where I came across your column - so you're fine in my book.

Just curious - did you have any issue with the foul call on Scheyer's throw into the backcourt? I thought it was pretty clear the Texas player fouled Elliot Williams by pushing him in the back when he was going for the ball. I also thought Singler's 4th foul was a phantom call - the one where the Texas player got 3 shots from the line.

I was glad to read on the Duke site that you've tried to debunk the "Duke gets all the calls" theory. I'm so tired of it. Anyone who believes that a majority of the refs actually love Duke and are conspiring together to help them win is exhibiting a lack of intelligence in my book. My way of dealing with it now is to respond by saying "You're right. We DO get all the calls. I contribute a lot of money to Duke's "Pay Off the Refs" Fund each year, and we damn well BETTER be getting all the calls".

And just as a side note...I don't know that I would consider Duke to have been the "home" team in Greensboro. I wasn't there, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were more people cheering for Texas there between the Texas fans and the UNC fans cheering against Duke.

Anyway, I appreciate what you said below and your explanation. I may post it on the Duke site so other people understand what your real intent was.

Thanks and take care.

And he responded with the following:

Subject: RE: Writer feedbacks: Gary Parrish
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:22:55 -0400
From: gparrish@cbs.com

Thanks for the well-reasoned response.

You know, from my vantage point live (I was on the other end of the court) it looked like two guys running after a loose ball, and I didn't necessarily see a foul. On the replay, it's still tough to see how much Gary Johnson shoved Elliot, and whether it was as bad as Elliot made it look. But that's why I used Elliot's quote -- the "he gave me a little shove" quote -- because I wasn't interested it writing a "the officials gave Duke the game" column ... even though the Texas coaches were clearly upset.

Again, a recent study shows home teams get calls.

It's not a theory, but a fact backed by statistics.

And though there were plenty of UNC fans cheering against Duke, this was still in North Carolina, still in ACC country, and that was the point of that sentence -- that I don't have to tell you who fouled whom because the game was in Greensboro -- but in hindsight I wish I would've just left it out. I clearly wasn't clear, and I understand why it came off the wrong way. I wish I could change it, but I guess I'll just have to learn from it instead.

Take care.

gp

PS: If you want to post this on the message board, feel free.

So there is his side of the story, which I'm fine with.

Inonehand
03-23-2009, 11:50 AM
Like many, I wasn't happy with the paragraph in Parrish's article that seemed to suggest Duke was benefitting from a bad call on the Scheyer save and subsequent foul on EWill. So I emailed him and here is his response:

Subject: RE: Writer feedbacks: Gary Parrish
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 19:32:35 -0400
From: gparrish@cbs.com

You didn't mention that paragraph.

You called me a Duke hater ... which is, as you put it, lazy.

Either way, here's an explanation: The point of that graph-- and this has clearly been misconstrued, which is my fault for not being clear enough -- was that the home team tends to get calls late (a recent study showed this) and that since Duke was playing in Greensboro, I shouldn't have to tell you who fouled whom. Obviously, that's been interpreted differently, which, again, is my fault.

I should've been clearer.

Or left it out completely.

I hate that that one line has overshadowed the rest of the column.

gp

I then responded as follows:

To: gparrish@cbs.com
Subject: RE: Writer feedbacks: Gary Parrish
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 01:06:18 +0000

Gotcha.

You're right - the column would have been better without that paragraph, because most people would likely assume you're inferring that the call went Duke's way because "Duke gets all the calls", and not because they were the "home" team. I'm a pretty ardent college basketball fan, and I've never heard of the study you're referring to, so when I read that paragraph I wouldn't think you're saying Duke got the call as a home team. Apart from that paragraph, I thought the column was fine - and you should know that several people are defending you on the dukebasketballreport.com, where I came across your column - so you're fine in my book.

Just curious - did you have any issue with the foul call on Scheyer's throw into the backcourt? I thought it was pretty clear the Texas player fouled Elliot Williams by pushing him in the back when he was going for the ball. I also thought Singler's 4th foul was a phantom call - the one where the Texas player got 3 shots from the line.

I was glad to read on the Duke site that you've tried to debunk the "Duke gets all the calls" theory. I'm so tired of it. Anyone who believes that a majority of the refs actually love Duke and are conspiring together to help them win is exhibiting a lack of intelligence in my book. My way of dealing with it now is to respond by saying "You're right. We DO get all the calls. I contribute a lot of money to Duke's "Pay Off the Refs" Fund each year, and we damn well BETTER be getting all the calls".

And just as a side note...I don't know that I would consider Duke to have been the "home" team in Greensboro. I wasn't there, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were more people cheering for Texas there between the Texas fans and the UNC fans cheering against Duke.

Anyway, I appreciate what you said below and your explanation. I may post it on the Duke site so other people understand what your real intent was.

Thanks and take care.

And he responded with the following:

Subject: RE: Writer feedbacks: Gary Parrish
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:22:55 -0400
From: gparrish@cbs.com

Thanks for the well-reasoned response.

You know, from my vantage point live (I was on the other end of the court) it looked like two guys running after a loose ball, and I didn't necessarily see a foul. On the replay, it's still tough to see how much Gary Johnson shoved Elliot, and whether it was as bad as Elliot made it look. But that's why I used Elliot's quote -- the "he gave me a little shove" quote -- because I wasn't interested it writing a "the officials gave Duke the game" column ... even though the Texas coaches were clearly upset.

Again, a recent study shows home teams get calls.

It's not a theory, but a fact backed by statistics.

And though there were plenty of UNC fans cheering against Duke, this was still in North Carolina, still in ACC country, and that was the point of that sentence -- that I don't have to tell you who fouled whom because the game was in Greensboro -- but in hindsight I wish I would've just left it out. I clearly wasn't clear, and I understand why it came off the wrong way. I wish I could change it, but I guess I'll just have to learn from it instead.

Take care.

gp

PS: If you want to post this on the message board, feel free.

So there is his side of the story, which I'm fine with.

Did he happen to write an article that stated the FACT that UNC had exactly 3 fouls called against them in the last 29 minutes and 24 seconds of play? That would have made a better example of the home team getting the benefit of a 'home' team getting all the calls. They shot 18 free throws to the 6 by LSU. We shot 27 to Texas' 25.

gotham devil
03-25-2009, 06:05 PM
http://www.newsday.com/sports/college/ny-spjeansonne0325,0,6157099.column

"Duke players rarely bounce around the European bush leagues, or struggle to make a USBL roster," Ventre wrote. "They either go right from Durham to the NBA, or they get a high-salaried job in a business run by an obsessive Duke alum who wants them to just sit in an office from 9 to 5 and sign autographs.

"Just once I would like to pull up at a Taco Bell drive-thru window and be waited on by Bobby Hurley or Cherokee Parks."

El_Diablo
03-25-2009, 06:16 PM
Why would college grads (from anywhere) be working at a Taco Bell drive-thru window? Especially grads from a top-ten university?

bdh21
03-25-2009, 06:33 PM
Why would college grads (from anywhere) be working at a Taco Bell drive-thru window? Especially grads from a top-ten university?

In some job markets you have to take work where you can find it!

Jeffrey
03-25-2009, 06:38 PM
"Just once I would like to pull up at a Taco Bell drive-thru window and be waited on by Bobby Hurley or Cherokee Parks."

This is a much more likely possibility that the writer may think (be careful what you wish for?). I could envision an endorsement deal resulting in a commercial with a former Duke hoops star working a drive-thru window. The writer may be less than pleased that the translated hourly rate would exceed Taco Bell's traditional pay scale.

bdh21
03-25-2009, 07:37 PM
This is a much more likely possibility that the writer may think (be careful what you wish for?). I could envision an endorsement deal resulting in a commercial with a former Duke hoops star working a drive-thru window. The writer may be less than pleased that the translated hourly rate would exceed Taco Bell's traditional pay scale.

Like walking into a DQ and being served by Mark Cuban.

SupaDave
03-25-2009, 07:51 PM
Funny thing is that it wouldn't matter. If I saw King Rice at my local Taco Bell I would still talk trash to him...

chrishoke
03-25-2009, 08:33 PM
Funny thing is that it wouldn't matter. If I saw King Rice at my local Taco Bell I would still talk trash to him...

And I wouldn't eat the food.

chi
03-25-2009, 08:54 PM
Is someone (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/joe_posnanski/03/24/tournament/1.html)converting?

"
East Region

Comment: All of the top four seeds are here, which should make these games interesting. We'll see. All the basketball junkies are so high on Pittsburgh, but I didn't seen anything the first weekend that made me think that Pitt is invulnerable. I think Xavier is a tough match-up and, though I dread saying it, I think Duke might be the best team in the region."

"New Final Four Prediction:
Louisville
Connecticut
Duke
North Carolina"

Hancock 4 Duke
03-25-2009, 08:57 PM
Why would college grads (from anywhere) be working at a Taco Bell drive-thru window? Especially grads from a top-ten university?

I swear I just saw Michael Jordan selling Underwear on the side of the street! ;)

Kedsy
03-25-2009, 10:11 PM
Is someone (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/joe_posnanski/03/24/tournament/1.html)converting?

"
East Region

Comment: All of the top four seeds are here, which should make these games interesting. We'll see. All the basketball junkies are so high on Pittsburgh, but I didn't seen anything the first weekend that made me think that Pitt is invulnerable. I think Xavier is a tough match-up and, though I dread saying it, I think Duke might be the best team in the region."

"New Final Four Prediction:
Louisville
Connecticut
Duke
North Carolina"

He dreads saying it, eh? It's tiresome that even when these writers say something nice about Duke they feel obligated to deliver it in a backhanded manner.

Devilsfan
03-25-2009, 10:16 PM
Don't USC grads wind up pumping gas? That's what they say at the elite ivy like school in knoxville, tenn.

Newton_14
03-25-2009, 10:35 PM
He dreads saying it, eh? It's tiresome that even when these writers say something nice about Duke they feel obligated to deliver it in a backhanded manner.

I have noticed the same thing in numerous articles and commentary on sports shows. If they say anything nice at all about Duke, they either use the back handed compliment method or out an out apologize for the compliment. Very tiresome.

Even with this years ACC Tourney win, it was "Duke wins tourney for first time since 2006" rather than "Duke wins tourney for 8th time in last 11 years"

Same thing for making the Sweet Sixteen this year. If you moved here from another planet in 2006, and started following college basketball, you would think Duke was in like a 20 year drought of success or something.

In this decade Duke has 2 Final Four appearances, 1 NC, and 7 ACC Championships. It is a great slump. Really, it is. Hope we have another bad decade like this from 2010 to 2019....

gotham devil
03-26-2009, 01:27 AM
Is someone (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/joe_posnanski/03/24/tournament/1.html)converting?

"
East Region

Comment: All of the top four seeds are here, which should make these games interesting. We'll see. All the basketball junkies are so high on Pittsburgh, but I didn't seen anything the first weekend that made me think that Pitt is invulnerable. I think Xavier is a tough match-up and, though I dread saying it, I think Duke might be the best team in the region."

"New Final Four Prediction:
Louisville
Connecticut
Duke
North Carolina"

This was the (I dread saying this ;)) human being that tried to write a negative full column on Krzyzewski answering a Chinese journalist in a manner that he felt was unsuitable. May the bald fatso have to write for the Kansas City Star for the remainder of his career.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
03-26-2009, 01:57 AM
I have noticed the same thing in numerous articles and commentary on sports shows. If they say anything nice at all about Duke, they either use the back handed compliment method or out an out apologize for the compliment. Very tiresome.

Even with this years ACC Tourney win, it was "Duke wins tourney for first time since 2006" rather than "Duke wins tourney for 8th time in last 11 years"

Same thing for making the Sweet Sixteen this year. If you moved here from another planet in 2006, and started following college basketball, you would think Duke was in like a 20 year drought of success or something.

In this decade Duke has 2 Final Four appearances, 1 NC, and 7 ACC Championships. It is a great slump. Really, it is. Hope we have another bad decade like this from 2010 to 2019....

ESPN Bottom Line Reads:

MICH ST. "8th sweet 16 in the last 12 years"

Duke " 1st sweet 16 since 2006"

Pretty crazy how they look at things over there.

Airforcedukie

Coach Carter
03-26-2009, 02:05 AM
This was the (I dread saying this ;)) human being that tried to write a negative full column on Krzyzewski answering a Chinese journalist in a manner that he felt was unsuitable. May the bald fatso have to write for the Kansas City Star for the remainder of his career.

You'd be hard pressed to find a better sports columnist on this planet than Joe Posnanski. I didn't like the article he wrote about Coach K, but he is phenomenal. I personally hope he writes for the Kansas City Star for the rest of his career.

Yes, I'm from KC. Yes, I love Duke, and it sucked reading that article. But, seriously, JoPo is the best.

On to more important matters, LET'S GO DUKE.

chi
03-26-2009, 02:55 AM
This was the (I dread saying this ;)) human being that tried to write a negative full column on Krzyzewski answering a Chinese journalist in a manner that he felt was unsuitable. May the bald fatso have to write for the Kansas City Star for the remainder of his career.

I think he also said on his blog that he despised duke. Anyway, I don't have to care about that ... I don't dread saying this ;)

chi
03-26-2009, 04:30 AM
why do we love Duke, particularly this year’s team.

This post is to provide some comic / stress relieve, generate more passion, and positive energy for our team on the verge of our very sweet 16 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weSUwLs7sZw) game. Please take it lightly (http://fineartamerica.com/images-medium/never-take-life-seriously-kelly-parker.jpg).

True, there are a lot of articles / people that hate Duke, but there are some (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2009-03-25-duke-villanova-cover_N.htm) who loves Duke. As long as I belong to "some" (http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/college/basketball/view/2009_03_26_Duke_hoops_stir_up_fans__worst_passions :_Love__em_or_hate__em/), that is good enough for me. I think the above article sums it up pretty well. No one in the history of mankind was / is loved by all, not even this guy (http://www.buddhapath.com/buddha1.jpg), this guy (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_uoHXtDg5HC4/Sal3mnZvVkI/AAAAAAAAD5A/X4O5dvJYNcI/s400/jesus_1233006972.jpg), or this guy (http://www.virtuescience.com/socrates.jpg). So why do we expect a team lead by someone whose ex player can't even get his last name right (http://www.tmz.com/2009/03/12/elton-brand-one-z-short-of-a-krzyzewski/) to be loved by all? He would say, "Common, ..."

I am not an X and O guy, perhaps I rubbed a little bit off this coach who is a much better coach than Coach J (http://dukeblueplanet.com/content.asp?tid=224). But, I had in 2001 the same giddy feeling and strong connection that I have with this team. Somehow I feel that we have a good chance to win it all, and I am not alone (http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009903260354). My sense is that if we get pass this weekend, our chances increases. If you want me to give you numbers, I would say this weekend, we have a 51 49 chance of getting pass. If we pass, then I think we have a 60 40 chance of winning it all (http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/photos/stylus/70709-apimagesncaa.jpg), beating the toe complete Ty UNC. Intuition aside, if you want more facts, this team reminds me a lot of the 2001 (http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/sports/pros_and_colleges/x1173689759/Duke-is-reborn) team, they have grown (http://www2.journalnow.com/content/2009/mar/26/boys-to-men-dukes-players-have-grown-up/) a lot, and they are a historically deep team (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/story/622874.html). There is of course the K Factor (http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/9377656/Beware-of-that-chip-on-Coach-K%27s-shoulder). Sure, we don't have a true big man. People have made similar criticism for his Klympic team, but look what he helped bring back. He also has repeatedly telling us that we can only focus on what we have. I like that attitude, and I believe that might carry us to the Promise Land (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCMx4YFzZKY). Also, 2001 was the year that I posted a lot on DBR, and I am returning to that form ...

I don't care if Kentucky is falling, heck I don't think we even care if the sky is falling. If it falls, we will just use umbrellas to stick it up until we finished watching the Wildcats game, then worry about it later. If we win, we will prop it up again Sat to watch, or just let it fall and use it as a blanket or carpet if you are lucky enough to live in the Devils' Cradle (http://www.innoworks.org/newinno/images/chapter_duke.jpg) or warm places. Ozzie might be tempted to step on it, I know.

Let's enjoy the dance while we still are dancing, and channel all our positive energy to help our Devils win. When it ends, let's celebrate. Win or loose. See you at the court. Well, mentally at least.

Oh if you are nervous, here are some stuff for you:
1) Check out the Dan Patrick with K (http://www.dukeblueplanet.com/xm_show.asp?tid=198), or
2) DP with Wojo (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/danpatrick/blog/26961/index.html?eref=fromSI&eref=fromSI)

and / or other cool stuff from Blue Planet (http://www.dukeblueplanet.com/)

If these still cannot cure you, check out the meditation instructions (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15218&page=2) by me from this thread

Go Devils! 藍魔鬼加油!

chi
03-26-2009, 05:10 AM
One more reason: our practice is the most focus and crisp (http://rushthecourt.net/2009/03/25/notes-from-the-east-region-open-practice/)

bjornolf
03-26-2009, 08:53 AM
Well, he's just parrotting Bobby Knight, right? We ARE the best TEAM left in the tournament. Doesn't mean we have the most talent or that we're gonna win it all, but we're definitely playing some of, if not THE, best team basketball in the tourney right now.

GoingFor#5
03-26-2009, 09:23 AM
I've been noticing that a lot of web comments and such lately don't show as much hatred towards Duke. There is still the immature "Duke gets all the calls" and jabs at our players being privileged, but I also see a lot of people reluctantly liking this team for its scrappiness. For some proof of this, check out this yahoo article and the comments: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Sorting-out-the-good-guys-in-the-Sweet-16?urn=ncaab,150510&cp=2#comments

Now, it is a Yahoo article so its purpose is pretty much to stir the pot, but the comments are interesting.

"You can't hold Duke's players accountable for Coach K's reputation. This year's team is the epitome of scrappy. I agree that getting outmanned by UNC in the second half both times this year doesn't make them "good guys" but they are playing with heart and still managed to eek out an ACC Tournament crown despite the upset monster that has run rampant throughout the ACC all year. They're a fun team to watch because they could simply get out-talented at any point during the game. They don't get a lifetime pass, but this team represents."

"Duke? No offense to the scrappiness of the current set of players, but considering Duke's history, conference and the built-in advantages of such, the school does not belong on such a list. Being UNC's whipping boy does not qualify.
Seriously, MJD, are you actually Dick Vitale in disguise?
That having been said, no bones about your other picks. "

Seems people admire the current roster. Also, with Paulus getting limited PT, there's nobody to direct the hatred at. Singler and Scheyer, although white and good, just don't have the hatred formula.

MulletMan
03-26-2009, 09:37 AM
Search function people!

blueprofessor
03-26-2009, 09:40 AM
http://www.kansascity.com/180/story/1106871.html

His initials are JC!:)

Best--Blue Prof:)

DukieInKansas
03-26-2009, 11:57 AM
You'd be hard pressed to find a better sports columnist on this planet than Joe Posnanski. I didn't like the article he wrote about Coach K, but he is phenomenal. I personally hope he writes for the Kansas City Star for the rest of his career.

Yes, I'm from KC. Yes, I love Duke, and it sucked reading that article. But, seriously, JoPo is the best.

On to more important matters, LET'S GO DUKE.

I'll echo this post. Joe is great so an occasional obnoxious column is ok. I really enjoyed his column on Cornell. http://www.kansascity.com/167/story/1096677.html

To the poster who called him a bald fatso - you may be thinking of Jason Whitlock who also writes for the Star. Usually annoys the heck out of me but writes a great column often enough that I keep reading him.

LCG! LGD! LGD!

rsvman
03-26-2009, 12:39 PM
http://www.kansascity.com/180/story/1106871.html

His initials are JC!:)

Best--Blue Prof:)

Dang it! I was hoping "JC" meant "Jim Calhoun." ;)

blueprofessor
03-26-2009, 06:01 PM
Duke stirs up passions:
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/college/basketball/view.bg?articleid=1161225&srvc=sports&position=0

good read.

Best--Blueprof:)

Billy Dat
03-27-2009, 03:28 PM
Interesting quote I just heard that I think applies to Duke:

"If you're in a position where a lot of people really like you and a lot of people really hate you, then you are probably doing something interesting....you're not shooting for the middle....you're really pushing for something unique and worthwhile to be that polarizing"

Sounds good to me.

beach rev
03-31-2009, 05:04 PM
Just came across this 'lovely' piece of journalism. Admittedly, there are some interesting points for debate - but why throw Seth Curry & Duke under the bus?
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/9400160/Let's-come-clean-about-'dirty-coaches'

roywhite
03-31-2009, 05:11 PM
Just came across this 'lovely' piece of journalism. Admittedly, there are some interesting points for debate - but why throw Seth Curry & Duke under the bus?
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/9400160/Let's-come-clean-about-'dirty-coaches'

Columnist Jason Whitlock was just showing off. He devoted 3 paragraphs to Myron Piggie without once mentioning Duke. He finished the article with a knowing wink by throwing in Seth Curry to Duke.

Duvall
03-31-2009, 05:27 PM
Just came across this 'lovely' piece of journalism. Admittedly, there are some interesting points for debate - but why throw Seth Curry & Duke under the bus?
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/9400160/Let's-come-clean-about-'dirty-coaches'

Just a little message for the Currys. Now that Seth has joined the Designated Villains of college hoops, sportswriters can say anything they want about him without repercussions. Oh well.

RainingThrees
03-31-2009, 05:31 PM
What a joke. This guy hasn't read any of the stories saying that Duke waited till Seth announced that he would tranfer. K has also waited till the time he is allowed to comment on Seth which hasn't come yet. This guy is a joke, a fake, a fraud and not a professional. High schoolers could right better than this joke of a journalist.

pfrduke
03-31-2009, 05:35 PM
I think the rejected title was "Profiles in Courage: Cal and Calhoun Commit Civil Disobedience via Text Messages, Cushy Cash Comp to Needy Hoops Stars."

RelativeWays
03-31-2009, 05:53 PM
Whitlock has one MO, especially when it comes to college hoops and anything NCAA related, play the race card regardless of the actual facts. He's right to call out the shoe companies for exploiting AAU players for all they can get, but trying to paint Marion Piggie as some helps victim caught between the evil mechanations of Shoe contracts and NCAA witch hunts is laughable. Whitlock is a great NFL beat writer and analyst, he really out to just stick with that. Anything else, particularly dealing with the NCAA, his motives are way too transparent. He's one of those guys thats convinced something really happened in the Duke lacrosse case, simply because the victim was black and the accused were white. Facts? Not needed for opinion pieces fishing for hits.

KandG
03-31-2009, 05:54 PM
Not really sure why anyone takes Whitlock seriously -- even if he loved Duke and managed to make more than one interesting point every ten columns, he would still be a particularly unreadable and attention-seeking shock columnist. In this case, shoot the messenger -- please.

DukieInKansas
03-31-2009, 06:10 PM
Whitlock has one MO, especially when it comes to college hoops and anything NCAA related, play the race card regardless of the actual facts. He's right to call out the shoe companies for exploiting AAU players for all they can get, but trying to paint Marion Piggie as some helps victim caught between the evil mechanations of Shoe contracts and NCAA witch hunts is laughable. Whitlock is a great NFL beat writer and analyst, he really out to just stick with that. Anything else, particularly dealing with the NCAA, his motives are way too transparent. He's one of those guys thats convinced something really happened in the Duke lacrosse case, simply because the victim was black and the accused were white. Facts? Not needed for opinion pieces fishing for hits.

I will defend Jason Whitlock on the lacrosse issue. He pointed out that if the races were reversed in the case, the opposite stance would have been taken. He thought the case should be treated without consideration of the race of the "alleged" victim.
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/mmedia/pdf/whitlock.pdf

He writes enough columns that I agree with that I continue to give his columns in the Star a look. This wasn't one of them.

Chitowndevil
03-31-2009, 06:30 PM
Hmm. Just skimmed through the article. I almost expect the dig at Duke. However, it strikes me as really, really odd that the only player other than Magic and Bird specifically mentioned in an article about dirty coaches is Seth Curry, who wasn't even a part of the high major recruiting process and has never to my knowledge even been mentioned in connection with any recruiting violations. Apparently there aren't enough players currently in the NBA making millions who are suspected of innapropriate behavior to use as examples, so we have to bring up Seth Curry, who committed the unforgivable sin of happening to announce his transfer to Duke when Whitlock was writing his article.

KandG
04-01-2009, 02:47 PM
Do You Still Hate Duke? (http://slamonline.com/online/college-hs/college/2009/04/do-you-still-hate-duke/)

Pretty funny and sad all at once, even though the comments are the standard inferiority complex acting out from other fans. It's like a guy saying to his buddies that he no longer cares for his old girlfriend, while he continues to stalk her secretly.

loran16
04-01-2009, 02:53 PM
ITs of course probably going to turn out to be some guy saying April Fools by tomorrow. Just Watch.

killerleft
04-01-2009, 03:32 PM
Whitlock has one MO, especially when it comes to college hoops and anything NCAA related, play the race card regardless of the actual facts. He's right to call out the shoe companies for exploiting AAU players for all they can get, but trying to paint Marion Piggie as some helps victim caught between the evil mechanations of Shoe contracts and NCAA witch hunts is laughable. Whitlock is a great NFL beat writer and analyst, he really out to just stick with that. Anything else, particularly dealing with the NCAA, his motives are way too transparent. He's one of those guys thats convinced something really happened in the Duke lacrosse case, simply because the victim was black and the accused were white. Facts? Not needed for opinion pieces fishing for hits.

I haven't had a chance to read the last few posts in this thread. Just wanted to say that Jason Whitlock was one of the early writers to see through the Duke Lacrosse scandal and question Nifong's methods and integrity.

devildownunder
04-01-2009, 09:59 PM
Do You Still Hate Duke? (http://slamonline.com/online/college-hs/college/2009/04/do-you-still-hate-duke/)

Pretty funny and sad all at once, even though the comments are the standard inferiority complex acting out from other fans. It's like a guy saying to his buddies that he no longer cares for his old girlfriend, while he continues to stalk her secretly.

The writer of this article lays out quite plainly the genesis of many of our current recruiting woes.

*sigh*