PDA

View Full Version : Duke Hate Tsunami, 2009-10 edition



Pages : [1] 2 3

G man
11-28-2009, 07:07 PM
Obviously we have heard about Gotlieb, but every time I read about Duke on SI I have to read Luke Winn. He has something negative to say every time. He can not give our guys any credit! http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/luke_winn/11/28/duke.uconn/index.html

roywhite
11-28-2009, 07:15 PM
Obviously we have heard about Gotlieb, but every time I read about Duke on SI I have to read Luke Winn. He has something negative to say every time. He can not give our guys any credit! http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/luke_winn/11/28/duke.uconn/index.html

Let's see, Luke. The Huskies had a decided "athletic" advantage at 4 out of 5 positions and a Hall of Fame coach on the sidelines.

Yet they lost decisively.

Maybe there's more to this game of basketball than running and jumping??

G man
11-28-2009, 07:17 PM
Let's see, Luke. The Huskies had a decided "athletic" advantage at 4 out of 5 positions and a Hall of Fame coach on the sidelines.

Yet they lost decisively.

Maybe there's more to this game of basketball than running and jumping??

Funny it is about who can put the ball in the hoop more than the other team

Indoor66
11-28-2009, 07:19 PM
Funny it is about who can put the ball in the hoop more than the other team

On top of that there are neither style points nor Russian judges.

Jim3k
11-28-2009, 07:39 PM
I mentioned it in the other thread re Gottlieb, but the No. 2 highlight from BluePlanet puts to rest any claim that Miles is not athletic. He flies and maneuvers in the air like gymnast, though he skipped the 2-point landing in favor of something safer. There are damn few 6-10 athletes that could do that while fending off the backboard at the same time.

Luke needs a different perspective. He should look at that highlight.

Jumbo
11-28-2009, 07:39 PM
Obviously we have heard about Gotlieb, but every time I read about Duke on SI I have to read Luke Winn. He has something negative to say every time. He can not give our guys any credit! http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/luke_winn/11/28/duke.uconn/index.html

That article was hardly negative at all. It was smart, analytical, and fair. If you think Luke Winn is a hater, well, I don't know what to say.

Ultrarunner
11-28-2009, 08:23 PM
That article was hardly negative at all. It was smart, analytical, and fair. If you think Luke Winn is a hater, well, I don't know what to say.

Jumbo, I won't disagree with you often - mainly because I hate having my head handed to me by someone smarter and more knowledgeable.

But I disagree with calling that article smart for one simple reason.


The game hadn't exactly been vindication of the Blue Devils' highlight-reel potential, but this team certainly has more explosiveness on the front line than the last few Duke clubs.

This is the same front line that we had last year and doesn't even count the fact that G floated to the forward spot.

Analytical and fair I do agree with.

Newton_14
11-28-2009, 09:07 PM
The only comment that was blatantly unfair and factually incorrect, was where Wynn describes Robinson's windmill dunk in the first half and then states that there is no player on Duke's team capable of performing a dunk of that nature. That was comical.

He obviously needs to pull the tape of the dunk contest from Countdown to Craziness and educate himself. By my count there are 5 players on our team that could easily do that dunk. Olek, Miles, Mason, Andre for sure, and I would give Nolan a fair shot at it. So call it 4 and a half.

Other than that my only beef with it is how many times do we need to beat this horse? We get it, ok?

P.S.- And besides, does anyone really think Stanley Robinson could jump over Zoubs and dunk the way Miles did in that infamous summer game???;):cool::eek::p

Just let it roll off your back fellas, I will take the winning "basketball players" that we have and not worry about the great athletes other teams may have..

Rock On Jon Scheyer, you are the man!!

tbyers11
11-28-2009, 09:08 PM
Count me in the camp that doesn't see how Luke Winn was ripping on the Devils at all. He states that Duke had a "dominating performance" against UConn and his point about how Duke's November play will translate to March is definitely fair after the last few years. His points about the subtext beneath the unathletic label ring true as well.



This is the same front line that we had last year and doesn't even count the fact that G floated to the forward spot.

Analytical and fair I do agree with.

While technically G played the "small forward" position last year, I wouldn't consider him to be a front-line player at all. I think Miles playing 20 minutes/game vs 4 and the yet-to-be-seen (by most of us) addition of Mason Plumlee will definitely make our front line much more athletic than last year

Lord Ash
11-28-2009, 09:37 PM
Glad someone else was most annoyed by the "no Blue Devil" nonsense. We have got some SICK dunkers this year.

Ultrarunner
11-28-2009, 10:17 PM
While technically G played the "small forward" position last year, I wouldn't consider him to be a front-line player at all. I think Miles playing 20 minutes/game vs 4 and the yet-to-be-seen (by most of us) addition of Mason Plumlee will definitely make our front line much more athletic than last year

Which was my point. He's saying we're more explosive this year. Not counting G, we have the same front line as last year but playing more minutes. If anything, that would suggest we're less explosive - or Winn is going with a dialogue that's a bit short on logic. He also says that the addition of Mason will make us more explosive so he clearly hasn't included him into his calculus yet.

Last year, we had Zoubs, Miles and Lance.
This year, we have Zoubs, Miles and Lance (so far).

Miles is playing more minutes which does add a dimension to the team but that was there last year in raw form - the same can be said of Mason this year. In fact, Mason has said that Miles is the better athlete.

I think he was forced to modify his commentary after the Duke front line manhandled UConn but has not necessarily changed his thinking.


The only comment that was blatantly unfair and factually incorrect, was where Wynn describes Robinson's windmill dunk in the first half and then states that there is no player on Duke's team capable of performing a dunk of that nature. That was comical.


But it did fit the message even if there isn't a basis for it. Boozer gave 5 people (well, four and a half) that he thought could pull it off. That's about half the squad and I think that Lance could probably do it too if he ever got aggressive enough. That's half the squad which is pretty good for a bunch of alarmingly unathletic guys. :rolleyes:

NYDukie
11-28-2009, 10:24 PM
Have to agree with some of the otehr who didn't take offense to Winn's article. I think K's comments after the games speak volumes and supports Winn's article in that if you read in between the lines that K realizes their team is not athlectically elite but rather in the average range. I do think this is a better team athletically than they have had since JJ and Sheldon's years and those teams were not elite athlectically. We'd have to go back to Battier/Jay/Boozer/Dunleavy years for the last teams that were athletically elite though 2004's teams was pretty good. Average atheleticism usually won't win a national championship unless there are other intangibles that overcome that. I think this team can use those intangible and compete for a championship. To paraphrase Calhoun's comments regarding K, the Duke team takes on K's persona on the court and as a result you have elite basketball skilled players that play excessively hard and won't be outworked to help compensate the average athleticism. From my early feelings on this team, I feel better than I inititally thought and I think they can hold their own with the elite athletic teams though I think the lack of backcourt depth could be a factor due to fatigue, fouls, etc. It will be interesting to see how they continue to develop and how MPII fits in as I have not seen him play other than the McDonald's game

That said, good, hard, under control basketball beat the out of control, trying to get to the basket at all costs style Friday. And finally, this wasn't a vintage UCONN team either athlecically and I think they have issues at a number of spots and SMITH IS BETTER ATHLECTICALLY THAN DYSON IMO ( Just had to get that in)!!!

Double DD
11-28-2009, 10:42 PM
Winn's usually quite fair and even-handed. And his description of the frontline being more explosive is accurate considering that he's including Mason who's mentioned in the very next sentence and that Miles only averaged 7 minutes when he got into games last year.

roywhite
11-28-2009, 10:50 PM
The only comment that was blatantly unfair and factually incorrect, was where Wynn describes Robinson's windmill dunk in the first half and then states that there is no player on Duke's team capable of performing a dunk of that nature. That was comical.



Yet here is what Winn says.

The most undeniable evidence of the athleticism gap between UConn and Duke came seven minutes and 11 seconds into Friday's NIT Season Tip-Off final at Madison Square Garden



No Duke player is capable of such a slam


So Winn's undeniable evidence is false, yet the article is fair? Keep in mind that the "undeniable evidence of the athleticism gap" is the first sentence in Winn's article. Is Luke not aware that Olek Czyz, Miles Plumlee, and Mason Plumlee are capable of very spectacular dunks? There's 3 players, Luke.

Sorry, he played to the stereotype and highlighted the predictable for a Duke-hater. Why apologize for this guy or this line of commentary? It stinks.

Jumbo
11-28-2009, 11:36 PM
Sorry, he played to the stereotype and highlighted the predictable for a Duke-hater. Why apologize for this guy or this line of commentary? It stinks.

Poppycock. He's a Duke-hater because he thinks Stanley Robinson can pull of dunks that no one on Duke can execute? Guess what -- he's right. Stanley Robinson is a ridiculous run/jump player. Miles has a great vertical. So does Olek. But Robinson -- man. Of course, none of that makes hima good basketball player, which was the bigger point of Winn's article that some of you are ignoring, for some reason.

And for whomever was making the comment about Duke's having the same frontcourt as last year, clearly it's not the same, given the number of minutes Miles is playing. And Miles, by himself, has made that group more explosive. Mason will be an even bigger addition.

lpd1982
11-29-2009, 04:54 AM
Whoever. The poppycock stays.

BlueDevilCorvette!
11-29-2009, 05:26 AM
I learned a long time ago that "opinions are like rectums...everybody has one and most of them stink". I'm a loyal Duke fan and I could care less if a player scores by dunking or shooting a jumper, just get the ball through the hoop! At the end of the day I want to see a "W" and I'm totally satisfied regardless of whether it was an ugly win or unathletic victory.

oldnavy
11-29-2009, 06:09 AM
I learned a long time ago that "opinions are like rectums...everybody has one and most of them stink".

First, "...most of them stink"?? I would argue that they all stink. Just because UNC doesn't think theirs stink doesn't count.

Sorry, had to say that!

Anyway. I think our style of play adds to our rap of being "unathletic". For instance, Luke Winn's comment that no one on Duke's team could pull of a dunk like that is ridiculous. However, no one on Duke's team would attempt to do it in a game for several reasons. First, it is not fundamental. If a Duke player were to miss that attempt, he would be benched immediately (especially in a close game like this one). And, second, it is a bit show-offish.. Duke is a very disciplined team, that may give the illusion of being unathletic at times, but Duke is very athletic and more importantly very fundamental and smart. And, yes they do take on Coach K's personality, and he is not a "tomahawk dunk" type of person.

flyingdutchdevil
11-29-2009, 06:50 AM
I have a question - why do people care so much that we be athletic? Everyone seems to get insulted when people call our team unathletic. Who cares? No, honestly - who the hell cares?

So what if we aren't athletic? So what if we are? We are still winning games and playing great basketball, right? Isn't that the most important think? I'd take a bunch of unathletic players who play amazing together and win games over a bunch of Robinson-esque players who can provide awesome dunks but can't find a way to win. We know how to win. That's the bottomline. That's the Duke way.

killerleft
11-29-2009, 10:33 AM
The most important thing about our perceived lack of athleticism is how it can only be a positive for Duke. If, for example, the guy guarding Jon Scheyer thinks he's better than Jon, he becomes frustrated when Mr. Scheyer contorts in five different directions, shows six "Scheyer-faces" and hits a lay-up and draws a foul for a three point play.:cool:

Duke fans are used to Jon doing this kind of thing on a regular basis. I call it athleticism. If the opposition wants to think they got punked by the tall dorky guy who built a gun rack in high school shop class, what's not to love?

Kedsy
11-29-2009, 02:28 PM
The most important thing about our perceived lack of athleticism is how it can only be a positive for Duke. If, for example, the guy guarding Jon Scheyer thinks he's better than Jon, he becomes frustrated when Mr. Scheyer contorts in five different directions, shows six "Scheyer-faces" and hits a lay-up and draws a foul for a three point play.:cool:

Duke fans are used to Jon doing this kind of thing on a regular basis. I call it athleticism. If the opposition wants to think they got punked by the tall dorky guy who built a gun rack in high school shop class, what's not to love?

I don't know about the gun rack, but the rest of this is spot on. If your opponent thinks you're worse than you are, you have a lot more opportunities to succeed. It's not just frustration -- if the player guarding Jon thinks Jon can't drive so he plays right in his face to try to get a steal, he actually gives Jon the opportunity to blow by him that Jon might otherwise not have had. If the guy guarding Z doesn't think he can jump, he might not box him out as hard as he can and Z can grab a rebound he might otherwise not have been able to reach.

Put another way, it's a lot easier to play well when your opponent doesn't think you're any good.

G man
11-29-2009, 08:09 PM
The big issue for me is that he talks about UConn not being a finished product, and alludes to the fact that we probably will not have the ability to beat a team like that come March. What about us? Are we not a finished product? We still do not have Mason back! It will take time to work out chemistry and the rotation once he does return. We will continue to improve as well! He makes it sound like this is as good as this team could possibly get and that is what bothers me!

feldspar
11-29-2009, 08:50 PM
I have a question - why do people care so much that we be athletic?

I think most people really don't care. It's just easy fodder for lazy journalists and talking heads to go on and on and on and on and on and on about trying to fill time and column inches.

Jumbo
11-29-2009, 08:57 PM
The big issue for me is that he talks about UConn not being a finished product, and alludes to the fact that we probably will not have the ability to beat a team like that come March. What about us? Are we not a finished product? We still do not have Mason back! It will take time to work out chemistry and the rotation once he does return. We will continue to improve as well! He makes it sound like this is as good as this team could possibly get and that is what bothers me!

He says nothing of the sort. Not only did Winn mention the fact that Duke will be getting Mason Plumlee back, which will hellp, this is what he wrote about March: "So as dominating as Friday's performance was, the question still lingers: Will the Blue Devils be able to dismantle a team like UConn as well in March as they just did in November?"

At no point did say anything close to "we probably will not have the ability to beat a team like that come March."

Carolina_Blue
11-29-2009, 09:45 PM
Duke is alarmingly unathletic. It is a fact. Fortunately, it takes more than athleticism to win basketball games. Connecticut shot just 53 percent from the line and turned the ball over 16 times. Coach K scouted Connecticut well - it doesn’t have a reliable shooter other than Jerome Dyson, and as a team, went 0-for-4 from deep. Nonetheless a great win for you fellows...seems as though yall are a step ahead of us this year. However I do think that yalls lack of athletic ability could pose some problems. But like yall have said its a game of more than athletic ability. Maybe that lack has been some of what has held yall back the past few years, which comes back to recruiting. McRoberts, ...Paulus...Shavlik Randolph...zoubek...Daniel Ewing. Harrison Barnes was a huge loss cause yall had been recruiting him hard for the longest, and Roy just got in on him late and still landed him...an article I read said something I agree with.... Right now, the Tar Heels are the toast of college basketball while the Blue Devils are carry the stigma of good, but not great.

dukemsu
11-29-2009, 09:51 PM
Duke is alarmingly unathletic. It is a fact. Fortunately, it takes more than athleticism to win basketball games. Connecticut shot just 53 percent from the line and turned the ball over 16 times. Coach K scouted Connecticut well - it doesn’t have a reliable shooter other than Jerome Dyson, and as a team, went 0-for-4 from deep. Nonetheless a great win for you fellows...seems as though yall are a step ahead of us this year. However I do think that yalls lack of athletic ability could pose some problems. But like yall have said its a game of more than athletic ability. Maybe that lack has been some of what has held yall back the past few years, which comes back to recruiting. McRoberts, ...Paulus...Shavlik Randolph...zoubek...Harrison Barnes was a huge loss cause yall had been recruiting him hard for the longest, and Roy just got in on him late and still landed him...an article I read said something I agree with.... Right now, the Tar Heels are the toast of college basketball while the Blue Devils are carry the stigma of good, but not great.

The point has been made ad nauseum. Athleticism is not solely defined as running fast and jumping high. Putting a basketball through a hoop, dribbling through defenders, rebounding, and guarding people are indeed athletic events. Therefore, I take significant issue with you stating it as a fact. Incorrect.

dukemsu

dukemsu

Ultrarunner
11-29-2009, 09:59 PM
Duke is alarmingly unathletic. It is a fact. Fortunately, it takes more than athleticism to win basketball games. Connecticut shot just 53 percent from the line and turned the ball over 16 times. Coach K scouted Connecticut well - it doesn’t have a reliable shooter other than Jerome Dyson, and as a team, went 0-for-4 from deep. Nonetheless a great win for you fellows...seems as though yall are a step ahead of us this year. However I do think that yalls lack of athletic ability could pose some problems. But like yall have said its a game of more than athletic ability. Maybe that lack has been some of what has held yall back the past few years, which comes back to recruiting. McRoberts, ...Paulus...Shavlik Randolph...zoubek...Daniel Ewing. Harrison Barnes was a huge loss cause yall had been recruiting him hard for the longest, and Roy just got in on him late and still landed him...an article I read said something I agree with.... Right now, the Tar Heels are the toast of college basketball while the Blue Devils are carry the stigma of good, but not great.

I'm not a Duke graduate (or even student) but do they not teach grammar anymore at major state universities? Organization? Logic?

I will agree with you that the Tarheels are toast in college basketball. We can finish the discussion regarding athletic ability March 7th.

Carolina_Blue
11-29-2009, 10:03 PM
I'm not a Duke graduate (or even student) but do they not teach grammar anymore at major state universities? Organization? Logic?

I will agree with you that the Tarheels are toast in college basketball. We can finish the discussion regarding athletic ability March 7th.

you people are hilarious .... I have said to another gentleman who said I needed commas...these are internet posts I am in no way trying to type some sort of formal document...however I think their was logic in my oppinion

BlueDevilCorvette!
11-29-2009, 10:05 PM
Carolina_Blue, you may want to pull the reigns on your horses and remember that it's a short walk from the Penthouse to the Outhouse! As a matter of fact, UNC better stack up on the toliet paper especially during the next 10 days...I got a feeling UNC is going to have a bad case of diarrhea, heck Nevada already had UNC's stomach churning!

Duvall
11-29-2009, 10:28 PM
Sorry, he played to the stereotype and highlighted the predictable for a Duke-hater. Why apologize for this guy or this line of commentary? It stinks.

I don't think Winn is a hater, though his commentary sometimes crosses the line between breezy and snide. But I was a little bothered by how close his column came to endorsing the notion that white= unathletic = smart = Duke. Our kids don't deserve to have to deal with that nonsense, and neither do UConn's. Just sloppy writing by Winn.

Jumbo
11-29-2009, 10:44 PM
Duke is alarmingly unathletic. It is a fact. Fortunately, it takes more than athleticism to win basketball games. Connecticut shot just 53 percent from the line and turned the ball over 16 times. Coach K scouted Connecticut well - it doesn’t have a reliable shooter other than Jerome Dyson, and as a team, went 0-for-4 from deep. Nonetheless a great win for you fellows...seems as though yall are a step ahead of us this year. However I do think that yalls lack of athletic ability could pose some problems. But like yall have said its a game of more than athletic ability. Maybe that lack has been some of what has held yall back the past few years, which comes back to recruiting. McRoberts, ...Paulus...Shavlik Randolph...zoubek...Daniel Ewing. Harrison Barnes was a huge loss cause yall had been recruiting him hard for the longest, and Roy just got in on him late and still landed him...an article I read said something I agree with.... Right now, the Tar Heels are the toast of college basketball while the Blue Devils are carry the stigma of good, but not great.

We've always welcomed good-natured fans from other schools. You, sir, are not good-natured at all. Not everything Duke does is related to what UNC does. This thread has nothing to do with Harrison Barnes, or Shavlik Randolph for that matter.

And you show your lack of basketball knowledge repeatedly there. Daniel EWing was a terrific athlete. Why on earth would anyone put him in the same sentence as Brian Zoubek? Josh McRoberts was a tremendous run/jump player -- he just didn't have post skills (or a good attitude). And this year's Duke team has more than enough "athletes" -- the Plumlee brothers, LT and Singler up front. Dawkins has a superb vertical. Nolan has every "athletic" trait you'd want -- length, strength, leaping ability, speed, quickness. And anyone who think Scheyer isn't athletic, just because he doesn't dunk, doesn't understand basketball. Want proof? Go watch the replays of what he did to your boy, Wayne Ellington, every game he guarded him. And then watch how he played in Chapel Hill last year, a game in which Duke was missing Nolan, on the road against the eventual national champs, and very nearly one. Give it up. You want to be here and contribute? Lose the 'tude.

VaDukie
11-29-2009, 10:46 PM
you people are hilarious .... I have said to another gentleman who said I needed commas...these are internet posts I am in no way trying to type some sort of formal document...however I think their was logic in my oppinion

This isn't a normal internet board. Grammatical accuracy and a logical thought process are highly valued here, not because it's a Duke site, but because that's how it was created. As Ron Burgundy says, "When in Rome..."

Jumbo
11-29-2009, 10:47 PM
I don't think Winn is a hater, though his commentary sometimes crosses the line between breezy and snide. But I was a little bothered by how close his column came to endorsing the notion that white= unathletic = smart = Duke. Our kids don't deserve to have to deal with that nonsense, and neither do UConn's. Just sloppy writing by Winn.

Read it again. It's pretty clear that he's lamenting those racial code words, rather than endorsing them.

duke09hms
11-29-2009, 11:22 PM
Duke is alarmingly unathletic. It is a fact. Fortunately, it takes more than athleticism to win basketball games. Connecticut shot just 53 percent from the line and turned the ball over 16 times. Coach K scouted Connecticut well - it doesn’t have a reliable shooter other than Jerome Dyson, and as a team, went 0-for-4 from deep. Nonetheless a great win for you fellows...seems as though yall are a step ahead of us this year. However I do think that yalls lack of athletic ability could pose some problems. But like yall have said its a game of more than athletic ability. Maybe that lack has been some of what has held yall back the past few years, which comes back to recruiting. McRoberts, ...Paulus...Shavlik Randolph...zoubek...Daniel Ewing. Harrison Barnes was a huge loss cause yall had been recruiting him hard for the longest, and Roy just got in on him late and still landed him...an article I read said something I agree with.... Right now, the Tar Heels are the toast of college basketball while the Blue Devils are carry the stigma of good, but not great.

Agree with everything coach K and jumbo have said. This year's team is not as athletically spectacular like UConn/UK etc but they are athletic enough to win most every game.

But seriously, especially as a former duke student, how does this tar heel's post not conform to EVERY negative stereotype us dukies have about unc? It's like he had a checklist or something - bad grammar and spelling, disconnected thoughts, poor logic, straight up wrong facts (daniel ewing are you serious?!), and of course the excessive yalls don't help much either.

Now I do respect unc, but this post was pretty laughable.

Duvall
11-29-2009, 11:28 PM
Read it again. It's pretty clear that he's lamenting those racial code words, rather than endorsing them.

Except that he isn't. While Winn does concede that Duke is "moderately athletic," there's not much lamentation in this paragraph.


Highlights do not decide everything, though, and the 13th-ranked Huskies were beaten 68-59 by the seventh-ranked Blue Devils in the first meeting of the two teams since the 2004 national semifinals. Robinson called Duke "smarter," and Scheyer, who had 19 points and five assists in the final, upping his assist-to-turnover ratio to 31-to-3 on the season, was the smartest player on the floor. UConn coach Jim Calhoun said Duke "played with a great deal of heart and toughness," something that was most seen on the offensive glass, where the Blue Devils held a 25-14 advantage, making up for the fact that they shot 28.4 percent from the field compared to UConn's 37.3.

I don't think Winn wanted to endorse the idea that "alarmingly unathletic" players were more likely to be smart and scrappy, but he didn't do much to reject the implication.

dukenilnil
03-30-2010, 12:41 PM
You don't have to like us, but you better fear us. Go Duke!


Link below to a story by Pat Forde at ESPN on Final Four "likability" (unnecessary spoiler: He really hates us). I'd say don't read it to avoid giving him high ratings, but I'll leave that choice to you.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2010/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5040237

DukeGirl4ever
03-30-2010, 12:46 PM
Sitting here at my desk at school during my planning period literally laughing out loud!


If your coach ever had a team put on probation, deduct five points. (West Virginia)

If your coach has been arrested and forced to resign, deduct five points. (West Virginia)

If your coach ever had a player who punched a police horse, deduct five points. (West Virginia)

If your coach dresses like a sports writer, add 10 points. (West Virginia)

J_C_Steel
03-30-2010, 12:49 PM
Gotta love the national media backlash against Duke.

All in all, however, this is a very difficult team to actively "dislike." Who's the villain on this Duke team?

alteran
03-30-2010, 01:07 PM
You don't have to like us, but you better fear us. Go Duke!


Link below to a story by Pat Forde at ESPN on Final Four "likability" (unnecessary spoiler: He really hates us). I'd say don't read it to avoid giving him high ratings, but I'll leave that choice to you.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2010/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5040237

alteran's Sports Columnist Suckability Index:

If your column focus is about as original as making fun of the French, deduct 20 points.

If you cite incidents about a school that are so far back they are allowed to vote, deduct 8 points.

If you rank a school whose coach has a high scumbag factor anywhere but last on your list, deduct 9 points.

If you finish on a self-deprecating note, add 6 points.

If you have a really silly spelling of your last name, deduct 12 points.

If you spell "Krzyzewski" properly, add 10 points.

If you ding a team more for advancing against a "rose petal" schedule then teams that played weaker seeds, deduct 15 points.

If you manage to sneak a little praise in with your barbs, add 8 points.

If you have an inconsistent scoring system, deduct 9.2 points.

Shane05
03-30-2010, 01:17 PM
Pat Forde might be the worst writer in the history of writers. He's constantly taking dumb, unfunny shots at Duke. Yet somehow, it's less terrible than his college football writing.

4decadedukie
03-30-2010, 01:21 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tourna...pat&id=5040237

Pat Fodre's recent "Likability Index" piece (URL above) is supposed to be humorous; in fact, it is tasteless, slurring universities, coaches and players with no constructiveness. He should be admonished, and ESPN should be ashamed, for publishing such tripe.

Billy Dat
03-30-2010, 01:23 PM
The piece is meant to be funny. I don't think it's a big deal. He doles out plenty of Duke praise, and I think he's generally playing up Duke's lightening rod status.

Duvall
03-30-2010, 01:34 PM
The piece is meant to be funny.

Then we should definitely notify someone at ESPN, because one of their employees is stealing money from them.

dyedwab
03-30-2010, 01:36 PM
don't have a link, but when Tony Kornheiser had his bracket challenge with a bunch of celebrities, sports writers, etc., Forde was on and picked us to lose earlier. But he also said that if Duke played Baylor, Baylor would "absolutely kill" Duke...and he repeated that analysis...

...good work, Pat...

The funny part is that Duke hate is no longer even an interesting position to take...everybody does it. Time for the next fad in sports journalistic analysis.

miramar
03-30-2010, 01:55 PM
Did anyone see ESPN first take at noon? OK, I know some of you were at work...

After a very nice phone interview with Nolan Smith, they had two black and two white sportscasters on the debate desk talking about why people hate Duke. While they mentioned a number of factors, several were race related:

1) One of the African-American commentators said that he was going to "keep it real" and that it was a combination of elitism and race ("the elephant in the room"). Duke has a lot of talented white players and some people ("brothers in barbershops") can't believe that a team with three or four white guys can run a talented and athletic black team off the court.

2) The same black commentator said that it's not entirely race, however, since they also have a combination of smugness and elitism, so there is an important class factor that rubs people the wrong way.

3) The second black commentator said that people hate Duke because they are winners, much like the Yankees.

4) One white commentator said that it's because Coach K gets all the calls, which everyone agreed on.

5) The second white commentators said that Duke has a history of really nice black guys that he knew personally, such as Battier, Brand, and Hill (described as "good citizens" & "the cream of the crop"), but they also have white guys who had a chip on their shoulders that made a few of them "despisable" (JJ, Laettner of course, but also Wojo and even Ferry!). The first black commentator agreed and speculated that these white players probably grew up on the playgrounds going up against more athletic black players and they "had to find an edge" so this chip on their shoulder actually makes them better players. The commentators like the fact that Duke will slap the floor and that they play with a "bring it on" mentality, but noted that makes people dislike Duke.

6) The two black commentators agreed that Duke plays solid, fundamental basketball and that they run the plays that Coach K wants rather than dribbling behind their back and going one on one, and while both admired that style of play and recognized that's what makes Duke win, they noted that "a lot of people don't like that."

I obviously don't hate Duke so I can't really speculate on why others do, but it was an interesting discussion.

Spret42
03-30-2010, 02:16 PM
I think this thread needs to die as do all Duke hate related stuff on this site.

Just enjoy your team and the games they play.

Duke hate won't go away, it is a complicated mix of race/class/accomplishment/failure/media/fandom etc.

jdj4duke
03-30-2010, 02:24 PM
Did anyone see ESPN first take at noon? OK, I know some of you were at work...

5) The second white commentators said that Duke has a history of really nice black guys that he knew personally, such as Battier, Brand, and Hill (described as "good citizens" & "the cream of the crop"), but they also have white guys who had a chip on their shoulders that made a few of them "despisable" (JJ, Laettner of course, but also Wojo and even Ferry!).

Commentator 5 was the reliable Skip Bayliss. He went after the white guys in what seemed almost a reflexive manner, as if "well Duke has these nice black fellows but I have to consciously launch the idea that their white guys are despisable (sic)". There was of course no qualification about what would make them so, other than they are white kids from Duke. The playground edge comment I think popped up to try to give even the least bit of reasoning that these guys had an "edge".

Bayliss also described Ferry as an "NBA thug" which I found very odd. Overall, it seemed like a very strained attempt to perpetuate the "why I hate Duke" posture. As Miramar indicated, there were a couple of interesting comments floated during the segment, but Bayliss did his usual job and got the innuendo going and derailed any further insightful discussion with basically "They're white, from Duke, they are 'despisable' and that is that".

Reddevil
03-30-2010, 02:25 PM
I believe so much of the Duke hate has to do with the success of the past and people being tired of all the attention. I get that, but honestly, and I think I'm not allowing my bias to interfere, I think I would like this TEAM if it were wearing a different uniform (other than light blue of course). If you take the DUKE off the front of the jerseys, and just look at the players, and the chemistry, this is an extremely likeable group. Unfortunately, most just want to bunch everything together and dislike everything Duke. If Duke were not in the FF, and these exact same guys were wearing say - UCLA jerseys - I would be rooting for them, and so would most indifferent fans.

TheRob8801
03-30-2010, 02:35 PM
I think the most humorous part of this article was the very last line...

...you know, the one in italics that states Pat Forde actually WORKS for ESPN...

*hearty chuckle*

mo.st.dukie
03-30-2010, 03:06 PM
1) One of the African-American commentators said that he was going to "keep it real" and that it was a combination of elitism and race ("the elephant in the room"). Duke has a lot of talented white players and some people ("brothers in barbershops") can't believe that a team with three or four white guys can run a talented and athletic black team off the court.



I think this right here is a BIG part of it, especially these last few years. Anybody who watches basketball, white or black, have been conditioned over decades of watching the sport to believe that all black players are far superior to all white players. When someone watches a majority white Duke team vs. a majority black Baylor team they automatically assume that there is no way Duke will win. So when they do win there can only be one explanation: the refs handed them the game.

People don't truly understand the game of basketball anymore. They think it is all about scoring 90 points, "breakin ankles," blocking shots, throwing down monstrous dunks, and playing at 100 mph. They don't understand team basketball, fundamentals, team defense, rebounding, and strategy. They only mention these aspects of basketball when a team like UNI beats KU because it was just a one time thing but Duke has done it 33 times this year and many more in years past (majority white team beating majority black team).

As for the white players playing with a "chip on their shoulders" making them less likable, I watched a bunch of Baylor players (who are black) play with a chip on their shoulders and make gestures to the crowd and pound their chest when they made a big play or flex their muscles. But it's acceptable for black players to do the things J.J. did or to act like Laettner did because after all, they're black players, they're tough and from "the 'hood" and grew up on "the streets" so it's ok for them to be angry and to show that emotion and maybe be a little arrogant and cocky. It's more acceptable for Quincy Acy to do the things he did than it would be for J.J. to be a little cocky and arrogant.

GODUKEGO
03-30-2010, 03:07 PM
All this Duke hate can be summed up in one word---------Envy!!! As long as the hate is out there then we are winning and doing the right thing. Keep it up media and just enjoy it.

Zeb
03-30-2010, 04:43 PM
It may simply be envy. But it may be more complicated than that.

If there is a dominant program heading into this season, it was clearly UNC. They had won 2 NC's in 5 years. They also had a white player (Psycho T) who had been highly visible at their program for the last 4 years. Yet outside of this board, I don't think they receive the same level of hate that Duke does nationally. I wonder if it's there and I just don't pick up on it, or if their tourney mises over the past ten years have made them more "human" and easier to root for than Duke.

Whatever it is, I'm not sure I really care. The rest of the world can hate all they want. I love our program--I can't remember a season I have had more fun watching than this one. A great combination of low(er) expectations and extraordinary results.

NashvilleDevil
03-30-2010, 04:56 PM
It may simply be envy. But it may be more complicated than that.

If there is a dominant program heading into this season, it was clearly UNC. They had won 2 NC's in 5 years. They also had a white player (Psycho T) who had been highly visible at their program for the last 4 years. Yet outside of this board, I don't think they receive the same level of hate that Duke does nationally. I wonder if it's there and I just don't pick up on it, or if their tourney mises over the past ten years have made them more "human" and easier to root for than Duke.

Whatever it is, I'm not sure I really care. The rest of the world can hate all they want. I love our program--I can't remember a season I have had more fun watching than this one. A great combination of low(er) expectations and extraordinary results.

UNC has the ultimate trump card....Jordan

-bdbd
03-30-2010, 05:00 PM
Enjoy it. Drink it in.

If you weren't on top they wouldn't care about/hate you.

Use it to motivate you. Come on Duke team -- everyone hates you (for generally irrational reasons). :mad:

Now go SHOW 'EM!!

:D :eek: :p

LSanders
03-30-2010, 05:06 PM
alteran's Sports Columnist Suckability Index:

If your column focus is about as original as making fun of the French, deduct 20 points.

If you cite incidents about a school that are so far back they are allowed to vote, deduct 8 points.

If you rank a school whose coach has a high scumbag factor anywhere but last on your list, deduct 9 points.

If you finish on a self-deprecating note, add 6 points.

If you have a really silly spelling of your last name, deduct 12 points.

If you spell "Krzyzewski" properly, add 10 points.

If you ding a team more for advancing against a "rose petal" schedule then teams that played weaker seeds, deduct 15 points.

If you manage to sneak a little praise in with your barbs, add 8 points.

If you have an inconsistent scoring system, deduct 9.2 points.

:D Good job! This index actually DID make me laugh!!

coldriver10
03-30-2010, 05:08 PM
I think this right here is a BIG part of it, especially these last few years. Anybody who watches basketball, white or black, have been conditioned over decades of watching the sport to believe that all black players are far superior to all white players. When someone watches a majority white Duke team vs. a majority black Baylor team they automatically assume that there is no way Duke will win. So when they do win there can only be one explanation: the refs handed them the game.

People don't truly understand the game of basketball anymore. They think it is all about scoring 90 points, "breakin ankles," blocking shots, throwing down monstrous dunks, and playing at 100 mph. They don't understand team basketball, fundamentals, team defense, rebounding, and strategy. They only mention these aspects of basketball when a team like UNI beats KU because it was just a one time thing but Duke has done it 33 times this year and many more in years past (majority white team beating majority black team).

As for the white players playing with a "chip on their shoulders" making them less likable, I watched a bunch of Baylor players (who are black) play with a chip on their shoulders and make gestures to the crowd and pound their chest when they made a big play or flex their muscles. But it's acceptable for black players to do the things J.J. did or to act like Laettner did because after all, they're black players, they're tough and from "the 'hood" and grew up on "the streets" so it's ok for them to be angry and to show that emotion and maybe be a little arrogant and cocky. It's more acceptable for Quincy Acy to do the things he did than it would be for J.J. to be a little cocky and arrogant.
I think this post is spot on. Race, (perceived) elitism, and national attention are the biggest contributors to Duke hate in my opinion.

TampaDukie
03-30-2010, 05:36 PM
...but Bayliss did his usual job and got the innuendo going and derailed any further insightful discussion with basically "They're white, from Duke, they are 'despisable' and that is that".
Interesting. Just yesterday on “1st and 10,” he was being extremely complimentary of our program. FWIW, he picked us to win the NC and apparently was one of the few national media folks who picked us to make it to Indy when the brackets came out. I was shocked (and slightly perturbed), since I have little to no regard for Skip's opinions.


Whatever it is, I'm not sure I really care. The rest of the world can hate all they want.
This. As much as I get irritated by the haters' continual frothing at the mouth, I can’t help but love the fact that, no matter what, we’re always the focus of the college basketball world, even in our “down” years. Love us or hate us, it's always about us – even when it’s not. So, as much as I enjoy our success on its own merits, I freely admit that part of my enjoyment stems from watching the haters choke on their bile when we do well. So the haters can keep on doing what they do best (http://www.joewrite.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/haters-gonna-hate.gif).

Kdogg
03-30-2010, 05:57 PM
It may simply be envy. But it may be more complicated than that.

If there is a dominant program heading into this season, it was clearly UNC. They had won 2 NC's in 5 years. They also had a white player (Psycho T) who had been highly visible at their program for the last 4 years. Yet outside of this board, I don't think they receive the same level of hate that Duke does nationally. I wonder if it's there and I just don't pick up on it, or if their tourney mises over the past ten years have made them more "human" and easier to root for than Duke.


Tyler did get his share of hate but it was not the 24/7 coverage that our guys get. On a national level it was probably the most for a non-Duke player I have seen. The thing is it's easier to target a smaller white guard than a white big man. Most of the fans that propagate the hate are physically closer to guys like Paulus, Reddick, Wojo, and Collins. It makes targeting them easier. A similiar thing happened in the Big East with Gerry Mcnamara and Eric Devendorf. The Christian Laettner / Danny Ferry hate has been retro active in my opinion. Very few non ACC fans hated either guy while they played.

Starter
03-30-2010, 06:21 PM
Tyler did get his share of hate but it was not the 24/7 coverage that our guys get. On a national level it was probably the most for a non-Duke player I have seen. The thing is it's easier to target a smaller white guard than a white big man.

I think it's more that Hansbrough was the only truly visible white guy on the team. There was also a backup point guard and a mostly sidelined center, unless I'm missing someone off the top. And as much as I hate Hansbrough -- I think he's actually my least favorite athlete, though I'm no fan of Shane Victorino -- he was perceived as gritty. Duke has 10 white guys and four black guys on the team (counting Curry). It's not fair to single them out for this, but it makes them an easy target.

mph
03-30-2010, 06:24 PM
Enjoy it. Drink it in.

If you weren't on top they wouldn't care about/hate you.

Use it to motivate you. Come on Duke team -- everyone hates you (for generally irrational reasons). :mad:

Now go SHOW 'EM!!

:D :eek: :p

Although not the first to express the sentiment, I remember Dale Earnhardt Sr. saying something along the lines of, "It doesn't matter if the crowd boos or cheers, as long as they're making noise." Better to be the team the media loves to hate than the team nobody covers.

DukeGirl4ever
03-30-2010, 07:08 PM
UNC has the ultimate trump card....Jordan


I agree with that....but here's what I don't get.
I teach middle school age children and so many of them wear UNC clothing (it makes me puke). I've asked all of them why they like UNC, and most say JORDAN. I know some of them weren't even around when Jordan played pro so how they can like UNC for a man they've never even seen play there is beyond my comprehension. I tell them to get another "excuse" b/c that's not even a valid reason.

On a side note - one of my student's parents BOTH went to UNC, she was brought home from the hospital in a UNC outfit. Her favorite team now? The team with the RIGHT shade of blue. Just goes to show you that nature over-rules the nurture argument. :D

devildownunder
03-30-2010, 07:29 PM
Most of the fans that propagate the hate are physically closer to guys like Paulus, Reddick, Wojo, and Collins. It makes targeting them easier. A similiar thing happened in the Big East with Gerry Mcnamara and Eric Devendorf. The Christian Laettner / Danny Ferry hate has been retro active in my opinion. Very few non ACC fans hated either guy while they played.


I've seen/heard this from enough white fans to start thinking that this is true for a lot of people. I don't understand why it's the case and the implications for how some fans who react this way perceive/feel about black basketball players are troubling to me so I wish I weren't starting to have the ring of truth to it.

RelativeWays
03-30-2010, 07:39 PM
In my experiences, the dislike that a lot of black basketball fans have for Duke is markedly less than the complete disdain and vitriol white basketball fans have for Duke. There's no comparison. The Duke and UNC hatred stems far more from where the two institutions and programs are alike, not where they are different.

tecumseh
03-30-2010, 08:03 PM
I agree it is the "get a life" white fans that have the most vitriol for Duke.
I might have sick sense of humor but my dream finish is for Duke to beat darling Butler on Monday night on a bad call. Like Butler scores the go ahead field goal with a second left and it is waved off as a charge. It would be great.

wilson
03-30-2010, 08:23 PM
"Oderint dum metuant." --Caligula

coldriver10
03-30-2010, 08:25 PM
Maybe I'm the only one that hates all the hate. It gets tiresome having to defend not only the team I love and the coach I most admire, but also the university I've proudly called "home" for the last 8+ years. My dream since i was 9 years old was to go to Duke. It's is an amazing place, a combination of academic excellence, ethics, and school spirit matched at few, if any, schools, and yet all I hear about Duke are words like "elitist", "spoiled", "white." Sigh...I admit I get overly sensitive trying to defend the place that I love and the team that represents it so well. It's hard for me not to. :(

Dr. Tina
03-30-2010, 08:35 PM
The Duke hate has been alive and well on Facebook. I have one "friend" who's been giving out "free tips" about how Duke is going to lose in the first weekend...then against Texas A&M, etc.. Now he's predicting WVU/Butler in the final game. I told him it's a good thing his tips are free because he's been wrong every time...to which he replied, "Duke sucks and they will lose...Thank you for your time!"

My response:

No, really, let me thank you...thank you for yet another "succinct reply" lacking in intelligent thought and originality!

I bet you make every Duke hater proud. What an accomplishment!

GO DUKE!!!!!!! ...

Hehehe.. :)

77devil
03-30-2010, 08:37 PM
The Duke hate has been alive and well on Facebook. I have one "friend" who's been giving out "free tips" about how Duke is going to lose in the first weekend...then against Texas A&M, etc.. Now he's predicting WVU/Butler in the final game. I told him it's a good thing his tips are free because he's been wrong every time...to which he replied, "Duke sucks and they will lose...Thank you for your time!"

My response:

No, really, let me thank you...thank you for yet another "succinct reply" lacking in intelligent thought and originality!

I bet you make every Duke hater proud. What an accomplishment!

GO DUKE!!!!!!! ...

Hehehe.. :)

Suggest you drop him as a friend.

Dr. Tina
03-30-2010, 08:41 PM
Suggest you drop him as a friend.

Ha, I just may with all of the ridiculous Duke hate he's spewing. I didn't realize how much he hated them until the NCAA tournament started because he's a Syracuse fan and hasn't commented on Duke before.

Talk about sour grapes! You'd think he was a UNC fan! Hahahahaha!

Spret42
03-30-2010, 08:43 PM
Tyler did get his share of hate but it was not the 24/7 coverage that our guys get. On a national level it was probably the most for a non-Duke player I have seen. The thing is it's easier to target a smaller white guard than a white big man. Most of the fans that propagate the hate are physically closer to guys like Paulus, Reddick, Wojo, and Collins. It makes targeting them easier. A similiar thing happened in the Big East with Gerry Mcnamara and Eric Devendorf. The Christian Laettner / Danny Ferry hate has been retro active in my opinion. Very few non ACC fans hated either guy while they played.


Gerry McNamara wasn't that hated. If a player is white and people decide to see the underdog "fighter" thing in him he won't be hated. McNamara was viewed as almost black, like the kind of white kid who learned the game on a black top. Redick, Paulus et al weren't viewed that way. They were viewed as privileged kids who learned the game in the warm gym of a private school and then went to Duke for more of the same.

Perception rules.

DukeGirl4ever
03-30-2010, 08:44 PM
Suggest you drop him as a friend.

DITTO! I did the same thing with a UNC fan/"friend" of mine.
When Duke had a 10-day break between games for finals, I did a TOP 10 REASONS I LIKE DUKE for my status updates.

On the last day, his status was "Thank God the Duke Top 10 is over"...this coming from a divorced, unemployed, bald-headed 35 year old who is in court for assaulting his ex-wife.

Typical UNC fan :p
(Kidding!)
But you can see why he hates Duke...he's accomplished NOTHING in his life. These boys have already accomplished more than he can ever even dream about. It all goes back to the JEALOUSY factor.

nmduke2001
03-30-2010, 09:05 PM
I think that it all comes down to the “I could have done that” mentality. “Sports Nation” had a poll a few months back in which 60% of respondents thought they could have been a professional athlete had it not been for an injury or coach that didn’t like them. These same guys see some of our players and think they are just lucky. If you look at someone like Dwight Howard, you can easily see that he is a vastly superior athlete. You look at someone like JJ Redick and you wonder why he is scoring 30 against ACC competition. The “haters” identify with JJ Redick (at least physically), so they wonder why they aren’t a college basketball star. Most people can’t identify with Shaq.

NYDukie
03-30-2010, 09:07 PM
In my experiences, the dislike that a lot of black basketball fans have for Duke is markedly less than the complete disdain and vitriol white basketball fans have for Duke. There's no comparison. The Duke and UNC hatred stems far more from where the two institutions and programs are alike, not where they are different.

It's funny that you say this. I was discussing this with a black co-worker of mine who, like me (though I'm white), grew up in NYC and played ball with a myriad of different backgrounds. Many a time is was one of a few white kids playing with and against black kids. What we concluded, and this is by no means scientific...LOL...is that there is a lot white on white hate as there ia black on black hate when it comes to athletics in general and basketball in this case. He said, and I'm paraphrasing here, that he knew of some friends that made it out of the projects and that there were plenty of those in the projects that thought they were "uncle toms" for using baskets to get out and not come back and/or forget where they came from. In the case of Duke or white athletes, many white people are jealous of successful white athletes because of the perceived notion that these white athletes aren't athletic enough to be as successful as they are and have the feeling that "why can't that be me", he doesn't run or jump that much better than me. Basically, it comes down to one word as Dickie V pointed out...and its "JEALOUSY". So in the case of Duke, many of the haters are white and they hate because they are "jealous" they were never able to be that good at playing basketball when they see players that are athletic but maybe not "elite" athlectic. Just my 2 cents. Would be curious to here what some of our fellow black Duke fans have to say as I know we all can have a constructive discussion about this!

RockLobster
03-30-2010, 09:48 PM
In my experiences, the dislike that a lot of black basketball fans have for Duke is markedly less than the complete disdain and vitriol white basketball fans have for Duke. There's no comparison. The Duke and UNC hatred stems far more from where the two institutions and programs are alike, not where they are different.

I could not agree more.

Usually, when I hear a Duke hater call us a bunch of "pasty white boys," it's from another white guy. Strangely, some of the people I've heard this from don't associate at all with blacks or other minorities in real life. (Think: Wal-Mart UNC fans.) I can't figure it out.

It's funny, I know a guy who went to my high school and graduated from UNC, and he keeps this blog on UNC basketball (which is pretty stupid, by the way, as literally half of it is devoted to Ol' Roy's neckties), and one of his posts included a rant on how Duke was populated with the aforementioned "pasty white boys."

The funny thing was that this kid was VERY much like what people perceive to be the typical Duke student - an upper-middle class well-educated white male. The only difference was that he was wearing that other shade of blue.

I know a lot of people that went to UNC, and to be quite honest, the overall "aura" of their student body is not very different from Duke's. The discrepancy between them and the Wal-Mart fans is something I've never been able to reconcile...though both segments of the fanbase do hate Duke for having "pasty white boys" on the team, even though their own school is full of them.

sagegrouse
03-30-2010, 09:51 PM
I could not agree more.

Usually, when I hear a Duke hater call us a bunch of "pasty white boys," it's usually from another white guy. Strangely, some of the people I've heard this from don't associate at all with blacks or other minorities in real life. (Think: Wal-Mart UNC fans.) I can't figure it out.

It's funny, I know a guy who went to my high school and graduated from UNC, and he keeps this blog on UNC basketball (which is pretty stupid, by the way, as literally half of it is devoted to Ol' Roy's neckties), and one of his posts included a rant on how Duke was populated with the aforementioned "pasty white boys."

The funny thing was that this kid was VERY much like what people perceive to be the typical Duke student - an upper-middle class well-educated white male. The only difference was that he was wearing that other shade of blue.

.

No surprise here. Most hating on the Internet and elsewhere seem to be an expression of self-hatred. Surely there is some honorable shrink on the Board who can help explain why.

sagegrouse

tecumseh
03-30-2010, 10:02 PM
In fairness I see a lot of the other side of the coin. People with no connection to Duke who are BIG Duke fans. Maybe its because in this town high school basketball is HUGE and the local team is the Blue Devils.

Sundays game had me too nervous to watch so kept recording and went out to walk the dogs, near the end of the game. A dozen block later I hear a tremendous cheer coming from a house I am walking by and I think, are Duke haters really THAT passionate? probably not. Sure enough it was some Duke lovers and seeing that I know every Dukie in town these folks I am sure had no direct connection with Duke.

RockLobster
03-30-2010, 10:05 PM
In fairness I see a lot of the other side of the coin. People with no connection to Duke who are BIG Duke fans. Maybe its because in this town high school basketball is HUGE and the local team is the Blue Devils.

Sundays game had me too nervous to watch so kept recording and went out to walk the dogs, near the end of the game. A dozen block later I hear a tremendous cheer coming from a house I am walking by and I think, are Duke haters really THAT passionate? probably not. Sure enough it was some Duke lovers and seeing that I know every Dukie in town these folks I am sure had no direct connection with Duke.

I don't deny that we have a lot of fans with no connection with the school as well. However, as a neutral observer (growing up in rural NC LONG before I cared about college sports at all), these sorts of Duke fans were made in a very different mold than Wal-Mart Carolina fans. I don't want to go into specifics, but most of the Duke fans didn't seem to walk out of a stereotype catalog.

devildownunder
03-30-2010, 10:11 PM
I agree it is the "get a life" white fans that have the most vitriol for Duke.
I might have sick sense of humor but my dream finish is for Duke to beat darling Butler on Monday night on a bad call. Like Butler scores the go ahead field goal with a second left and it is waved off as a charge. It would be great.

LOL!

Richard Berg
03-30-2010, 11:33 PM
I've seen/heard this from enough white fans to start thinking that this is true for a lot of people. I don't understand why it's the case and the implications for how some fans who react this way perceive/feel about black basketball players are troubling to me so I wish I weren't starting to have the ring of truth to it.
That's an easy one. Your average fan/hater latches onto guards for the same reason he singles out middle-class whiteys in the first place: fantasy. Sports aren't just a game. They're a form of escapism, of imagination. The modern Olympics are a perfect example: among its founders' explicit hopes was that nations could compete vicariously on the track & field instead of the physical battlefield. And for the most part, we do just that. (I'm sure plenty of humanities papers have been written on the subject...) The country swells with pride whenever we win medals, even though "we" did nothing of the sort -- a few extremely rare individuals did.

However, the ridiculous prowess of today's athletes can sometimes be too overwhelming. Few people honestly believe they could just waltz their way into Olympic weightlifting given a few lucky breaks. Not coincidentally, the most physically demanding sports are the ones whose fantasy leagues/games have exploded in popularity. Even in the world of imagination, roles like GM and QB are a much more plausible fit for the average guy. Meanwhile, the phrase "Monday morning nose tackle" is unlikely to join our sports lexicon.

Back to college basketball. We've established that people like to live vicariously through the athletic accomplishments of others. The more closely you identify with the athlete, the stronger these feelings get. Nobody is surprised when you root for your alma mater, your hometown pro franchise, or your World Cup team. It's obvious to me that similar effects are going to be felt when athletes look like you; human emotions are tribal and shallow, period, no apology needed. (Keep in mind we're not talking about preference per se, but rather identity...though the former probably comes into play at times.)

Some of that will naturally come from things like skin color and speech patterns. Having acknowledged race, I'd then argue that overall physique (height, musculature, etc) can play an equally big role in your subconscious determination of "familiar" -- that scrawny little PG looks just like the kid from next door you used to dominate, doesn't he? Likewise when our brains reach for the label of "other" -- witness the weird hate/fetish surrounding female ballers who don't line up with traditional feminine beauty norms.

One of those reactions elevates the casual fan back to his pleasant fantasy world, where he could take JJ's place if only he'd spent a couple extra hours in high school working on his 3-point shot. If he's otherwise inclined to root for Duke, it's a fun feeling; if not, the "personal" connection just adds fuel to the fire.

The opposite reaction is a visceral reminder those athletes on TV are operating in a whole other universe that bears no relation to Mr. Fanboy's playground/YMCA game, regardless of his race/height/looks. Someone mentioned Dwight Howard earlier. One look at his shirtless body should snap people out of the illusion that what happens on an NBA court has anything whatsoever to do with them or their egocentric fandom. Put simply, it's hard to summon the requisite hatorade for an opponent you know -- both rationally and subconsciously -- you could never ever beat.

----

To be clear, I don't want to take anything away from fans who can:
- enjoy the game of basketball for its own sake, happy to analyze X's & O's without regard for who the symbols might represent on a given night
- admire LeBron (or whoever) as a sheer physical specimen, willing and able to put his body in peak condition, quite apart from whatever role he plays in the entertainment business
- admire Jordan (or whoever) for his competitive spirit, mental toughness, etc no matter where they are applied
- admire K (or whoever) for instilling leadership, teamwork, and discipline, whatever the arena

On the contrary; I love it when people can really break down the areas they're passionate about. For better or worse, I think we have more such folks here on DBR than they do back in the ESPN studio...

----

Someone used to write "everyone hates everyone else's little white point guard" in their signature here. I even thought the phrase had made it into T-beard's HPR, but alas I was wrong. The topic does come up far too often though; probably belongs in the HPR after all.

DukeCO2009
03-30-2010, 11:47 PM
Pat Forde (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2010/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5040237)

flyingdutchdevil
03-31-2010, 03:44 AM
I remember reading this article before the tournament started that Forde writes every year: Dreams and Nightmares for the 64 Teams (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2010/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5001177).

Here is the best case scenario for Duke:


Best Case: The Blue Devils are back, ending a six-year absence from the Final Four and a nine-year drought without a national title. Aided by a gift-wrapped draw from the Iron Duke Club -- excuse me, the NCAA selection committee -- they breeze through the South Regional. Somehow, 100 percent of the block/charge calls go Duke's way across the span of six games. But mostly, the Devils get inspired play from Nolan Smith, Kyle Singler and Jon Scheyer while winning two games against Texas schools in Houston. Duke then double-Plumlees DeMarcus Cousins in the Final Four, Mike Krzyzewski devises a defense to contain the point guard who spurned him (John Wall) and Kentucky implodes against the more experienced team. That gets Duke its date with Kansas in a rematch of the 1991 title game, and the Blue Devils again take down the Jayhawks to win their fourth title. In gratitude for K being K, the coach is handed a scepter in the postgame celebration and given the right to assign all ACC game officials for the rest of his career. North Carolina wins the NIT, which Duke fans find cute.

We look to be on that right track. I don't believe in jinxing, and this has already been written, so don't shot the messenger. That said, the part that I absolutely love is the last line. Every time I read that, I chuckle. If we win the whole thing, I would have no problems with UNC winning the NIT. And, as Forde said, I would certainly find it cute.

I always want UNC to lose, but can you image 20 years from now when someone asks, "who won the NCAA Tournament in 2010?" and you respond "Duke won it, and UNC won the NIT." Priceless...

Lord Ash
03-31-2010, 06:05 AM
Wow.

Let us play the game. It will be called "Count the Insults." I'll start.

1

2

3

4

5

6...

Forde is an I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this..

JStuart
03-31-2010, 06:13 AM
I remember reading this article before the tournament started that Forde writes every year: Dreams and Nightmares for the 64 Teams (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2010/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5001177).

Here is the best case scenario for Duke:



We look to be on that right track. I don't believe in jinxing, and this has already been written, so don't shot the messenger. That said, the part that I absolutely love is the last line. Every time I read that, I chuckle. If we win the whole thing, I would have no problems with UNC winning the NIT. And, as Forde said, I would certainly find it cute.

I always want UNC to lose, but can you image 20 years from now when someone asks, "who won the NCAA Tournament in 2010?" and you respond "Duke won it, and UNC won the NIT." Priceless...

I think Pat Forde is a real wanker for saying this...and his recent article on 'likeability' :D

ReformedAggie
03-31-2010, 06:51 AM
I think the "Duke double-Plumlee's" comment was hilarious. The rest is typical nasty-speak.

Shane05
03-31-2010, 07:17 AM
I'm getting really sick of the idea that we had an 'easy' bracket. We had an easy #2 seed in our bracket, and that's it. Cal/Louisville was the best 8/9 match-up in the bracket, and playing Baylor in a road game was probably the toughest Elite 8 task of any Final 4 team except WVU. At some point, people are going to have to admit we're just good.

davekay1971
03-31-2010, 08:08 AM
Pat Forde is pretty much a bonehead...but I found the likeability article to be pretty funny.

Sure he has a good time picking on Duke, but he avoids the two things that really get under my skin

1) Shots a Coach K for somehow being Darth Vader, despite all evidence to the contrary. His nod to Coach K taking on the Olympic job was good.

2) Shots at the players (okay, he did the typical overplay of the Laettner stomp...but Laettner did do an immature and stupid thing in the midst of what just happened to become the greatest, and most rewatched, game ever played. If we're going to enjoy the annual replays of The Shot, we'll just have to endure the annual resurrection of The Stomp). He gets point from me for the nice mention of Nolan.

Pick on us (insert your stereotype here) Dukies all you like (after all, we ARE better than everyone else, so we can take it), but don't mess with my Coach and my kids! :)

miramar
03-31-2010, 08:13 AM
A particularly stupid take from a Miami Herald sportswriter:

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/30/1555928/duke-despised-and-it-starts-with.html

moonpie23
03-31-2010, 08:26 AM
don't even respond to him.

dukeblue225
03-31-2010, 08:27 AM
At this point, I've grown so accustomed to this type of hate it no longer bothers me what so ever. I find it hilarious, and it only gives me more motivation to want to run WVU out of the building and go on to win a 4th title. Coming from Western North Carolina where the UNC to Duke fan ratio is around 99:1, I love this hate and find it amusing.

The most feared and best team is the most hated. The more hated we are the better we're doing our job.

91devil
03-31-2010, 08:29 AM
A particularly stupid take from a Miami Herald sportswriter:

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/30/1555928/duke-despised-and-it-starts-with.html


Good to see that virtually all of the comments call out the writer for being an idiot and a terrible writer.

MChambers
03-31-2010, 08:34 AM
Interestingly, next year, Duke won't be so overwhelmingly white. We'll have Kelly, the Plumlee brothers, and perhaps Singler. On the non-white side, we'll have Smith, Dawkins, Curry, Felix, Hairston, Irving, and Thornton. I wonder if the hatred tsunami will subside somewhat.

Of course, the Plumlees will have a big role, so maybe that will give the haters something on which to focus their hatred.

davekay1971
03-31-2010, 08:35 AM
Good to see that virtually all of the comments call out the writer for being an idiot and a terrible writer.

Sent him an email basically telling him that and pointing out the facts that made his "opinion piece" laughable. Probably beneath me and not worth my time, but it was fun to (very politely) slide the dagger in deep and turn it.

davekay1971
03-31-2010, 08:37 AM
Interestingly, next year, Duke won't be so overwhelmingly white. We'll have Kelly, the Plumlee brothers, and perhaps Singler. On the non-white side, we'll have Smith, Dawkins, Curry, Felix, Hairston, Irving, and Thornton. I wonder if the hatred tsunami will subside somewhat.

Of course, the Plumlees will have a big role, so maybe that will give the haters something on which to focus their hatred.

The white players issue is just a simple thing for simple-minded people to latch onto. The Duke-haters will continue to hate as long as Duke is perceived as a rich-white-private school, as long as Coach K is there, and as long as we keep winning. The Duke-hate subsided somewhat from 2005-2009, only to come back in full-force this year. When we're irrelevant, they won't bother to hate us any more. It's my fervent hope that we remain very, very hated for the foreseeable future.

flyingdutchdevil
03-31-2010, 08:44 AM
The white players issue is just a simple thing for simple-minded people to latch onto. The Duke-haters will continue to hate as long as Duke is perceived as a rich-white-private school, as long as Coach K is there, and as long as we keep winning. The Duke-hate subsided somewhat from 2005-2009, only to come back in full-force this year. When we're irrelevant, they won't bother to hate us any more. It's my fervent hope that we remain very, very hated for the foreseeable future.

Hate to break it to you, but Duke is definitely a rich school (the white aspect has already been proven to be false compared to most schools). Our endowment is larger than the other 3 FF teams put together.

Sadly, in this world, rich = supposedly arrogant = "love to hate em."

CDu
03-31-2010, 08:56 AM
Pat Forde is pretty much a bonehead...but I found the likeability article to be pretty funny.

Sure he has a good time picking on Duke, but he avoids the two things that really get under my skin

1) Shots a Coach K for somehow being Darth Vader, despite all evidence to the contrary. His nod to Coach K taking on the Olympic job was good.

2) Shots at the players (okay, he did the typical overplay of the Laettner stomp...but Laettner did do an immature and stupid thing in the midst of what just happened to become the greatest, and most rewatched, game ever played. If we're going to enjoy the annual replays of The Shot, we'll just have to endure the annual resurrection of The Stomp). He gets point from me for the nice mention of Nolan.

Pick on us (insert your stereotype here) Dukies all you like (after all, we ARE better than everyone else, so we can take it), but don't mess with my Coach and my kids! :)

Yeah, it's fine to hate on the jersey. But don't hate on the kids playing the game. That's where people often cross the line. Typically, the media doesn't cross that line, though.

wva_iron_duke
03-31-2010, 09:01 AM
A signicant contribution to Duke hatred is that we have beaten just about every major college program in the Tourney. Between 88-92 it seemed like evey year we beat a midlevel Big 10 team ior the equivalent in the 2nd round. A Michigan fan on a radio show ranted on about how much he hated Duke because they beat the Fab 5. Wasn't Duke like a 10 point favorite in that game?

darthur
03-31-2010, 09:10 AM
Personally, I find Pat Forde to be by far the funniest writer on ESPN CBB. That may not be saying too much, but his articles are consistently entertaining, which isn't true of pretty much anyone else on the site.

Yes, he's a UK fan and yes he cheers against Duke. But at the same time, he shows the program a great deal of respect (even with the easy-bracket needling this year, because guess what - everyone outside of Duke believed we got one).

Just lighten up. He makes jokes and the only tasteless thing about them is that Duke is one of his favorite targets.

superdave
03-31-2010, 09:31 AM
I used to watch a lot of pro wrestling, thank you very much. The best way to get a crowd fired up was to insult them. If you walk into Mobile or Lousiville and tell them how the hometown folk are inbred and in love with their sister's, you get a quick negative reaction or "cheap heat" as the wrestling term goes.

All this anti-Duke stuff from Forde and Whitlock is cheap heat. It happens every year and is an easy substitute for a good column. You can show your editor how many comments people made below your article on the website, etc etc. Cheap heat is typically brainless and it works with any school people care about and people care about winning teams.

Other examples include attacking Calipari's ethics, Kentucky's crazed fans, Donovan's recruiting aggresiveness. I do look forward to the day where Roy Williams gets regularly attacked for foot in mouth disease. not sure why that has not caught on yet....maybe because he doesnt play too many white guys or get 50/50 calls occasionally. Oh wait, he does get lots of calls (Nova in 2005 and last night...).

tecumseh
03-31-2010, 10:46 AM
I thought it would be great fun if Tiger took the Bad Boy image and just ran with it. Kind of like the Raiders of the PGA, started wearing all black, and bringing a gaggle of Hos to the tourney and flipping off unruly fans.

It would be such great theater and you know what his marketing value would not be too bad either. Not as good as before but he would definitely have value.

Billy Dat
03-31-2010, 11:16 AM
I have seen a lot of mean spirited Duke articles but this one really sticks out. Isreal Guttierez of the Miami Herald is a national figure now because John Saunders regularly includes him on ESPN's The Sports Reporters. For such a high profile guy, I am pretty shocked at the content in this slam.

www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/30/1555928/duke-despised-and-it-starts-with.html

This reaction is not hyperbole, it's far worse than anything Doyel has ever written. You'd think K had personally wronged Gutierrez at some point. At least Doyel has the excuse that K wouldn't cooperate with his book.

superdave
03-31-2010, 11:22 AM
Cheap heat. Hope Guttierez enjoys writing about Miami basketball for his career.

NashvilleDevil
03-31-2010, 11:27 AM
I have seen a lot of mean spirited Duke articles but this one really sticks out. Isreal Guttierez of the Miami Herald is a national figure now because John Saunders regularly includes him on ESPN's The Sports Reporters. For such a high profile guy, I am pretty shocked at the content in this slam.

www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/30/1555928/duke-despised-and-it-starts-with.html

This reaction is not hyperbole, it's far worse than anything Doyel has ever written. You'd think K had personally wronged Gutierrez at some point. At least Doyel has the excuse that K wouldn't cooperate with his book.

The comments are pretty funny.

kmmk
03-31-2010, 11:33 AM
At least he got the last one right

"If your team's presence in this Final Four was not predicted by me and therefore makes me look even dumber than usual, deduct five points. (Duke, West Virginia)"

But shouldn't his dumbness account for more than five points? lol.

I know this was all in fun but I hope HE had the fun because I think what he came up with for Duke is ridiculous.

Kelly

Acymetric
03-31-2010, 11:36 AM
I have seen a lot of mean spirited Duke articles but this one really sticks out. Isreal Guttierez of the Miami Herald is a national figure now because John Saunders regularly includes him on ESPN's The Sports Reporters. For such a high profile guy, I am pretty shocked at the content in this slam.

www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/30/1555928/duke-despised-and-it-starts-with.html

This reaction is not hyperbole, it's far worse than anything Doyel has ever written. You'd think K had personally wronged Gutierrez at some point. At least Doyel has the excuse that K wouldn't cooperate with his book.

Care to post some quotes from the article? I don't care to give it any hits.

davidrosenhp
03-31-2010, 11:36 AM
As an alum and 30+ year fan, I hate the Duke haters, but as I read the threads, I've read endless examples of media and fan duke haters with few explanations as to why. Why wife asked me why the, and I struggled to answer. Success is not an answer, or there would be UConn and Tennessee haters in womens, and Izzo/MSU, and KY haters; USC in NCAA football. I know there are some, but not to the degree of Duke.
Theories: coach k comes off as too-good-to-be-true; we are too white (I hope this is not the case for many reasons); we are a yuppie school in the south with a northern student body; sustained backlash against the rock star treatment of Hurley and Laettner (a.k.a the A-Rod/Jeter hater phenonenom); too much TV coverage during regular season; Vitale's boosterism; the student body behavior has become too precious. "All of the above cumulative effect" may be the best (if not easiest) answer

Or maybe we are too sensitive and every successful program thinks they are hated on. I'm not trying to be provocative for its own sake- I just couldn't answer a basic question from my wife

KyDevilinIL
03-31-2010, 11:42 AM
Well I know from experience that Kentucky fans definitely think their program is hated. But I suspect that's wishful thinking. After nearly a decade of minor blips and near invisibility (before this season), I think UK fans want to believe the Cats are hated because they wanted so badly to feel relevant again (before this season).

As for the Duke hate, there is no clear answer, because all the theories apply in one form or another. I've decided it persists simply because it's easy, and it's become cool.

kmmk
03-31-2010, 11:44 AM
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Isn't it unbelievable that you couldn't find an answer for your wife? I think it's because those that are Duke haters are thinking with an irrational mind and what they come up with doesn't make sense. So those of us with common sense can't possibly harbor a guess as to what the real reason for the hate is.

I could brush the hate aside if it weren't for one thing: every article you read about Duke hating cites the same five to ten reasons why Duke sucks. No one comes up with anything orginial, and those five to ten reasons are always ridiculous and could be proven wrong with solid facts pretty quickly.

I guess we all have to agree that neither Duke Basketball success nor the Duke haters are going away. But while the basketball gets better and better, the haters seem to get worse and worse. lol.

Kelly

Billy Dat
03-31-2010, 11:49 AM
Care to post some quotes from the article? I don't care to give it any hits.

"Everyone hates Duke, and we're not even sure why. For some reason, we know that if the devil had a face, it would have little beady eyes (like Mike Krzyzewski's). If he had a voice, it would be nasally and annoying (like K's)"

"But since then (1986-1990), it seems a lot of his colleagues have placed themselves in similar company, and yet, the head Blue Devil remains the most arrogant of the bunch. To this day, he carries around a superiority complex that doesn't match the success - at least not in the past decade."

I'd have to quote the whole article...it really seems almost like a joke.

Jderf
03-31-2010, 11:49 AM
It's sports. People like some teams and dislike others. Nobody really "hates" anyone. Duke sometimes draws a lot of ire for a million different reasons. Some of those reasons are well-founded, others are not. I would chalk it up to a mixture of both-success-and-failure/a-few-hate-inducing-players/potential-over-exposure/perceived-favoritism/perceived-elitism and countless others. (Some people have speculated about reverse racism but I'm not convinced.)

Really though, we're not that special. Nobody hates Duke more than any one else. We just feel it more because we have a small but vocal fanbase. Maybe people just like to cheer for the underdog (which Duke traditionally hasn't been), but I'm not sure I buy that either. It all just gets played up around here because this is a Duke website. It does not need a million different threads. Like I said, it's sports. You cheer for some teams and against others. That's just the way it works.

tecumseh
03-31-2010, 11:54 AM
Like I posted above there are a LOT of Duke lovers out there in fact get this DUKE IS THE MOST POPULAR TEAM IN NCAA BASKETBALL
http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2010/03/15/daily17.html

So these silly articles like "everyone hates Duke" maybe you need to get out more buddy.

Matches
03-31-2010, 11:59 AM
Thing is, we ARE kind of elitist and snobby. Not the players so much (at least not the current players), but a lot of us are as fans, and as much as I love Coach K he often comes across as full of himself and a bit condescending. The Crazies are viewed as being smart-[insert word for rear end] nerds by most other fanbases, particularly as their routines have become more institutionalized and formal (cheer sheets, etc.).

It's NOT just because we're successful. UNC is successful (usually). Michigan State is successful. Kansas is successful.

It's NOT just because we have white players. Other schools also have white players.

Some of it is held over from past players who were viewed as arrogant, but geez... Laettner graduated 18 years ago. Lots of current fans aren't even old enough to remember Laettner as a Duke player. (And yes, that makes me feel very very old, too.)

We as a fanbase are at least partially responsible for the public perception of us - yes the media drives it because it fills airtime and helps get ratings - but it cannot be explained away completely as a media fabrication. People hate us for a reason. A lot of the vitriol directed our way is unfair (e.g. the tiresome refs thing), but we do bring some of it on ourselves.

Highlander
03-31-2010, 12:00 PM
Per the Laettner foot tap, how different was it than Acy's shove in the Baylor game? In my mind, the two plays are pretty comparable if you look at them objectively. Both received Techs and both were retalliation plays in which the earlier foul was not called. For all those haters who claim Laettner should have been ejected for the foot tap, I find it amusing that they also argue Acy's shove was not worthy of a technical.

Ask yourself if Acy were wearing a Duke uniform and did the exact same thing whether people would think it should be a no-call, and you have a perfect strawman to debunk the whole Laettner thing.

But then, Duke gets all the calls, so therefore this is all moot :)

DukieInKansas
03-31-2010, 12:11 PM
Face it, there are going to be people that will always want Duke to lose. They probably have as reasonable and explanation for this as I do if you ask me why I want Carolina to lose. Because they are Carolina is the only reason I have. * There is no logic, just an overwhelming desire to see them lose. And that's ok. We can't all like the same team or be reasonable in our dislikes.





* Mind you, wanting carolina to lose is actually very reasonable. Others wanting Duke to lose, not so much. Of course, I have no bias. ;)

slower
03-31-2010, 12:13 PM
Per the Laettner foot tap, how different was it than Acy's shove in the Baylor game? In my mind, the two plays are pretty comparable if you look at them objectively. Both received Techs and both were retalliation plays in which the earlier foul was not called.

WHAT "earlier foul" are you talking about? Please don't say Jon's "swinging elbow", because that would be REALLY lame.

jipops
03-31-2010, 12:22 PM
We as a fanbase are at least partially responsible for the public perception of us - yes the media drives it because it fills airtime and helps get ratings - but it cannot be explained away completely as a media fabrication. People hate us for a reason. A lot of the vitriol directed our way is unfair (e.g. the tiresome refs thing), but we do bring some of it on ourselves.

At a local level I find this a bit amusing, because as a North Carolinian the Duke fan base is comparatively small to the other large universities in the area. How exactly have we brought this on ourselves? I'm curious as to what you mean by this. Are fans not supposed to be proud of what their favorite team has accomplished? Aren't other fans apt to do the same thing? Do you really think Duke fans somehow compare to the rabidness of Kentucky?

Having gone to school and now working in the Triangle area, among the college basketball fans things remain relatively quiet when Duke has accomplished something great and the other schools have not had the success they had hoped. Occasionally you'll see a Duke flag on a car and some t-shirts sparsed around but that is mostly it. Let me be clear I'm not referencing anything related to talk radio here where any blow-hard can sound like the voice of a thousand people. However, when the shoe is on the other foot everyone is surrounded by the pale blue and conversation about their superiority.

So again, how did we bring this upon ourselves?

I really think people just want someone to hate. Period. The media has and continues to perpetuate a lot of stereotypes that makes it easy for the general public to go along with hating Duke.

Spret42
03-31-2010, 12:25 PM
WHAT "earlier foul" are you talking about? Please don't say Jon's "swinging elbow", because that would be REALLY lame.

He was referring to the charge/block call with Zoubeck. The play could have gone either way. It clearly frustrated him. Instead of shooting a free throw to take a 5 point lead with the opposing team's big man headed to the bench, he was headed the other way and 30 seconds later his team was down 1.

Acy handled it kind of poorly. But I have broken my hand on a cinder block wall after a call I didn't agree with and I wasn't playing in a regional final on national championship so really who am I to judge.

Matches
03-31-2010, 12:32 PM
At a local level I find this a bit amusing, because as a North Carolinian the Duke fan base is comparatively small to the other large universities in the area. How exactly have we brought this on ourselves? I'm curious as to what you mean by this. Are fans not supposed to be proud of what their favorite team has accomplished? Aren't other fans apt to do the same thing? Do you really think Duke fans somehow compare to the rabidness of Kentucky?



I think Kentucky BB fans are looked at kind of like Alabama FB fans - fanatic about their teams, probably moreso than is emotionally healthy. That's not a positive characterization by any means, but it doesn't really inspire hatred. The stereotype is more one to be mocked than hated.

With us the attitude we project at times (and again - NOT talking about the players - I'm talking fans and coach) is that we believe that when we win, it's because we were better people than the opposition. Not that we have better players, or a better coach, but because there's something about us that makes us inherently better. People respond very angrily to those they perceive as stuck up. No one really thinks Kentucky fans are stuck up. Unhinged, maybe, but that's a whole 'nother thing.

The UNC fanbase *does* come off as stuck-up sometimes - ask an N.C. State fan about it - but they're not perceived that way nationally the way we are. Living in NC you're apt to be surrounded by fans of the baby blue, but they're not as much a topic of conversation elsewhere.

Spret42
03-31-2010, 12:39 PM
At a local level I find this a bit amusing, because as a North Carolinian the Duke fan base is comparatively small to the other large universities in the area. How exactly have we brought this on ourselves? I'm curious as to what you mean by this. Are fans not supposed to be proud of what their favorite team has accomplished? Aren't other fans apt to do the same thing? Do you really think Duke fans somehow compare to the rabidness of Kentucky?

Having gone to school and now working in the Triangle area, among the college basketball fans things remain relatively quiet when Duke has accomplished something great and the other schools have not had the success they had hoped. Occasionally you'll see a Duke flag on a car and some t-shirts sparsed around but that is mostly it. Let me be clear I'm not referencing anything related to talk radio here where any blow-hard can sound like the voice of a thousand people. However, when the shoe is on the other foot everyone is surrounded by the pale blue and conversation about their superiority.

So again, how did we bring this upon ourselves?

I really think people just want someone to hate. Period. The media has and continues to perpetuate a lot of stereotypes that makes it easy for the general public to go along with hating Duke.

Stop this.. Duke isn't perfect. All he was saying is that there are part of Duke, the program and it's fan base that do invite dislike and even hatred. Everyone has flaws, why would Duke, the program and it's fanbase be any different.

DukeDiva
03-31-2010, 12:53 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/03/30/duke.anti.hate/

Being my first post I am hoping this hasn't already been posted. It is a SI article from Stewart Mandel on Duke hating and why this years team is different from previous years. Good read. :cool:

Mudge
03-31-2010, 01:16 PM
I read the article by the Duke alum (Kashmir Hill) cited on the DBR main page-- quite understated and well done, by the way-- then I read the response by one Jon Pessah (who, apparently, is already persona non grata here, as he was taken to task by DBR for his hatchet job/shameless attempt to garner publicity with unfounded suppositions and illogical assertions, in the ESPN Magazine article called Krunch Time http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3373328); his bio is listed here (http://trueslant.com/people/jonpessah/), and his response to Kashmir Hill is currently here (http://trueslant.com/jonpessah/). I have one question for Jon Pessa, who clearly has delusions of grandeur, when it comes to his intellectual abilities and writing style:

How do you reconcile that you end your article responding to Kashmir Hill by saying that you "will be rooting for West Virginia" this weekend, and then have posted, over in your biography that: "I now see sports almost always as a metaphor for what is happening around me. I see college athletic programs exploiting poor minority athletes and wonder why it exists and what it says about us."

Clearly, if there is one major college basketball program that is not "exploiting poor minority athletes", it is Duke: we neither have enough of them (apparently) to satisfy the reverse racists in our society, nor do we exploit them, as Duke graduates minority athletes at a rate that exceeds nearly all other colleges, and generally sends them on to highly successful careers outside of playing sports (cf.- Brian Davis, Jason Williams, Johnny Dawkins, Jeff Capel, Reggie Love, Weldon Williams, etc., etc., ad infinitum).

What's your problem, Jon Pessa? It can't be that you resent Duke because that would be rooting for the overdog-- you readily acknowledge that you are an irrepressible NY Yankee fan. Is it just the usual "can't stand to see some, short, white ethnic type (like yourself) succeeding at that which you couldn't dream of doing yourself"... don't the Chosen People have a specific term, just for people like you?

cspan37421
03-31-2010, 01:21 PM
Isn't "racists" a simpler and more accurate term for "reverse racists" ?

northernduke
03-31-2010, 01:24 PM
Many of you will presumably dismiss that claim by pointing to Duke's "easy" road to Indianapolis. The Blue Devils were, after all, a No. 1 seed, and I was among the many on Selection Sunday who felt they drew a more favorable region than No. 1 overall seed Kansas.

But that argument no longer holds water after what's transpired in this tournament. When I said the Jayhawks got a tougher draw than the Blue Devils, I wasn't referring to quality of their opposing No. 9 seeds. It's not Duke's fault that Kansas couldn't handle Northern Iowa, or that Syracuse ran into Butler. Duke's past three games were actually harder when measured by total seed number (No. 8 Cal + No. 4 Purdue + No. 3 Baylor = 15) than fellow Final Four participants Michigan State (No. 4 Maryland, + No. 9 Northern Iowa + No. 6 Tennessee = 19) and West Virginia (No. 10 Missouri + No. 11 Washington + No. 1 Kentucky = 22).

Someone finally stepped up to the plate and made the statement.

COYS
03-31-2010, 01:34 PM
Isn't "racists" a simpler and more accurate term for "reverse racists" ?

I certainly prefer it. "Reverse racism" has a better connotation than "racist" even though they are the same thing. Call it what it is.

As for the article, I agree with Mudge that Pessah's writing style is . . . well . . . almost unreadable and his ultimate conclusion to root for WVU is absolutely baffling!

alteran
03-31-2010, 01:42 PM
Stop this.. Duke isn't perfect. All he was saying is that there are part of Duke, the program and it's fan base that do invite dislike and even hatred. Everyone has flaws, why would Duke, the program and it's fanbase be any different.

But if your point is "hey, we aren't any better than anyone else," it seems to beg the question of how we brought it on ourselves.

Our fans are obnoxious in numbers similar to other schools, I'd imagine. Plus, there's simply less of us, as much of our opposition is from much larger schools. The Duke fan base does not explain the animosity.

RoyalBlue08
03-31-2010, 02:07 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/03/30/duke.anti.hate/

Being my first post I am hoping this hasn't already been posted. It is a SI article from Stewart Mandel on Duke hating and why this years team is different from previous years. Good read. :cool:

I am pretty sure every part of this argument has been made many times on this board, but it is nice to see it in "print" out in the mainstream somewhere. Who says you can't write a logical, fact driven column about this Duke team. I would love to see some of the haters take on this column.

davidrosenhp
03-31-2010, 02:11 PM
Like I posted above there are a LOT of Duke lovers out there in fact get this DUKE IS THE MOST POPULAR TEAM IN NCAA BASKETBALL
http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2010/03/15/daily17.html

So these silly articles like "everyone hates Duke" maybe you need to get out more buddy.

I raised a question that relates directly to to the fact that there are more mentions on this board about Steve Lavin then seem appropriate, and that few posters who complain about hating (and that's a lot of posters) suggest reasons why.

Why do you need to tell me to "get out more, buddy." With all the angry rhetoric in public discource, I'd expect a bit more respect from a fellow alum.

Kewlswim
03-31-2010, 02:12 PM
Hi,

People who like to say things like, "It started after the X number of FFs and after Coach K was a household name" I think our wrong. I went to an ACC tournament in 1986, already then Duke was really disliked. I think some of it had to do with how obnoxious we were--sort of in a funny way to me anyway.

Over the years Duke would do stuff like this: When student were picking up tickets at the ACC will-call, other teams were in a neat line. Duke had no line, everyone smooshed against the glass screaming. Total pandemonium. Too funny. However, it seemed to annoy the "genteel" southern schools.

Duke fans were really loud and stood up the whole game.

Duke, the name, sounds pretentious and full of snobs. I was told that way back before we had a ton of basketball success year in and year out.

Duke student-athletes acted like they were at an Ivy-league school or something. That was a paraphrase from a Kentucky sports writer after the 1986 FF. He felt it was inappropriate that only Duke players were asked about school. I asked him if it was inappropriate why didn't he make it right by asking the Louisville players about Louisville the school? He said he wouldn't, it was inappropriate period--school isn't something that should be talked about at a FF. Furthermore, Mr. Kentucky Sports-Writer the Duke kids weren't asking the questions, why get mad at them and the school when they aren't the ones who ask the questions? I kid you not, you can't make this stuff up.

In Short, I have a way of making ourselves no longer be hated as much. We need to change the name of the school, no longer have student-athletes, no longer have students and fans who vociferously support the school formerly known as Duke, and probably let in everyone who applies thus ensuring snobs won't come because as we all know snobs don't mingle with the less fortunate and "of course" the school formerly known as Duke only had kids from the upper-class in attendance. Whose in? I'm not. I think I rather be hated than take the steps to undue the past whether that hatred is justified or not.

GO DUKE!!

Billy Dat
03-31-2010, 02:12 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/03/30/duke.anti.hate/

Being my first post I am hoping this hasn't already been posted. It is a SI article from Stewart Mandel on Duke hating and why this years team is different from previous years. Good read. :cool:

Good for Mandel...a writer who actually holds himself accountable for what he's written in the past, revists those articles, and talks about how things have changed with this current team.

At least the "Duke Hate" story is actually being covered from both sides.

Spret42
03-31-2010, 02:21 PM
But if your point is "hey, we aren't any better than anyone else," it seems to beg the question of how we brought it on ourselves.

Our fans are obnoxious in numbers similar to other schools, I'd imagine. Plus, there's simply less of us, as much of our opposition is from much larger schools. The Duke fan base does not explain the animosity.

I really don't want to get too deep into this because I think Duke fans should just enjoy their team and stop worrying so much about this. Suffice it to say I think Duke and it's fans are in a tough spot.

Big state schools are viewed as belonging to all the people of large areas.

Duke is viewed as an elite school whose fans believe belong only to a hand picked select few, both on and off the court. Duke fans, and even Coach K, sometimes help that image, even when they don't mean to.

yum dukie
03-31-2010, 02:24 PM
is that Nolan is pretty much immune to criticism for clapping on defense when he's guarding the opposing ball-handler who is bringing it up the floor. he does it at those times in the game one would expect floor-slapping.

yes, i know the clapping is obviously not a Duke-only thing, lots of other players elsewhere do it. but it's just...interesting...that i don't hear opposing fans or journalists talk about what they could perceive as a cocky gesture.

which is fine with me. it always fires me up just by watching it, that's for sure.

alteran
03-31-2010, 03:06 PM
I really don't want to get too deep into this because I think Duke fans should just enjoy their team and stop worrying so much about this. Suffice it to say I think Duke and it's fans are in a tough spot.

Big state schools are viewed as belonging to all the people of large areas.

Duke is viewed as an elite school whose fans believe belong only to a hand picked select few, both on and off the court. Duke fans, and even Coach K, sometimes help that image, even when they don't mean to.

Dude, you are so right.

I'm going to stop letting the Duke hate get to me right after I stop letting the people driving slow in the passing lane get to me; about the same time that I start eating right and exercising; about the same time I start doing my taxes before April 14th. :D

I know what wisdom looks like-- it's just that I don't have it.

I DO have enough wisdom to actually enjoy the good moments, though. I am thoroughly enjoying this time. To be clear, I actually don't dwell too much on the fan hatorade-- it's the national media hatorade that gets on my nerves. I really don't see anything like it out there.

The only thing I was reacting to was that we brought this on ourselves. I don't buy that. Not at all.

Spret42
03-31-2010, 03:09 PM
Dude, you are so right.

I'm going to stop letting the Duke hate get to me right after I stop letting the people driving slow in the passing lane get to me; about the same time that I start eating right and exercising; about the same time I start doing my taxes before April 14th. :D

I know what wisdom looks like-- it's just that I don't have it.

I DO have enough wisdom to actually enjoy the good moments, though. I am thoroughly enjoying this time. To be clear, I actually don't dwell too much on the fan hatorade-- it's the national media hatorade that gets on my nerves. I really don't see anything like it out there.

The only thing I was reacting to was that we brought this on ourselves. I don't buy that. Not at all.

I would never say Duke brought it entirely or even mostly on itself. The hate is way out of proportion.

BlueHeaven
03-31-2010, 03:33 PM
Here's one from the Miami Herald today...must be a UM grad.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/30/1555928/duke-despised-and-it-starts-with.html

Although the comments take him to task fairly nicely!

JonPessah
03-31-2010, 05:44 PM
I read the article by the Duke alum (Kashmir Hill) cited on the DBR main page-- quite understated and well done, by the way-- then I read the response by one Jon Pessah (who, apparently, is already persona non grata here, as he was taken to task by DBR for his hatchet job/shameless attempt to garner publicity with unfounded suppositions and illogical assertions, in the ESPN Magazine article called Krunch Time http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3373328); his bio is listed here (http://trueslant.com/people/jonpessah/), and his response to Kashmir Hill is currently here (http://trueslant.com/jonpessah/). I have one question for Jon Pessa, who clearly has delusions of grandeur, when it comes to his intellectual abilities and writing style:

How do you reconcile that you end your article responding to Kashmir Hill by saying that you "will be rooting for West Virginia" this weekend, and then have posted, over in your biography that: "I now see sports almost always as a metaphor for what is happening around me. I see college athletic programs exploiting poor minority athletes and wonder why it exists and what it says about us."

Clearly, if there is one major college basketball program that is not "exploiting poor minority athletes", it is Duke: we neither have enough of them (apparently) to satisfy the reverse racists in our society, nor do we exploit them, as Duke graduates minority athletes at a rate that exceeds nearly all other colleges, and generally sends them on to highly successful careers outside of playing sports (cf.- Brian Davis, Jason Williams, Johnny Dawkins, Jeff Capel, Reggie Love, Weldon Williams, etc., etc., ad infinitum).

What's your problem, Jon Pessa? It can't be that you resent Duke because that would be rooting for the overdog-- you readily acknowledge that you are an irrepressible NY Yankee fan. Is it just the usual "can't stand to see some, short, white ethnic type (like yourself) succeeding at that which you couldn't dream of doing yourself"... don't the Chosen People have a specific term, just for people like you?

First, why so angry? Hasn't Duke taught you to argue your point without insulting the integrity of the person you are arguing against?

Second, regarding how to reconcile writing about social injustice with at times rooting against Duke would be to believe that Duke is as pure as you say. I ask you to consider that Dukes does not play in a vacuum. They are as much a part of an exploitive system as any other member of the college entertainment industry, one that generates billions of dollars of revenue.

And is there really that much difference between paying the top high school stars under the table as attracting upper middle class players with a country club lifestyle that costs $397,000 per player and access to many of the post powerful executives on Wall Street?

Either way, they still pay in the same game.

jipops
03-31-2010, 05:47 PM
Stop this.. Duke isn't perfect. All he was saying is that there are part of Duke, the program and it's fan base that do invite dislike and even hatred. Everyone has flaws, why would Duke, the program and it's fanbase be any different.
Stop what? I was asking a fundamenatal question. Where from my post did you derive that I think we are perfect? No group of fans is perfect. It is part ofd what makes us fans. I did not understand from the earlier post how Duke fans had some general responsibility to bringing so much hatred to Duke.

Duvall
03-31-2010, 05:55 PM
And is there really that much difference between paying the top high school stars under the table as attracting upper middle class players with a country club lifestyle that costs $397,000 per player and access to many of the post powerful executives on Wall Street?

What does this even mean? Country club lifestyle?

jipops
03-31-2010, 06:00 PM
I think Kentucky BB fans are looked at kind of like Alabama FB fans - fanatic about their teams, probably moreso than is emotionally healthy. That's not a positive characterization by any means, but it doesn't really inspire hatred. The stereotype is more one to be mocked than hated.

With us the attitude we project at times (and again - NOT talking about the players - I'm talking fans and coach) is that we believe that when we win, it's because we were better people than the opposition. Not that we have better players, or a better coach, but because there's something about us that makes us inherently better. People respond very angrily to those they perceive as stuck up. No one really thinks Kentucky fans are stuck up. Unhinged, maybe, but that's a whole 'nother thing.

The UNC fanbase *does* come off as stuck-up sometimes - ask an N.C. State fan about it - but they're not perceived that way nationally the way we are. Living in NC you're apt to be surrounded by fans of the baby blue, but they're not as much a topic of conversation elsewhere.

I do buy this explanation to an extent but I still think it is largely unfair. If Duke was a public institution of generally lesser academic standards, this specific perception would be lessened, in my opinion anyway.

That being said, I do agree there is an element of Duke contingent out there that does feel they are above others. Though I believe this would occur for any school that is private with high academic standards and a very successful basketball program

Spret42
03-31-2010, 06:35 PM
Stop what? I was asking a fundamenatal question. Where from my post did you derive that I think we are perfect? No group of fans is perfect. It is part ofd what makes us fans. I did not understand from the earlier post how Duke fans had some general responsibility to bringing so much hatred to Duke.



I shouldn't have said perfect cause I didn't think you thought Duke was perfect. But the rest still stands. There are parts of Duke, the program and it's fan base that do invite dislike and even hatred and I can't believe even the biggest Duke fan can't see that.

sagegrouse
03-31-2010, 06:36 PM
Isn't "racists" a simpler and more accurate term for "reverse racists" ?

I think the phenomenom is fairly subtle and has to do with this: Because Duke has white players (this year a whole passel), the critic, or hate monger, cannot be assailed as a racist in the traditional sense. People who direct hate at other programs that are almost entirely black could be vulnerable to that charge. In that sense, Duke is a "safe" target.

I am still waiting for a psychiatrist or psychologist to sound off on a related topic: With white kids who express hatred for white players like Ferry, Hurley, and JJ, it is almost like a self-hatred being expressed. Or else, insane physical jealousy of a perceived rival.

Oh, well.... This is an uncomfortable topic for most of us, including me, and I will hereby retreat to looking up restaurants in Indy. :) ;)

sagegrouse

roywhite
03-31-2010, 06:39 PM
I shouldn't have said perfect cause I didn't think you thought Duke was perfect. But the rest still stands. There are parts of Duke, the program and it's fan base that do invite dislike and even hatred.

Invite hatred???

What does that mean...that's it okay for opposing fans to spit on our players, throw things, F-Duke, F-Scheyer??

Please explain.

Spret42
03-31-2010, 06:50 PM
Invite hatred???

What does that mean...that's it okay for opposing fans to spit on our players, throw things, F-Duke, F-Scheyer??

Please explain.

I would never say that acting on the hatred is ok nor would I ever condone that kind of thing. It is completely and totally out of bounds.

Matches said:

With us the attitude we project at times (and again - NOT talking about the players - I'm talking fans and coach) is that we believe that when we win, it's because we were better people than the opposition. Not that we have better players, or a better coach, but because there's something about us that makes us inherently better. People respond very angrily to those they perceive as stuck up. No one really thinks Kentucky fans are stuck up. Unhinged, maybe, but that's a whole 'nother thing.


I would agree with that. Sometimes Duke fans, and Coach K as well come across as apple polishers.

roywhite
03-31-2010, 06:54 PM
I would never say that acting on the hatred is ok nor would I ever condone that kind of thing. It is completely and totally out of bounds.

Matches said:

With us the attitude we project at times (and again - NOT talking about the players - I'm talking fans and coach) is that we believe that when we win, it's because we were better people than the opposition. Not that we have better players, or a better coach, but because there's something about us that makes us inherently better. People respond very angrily to those they perceive as stuck up. No one really thinks Kentucky fans are stuck up. Unhinged, maybe, but that's a whole 'nother thing.


I would agree with that. Sometimes Duke fans, and Coach K as well come across as apple polishers.

Look, I really don't get your points at all. What do you mean Coach K comes across as an "apple polisher?"

Are you a Duke fan by the way? That's not required to post here certainly, but I just don't know where you're coming from.

jipops
03-31-2010, 06:54 PM
I shouldn't have said perfect cause I didn't think you thought Duke was perfect. But the rest still stands. There are parts of Duke, the program and it's fan base that do invite dislike and even hatred and I can't believe even the biggest Duke fan can't see that.

I guess I just don't see how Duke fans invite it any more than others. Everyone has warts.

weezie
03-31-2010, 06:58 PM
That's and interesting accusation. Just who does Coach K have to impress at this stage of his career.
Haters just want to drag everything/everyone down to their miserable level. And I do mean down.

The apples polish themselves for Coach K.

Spret42
03-31-2010, 07:21 PM
All I ever meant to do was agree with that one graph from Matches. I thought it was a fairly reasonable point.

stickdog
03-31-2010, 09:50 PM
First, why so angry? Hasn't Duke taught you to argue your point without insulting the integrity of the person you are arguing against?

Second, regarding how to reconcile writing about social injustice with at times rooting against Duke would be to believe that Duke is as pure as you say. I ask you to consider that Dukes does not play in a vacuum. They are as much a part of an exploitive system as any other member of the college entertainment industry, one that generates billions of dollars of revenue.

And is there really that much difference between paying the top high school stars under the table as attracting upper middle class players with a country club lifestyle that costs $397,000 per player and access to many of the post powerful executives on Wall Street?

Either way, they still pay in the same game.

How is your prediction business (http://jonpessah.com/2009/07/10/krzyzewski-and-the-olympics/) going these days, Jon?

Are you sure you aren't rooting against Duke because your predictions of Coach K's demise last July now look as silly as your claim that Duke has not landed a big man prospect since Carlos Boozer?

Mudge
03-31-2010, 10:25 PM
1) First, why so angry? Hasn't Duke taught you to argue your point without insulting the integrity of the person you are arguing against?
Second, regarding how to reconcile writing about social injustice with at times rooting against Duke would be to believe that Duke is as pure as you say. I ask you to consider that 2) Dukes does not play in a vacuum. They are as much a part of an exploitive system as any other member of the college entertainment industry, one that generates billions of dollars of revenue.

And 3) is there really that much difference between paying the top high school stars under the table as attracting upper middle class players with a country club lifestyle that costs $397,000 per player and access to many of the post powerful executives on Wall Street?

Either way, they still pay in the same game.

1) I'm angry because I don't believe that even liberal, left-wing, bleeding-heart Jon Pessah really believes most of the half-baked, outlandish, and unsupported claims that you made in Krunch Time-- you knew you were being paid to get a rise out of people, be outrageous, and draw in readers-- and if it pissed off a bunch of toffs at Duke, so much the better, as Coach K's inherently conservative world view is inimical to yours, and ESPN's hierarchy (living cheek-by-jowl with UConn and several other Big East schools) has never had any love lost for Duke and the ACC (even before the ACC absconded with BC, Miami, and Virginia Tech, and had Syracuse and West Virginia available for the asking). You took advantage of the unprecedented access to K, not, for example, to reveal many of the incredible charitable works that he does that never get mentioned anywhere (because that's dog bites man), but rather to trump up a thin gruel of imaginary and supposed failings of the man, in order to argue that he has lost his fastball, and is phoning it in, and is ready to quit any moment-- you must be feeling particularly foolish at this moment, as this year's squad challenging for the National Championship, despite the imminent loss of only one key player, even before the matriculation of Kyrie Irving heralds the start of a third Golden Era of Duke basketball under Coach K, already belies your sour, warped assessment of 2+ years ago... of course you will be rooting for West Virginia-- it's the only faint hope you can still hold that the weak, flawed house-of-cards argument that you made 2 years ago will not be shown to be the puddle of piddle that it always was.

2) No, Duke is not "as much a part of the exploitive system as any other member of the college entertainment industry"-- Duke offers its student athletes more in return than all but a handful of other major Division I schools (Stanford, Northwestern, Notre Dame, perhaps Georgetown)-- Duke offers its student athletes a college degree second in quality to none at the Div. I level, and does virtually everything in its power to ensure that those athletes earn and receive their degrees. Duke graduates athletes (minority or not) at among the highest rates of any Div. I school, over any time period you care to consider. Before you made your silly, childish retort that you "will be rooting for West Virginia" this weekend, did you even stop to think about what Bob Huggins has done for/with the vast majority of his basketball recruits over the last 30 years that Coach K has been at Duke? I am the first person to say that Huggins is a great (on-court) basketball coach, who gets terrific results from his often talent-limited squads-- but what has happened to his players off the court is not a pretty picture-- do a little research on the sad current state of Dontonio Wingfield and Steve Logan (two of Huggins' all-time highest profile recruits); look into what has happened with Cory Blount, one of Huggins' most successful pro players. Look at the incredibly tiny number of Huggins' players who have gotten their degrees and/or gone on to any meaningful success in their careers, outside of pro basketball-- and contrast that with the enormously wide-ranging success of K's players (off the court), and then tell me with a straight face that there is no difference between what K is doing and what Huggs is doing-- K is absolutely doing God's work, while Huggs is doing whatever he can that serves his own purposes... you should be ashamed of yourself, as someone who claims to be concerned about exploitation of poor, minority athletes, to claim that you are supporting WVU this weekend-- you contemptible hypocrite.

3) And finally, if Duke should make high-powered corporate executives accessible to their student athletes, WHAT OF IT? This is only another way that Duke attempts to more than pay back its athletes' labors with near priceless (and legal, under the rules) rewards. If anything, you should be awed that Duke can provide the kind of access to power (and education) that allows an athlete like Reggie Love the opportunity to become the right-hand man to the President of the United States. If you really cared about the athletes, you would be thrilled that Jason Williams has been able to land on his feet, and earn a high six-figure income for his oratorical skills, after his pro basketball career was tragically cut short after 1 season, or that Brian Davis has done so well for himself in real estate development (without ever playing NBA basketball) that he was able to beat the nearly 10 years older Michael Jordan to the punch, in making a realistic offer to buy an NBA franchise. As for the "country club lifestyle", I don't know what you witnessed, with your all-access pass, but the players at Duke live in the same dorms as the rest of the students (not some athletes-only Taj Mahal, like the Joe B. Hall Lodge and garden of earthly delights at the U. of Kentucky)-- this is another of your lurid, unsupported, and outrageous assertions, calculated to get a reaction, without having to document the truth of the situation or the facts on the ground. It's almost not even worth the time to argue with you-- but then all of us Duke grads are learning this same sorry fact about the vast majority of the ink-stained wretches in your profession, these last few weeks.

Jim3k
03-31-2010, 10:38 PM
First, Mr. Pessah, I, for one, appreciate your coming to the Board to defend yourself. I am certain that most of us can have a civil conversation with you. I am certainly willing to do so.

Second, let me assure you that poster Mudge speaks for himself and not for the Board as a community. In fact, none of us speaks for the Board as a whole. Even the editors/moderators. Each of us has his/her own opinion about things – same as you.

Most of us are not journalists, though at least three inhabit this place. As far as I know, none of them has weighed in on either your blog post or your post here. Still, there are some very knowledgeable people here – steeped in basketball, professional writing, statistics, a physicist or two – even some doctors – certainly lawyers, who know how to argue and who know how to present data. Many are experts in their field, perhaps more accomplished than you know.

It’s also true we have young people whose skills are yet to develop and more mature people who may not be as analytical or as measured as they might be. Still, we are generally pretty good observers and often comment on what we see.

For example, we generally recognize an insult when we see it. Indeed, in your blog (http://trueslant.com/jonpessah/) you started your post with a two-lede insult. (Unfortunately, the DBR filter will not allow to submit your actual word.) Nevertheless, your first paragraph is on its face condescending to your ‘friend’ Kashmir Hill.


Seems everyone still hates Duke, even though this is the first time the Blue Devils have reached the Final Four since 2004. So Kash, let me be the first—way to go 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!

In the same breath you use the term ‘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.’ Having spent time on campus – apparently with less than full approbation – you knew full well when you wrote that, you were slapping our face. That has always been the Carolina insult – often painted on our Campus Drive bridge in powder blue. We certainly recognized your purpose.

So, you are clearly willing to engage in condescending and sophomoric language at the very start of your blog – even risking the good will of a colleague. Good setup for an article’s theme? Professional? I think in hindsight you would agree that the answer is ‘no’ on both counts.

Despite your history as journalist, you didn’t introduce yourself in a credible fashion. Moreover, your personal feelings (what? Resentment? Anger? Envy?) are displayed so transparently that a reader must think you did it deliberately. So why… do you accuse Mudge of being angry at you? After all, you knew someone would be. Why don’t you just trumpet it, instead of feigning concern for the tone of the discourse?


First, why so angry? Hasn't Duke taught you to argue your point without insulting the integrity of the person you are arguing against?

You got what you wanted. You trolled for it and now you come to defend yourself? Daring of you. Maybe even… arrogant?

In your blog, you then try to explain – in what can only be described as in a smarmy manner – your effort at treating Coach K fairly and describing the university in respectful terms. Yet, even there one can see your anger – still not understanding that your “man at a crossroads” theme was 180 degrees inaccurate – and defensively painting yourself as a victim when called out on it. Bleah! Even if… doubtful as it is … your quotes were correct, you still committed an unnecessary hatchet job. To what purpose?

Evidence of current Duke hatred? You bet.

And, that defensiveness is seen again when you respond to Mudge’s commentary:


Second, regarding how to reconcile writing about social injustice with at times rooting against Duke would be to believe that Duke is as pure as you say. I ask you to consider that Dukes (sic) does not play in a vacuum. They are as much a part of an exploitive system as any other member of the college entertainment industry, one that generates billions of dollars of revenue.

Mudge never suggested purity. What he did say was that Duke was succeeding in the system not only on the playing court, but also in the classroom. Duke athletes graduate at a much higher rate than nearly every other university. (Duke, Stanford and Notre Dame are the consistent leaders in this regard.) Therefore, fair exchange is not exploitive. Agree or disagree with the system, Mudge made a fair observation.

Furthermore, your argument is a bit half-baked – your phrase “college entertainment industry that generates billions of dollars of revenue” – suggests that it is a for-profit industry. And you well know that’s not true. Football and basketball are major funding sources for non-revenue sports. Without them, the college experience would not be as enriching as it is. (That the system is sometimes abused is of no relevance to your commentary.)

Then you kind of get into it a bit deeper than you know.


And is there really that much difference between paying the top high school stars under the table as attracting upper middle class players with a country club lifestyle that costs $397,000 per player and access to many of the post powerful executives on Wall Street?

Are you condoning paying high school players under the table? Seems to me that’s exactly what you’re doing. Surely you are not that foolish. Why do you equate that with what Duke does? So far, Duke has never been involved in a scandal, not regarding money or grades or nearly anything. (Knock on wood.) And don’t bother raising the David Thompson thing or the Corey Maggette contentions. You’d lose either on the facts or the triviality of it. In any event, all long past . What you said here suggests that you are so cynical as to believe that all colleges cheat. Most don’t as a matter of simple truth. So your high school payments have something to do with Duke? Please...that comparison is simply feckless.

And what’s this about a country club lifestyle? Are you speaking of Duke or Lamar (to take one example)? Every university is different. And few of them, including Duke, are country clubs. Even with a world class golf course, I doubt you can say that, aside from the golfers, there is even a country club atmosphere. (I might go with 24-Hour Fitness Center.) All of the gyms and weight rooms reek of perspiration. The meals given to those on athletic scholarships are cafeteria quality. No liquor (most are too young, anyway). So what does your statement mean? At Duke, the athletes live in dorms that are ok, but not luxurious. Same for most of the other NCAA schools. And where does that $397,000 come from? Even at Duke the total value of a full scholarship is only about $200,000 plus room and board. I doubt room and board add up to another $197,000. (Well, maybe redshirts get a chunk I didn’t count.) For state universities, the number is far lower, but the degree is nonetheless valuable.

And access to Wall Street? Maybe a few. But not true for most. Indeed, most Duke students don’t have that. Many don’t want it, anyway. By making that contention, you are playing the so-called ‘elite, rich, white school’ argument which, if you’ve read this thread, has been shown to be factually unsupportable.

Your exaggerations here, together with your resentment, really lead readers to a rejection, not of your facts so much, but of your logic and eventually to label you as a Duke hater-in-fact -- not even a Duke hater of the UNC kind -- just a garden-variety green-eye. At least after college Duke and UNC graduates have no trouble working alongside one another. Can you say that now of your relationship with Ms. Hill? I expect your condescending attitude toward her may have just become intolerable to her.

Drop by anytime. We can continue this dialogue.

coldriver10
03-31-2010, 11:14 PM
1) I'm angry because I don't believe that even liberal, left-wing, bleeding-heart Jon Pessah really believes most of the half-baked, outlandish, and unsupported claims that you made in Krunch Time-- you knew you were being paid to get a rise out of people, be outrageous, and draw in readers-- and if it pissed off a bunch of toffs at Duke, so much the better, as Coach K's inherently conservative world view is inimical to yours, and ESPN's hierarchy (living cheek-by-jowl with UConn and several other Big East schools) has never had any love lost for Duke and the ACC (even before the ACC absconded with BC, Miami, and Virginia Tech, and had Syracuse and West Virginia available for the asking). You took advantage of the unprecedented access to K, not, for example, to reveal many of the incredible charitable works that he does that never get mentioned anywhere (because that's dog bites man), but rather to trump up a thin gruel of imaginary and supposed failings of the man, in order to argue that he has lost his fastball, and is phoning it in, and is ready to quit any moment-- you must be feeling particularly foolish at this moment, as this year's squad challenging for the National Championship, despite the imminent loss of only one key player, even before the matriculation of Kyrie Irving heralds the start of a third Golden Era of Duke basketball under Coach K, already belies your sour, warped assessment of 2+ years ago... of course you will be rooting for West Virginia-- it's the only faint hope you can still hold that the weak, flawed house-of-cards argument that you made 2 years ago will not be shown to be the puddle of piddle that it always was.

2) No, Duke is not "as much a part of the exploitive system as any other member of the college entertainment industry"-- Duke offers its student athletes more in return than all but a handful of other major Division I schools (Stanford, Northwestern, Notre Dame, perhaps Georgetown)-- Duke offers its student athletes a college degree second in quality to none at the Div. I level, and does virtually everything in its power to ensure that those athletes earn and receive their degrees. Duke graduates athletes (minority or not) at among the highest rates of any Div. I school, over any time period you care to consider. Before you made your silly, childish retort that you "will be rooting for West Virginia" this weekend, did you even stop to think about what Bob Huggins has done for/with the vast majority of his basketball recruits over the last 30 years that Coach K has been at Duke? I am the first person to say that Huggins is a great (on-court) basketball coach, who gets terrific results from his often talent-limited squads-- but what has happened to his players off the court is not a pretty picture-- do a little research on the sad current state of Dontonio Wingfield and Steve Logan (two of Huggins' all-time highest profile recruits); look into what has happened with Cory Blount, one of Huggins' most successful pro players. Look at the incredibly tiny number of Huggins' players who have gotten their degrees and/or gone on to any meaningful success in their careers, outside of pro basketball-- and contrast that with the enormously wide-ranging success of K's players (off the court), and then tell me with a straight face that there is no difference between what K is doing and what Huggs is doing-- K is absolutely doing God's work, while Huggs is doing whatever he can that serves his own purposes... you should be ashamed of yourself, as someone who claims to be concerned about exploitation of poor, minority athletes, to claim that you are supporting WVU this weekend-- you contemptible hypocrite.

3) And finally, if Duke should make high-powered corporate executives accessible to their student athletes, WHAT OF IT? This is only another way that Duke attempts to more than pay back its athletes' labors with near priceless (and legal, under the rules) rewards. If anything, you should be awed that Duke can provide the kind of access to power (and education) that allows an athlete like Reggie Love the opportunity to become the right-hand man to the President of the United States. If you really cared about the athletes, you would be thrilled that Jason Williams has been able to land on his feet, and earn a high six-figure income for his oratorical skills, after his pro basketball career was tragically cut short after 1 season, or that Brian Davis has done so well for himself in real estate development (without ever playing NBA basketball) that he was able to beat the nearly 10 years older Michael Jordan to the punch, in making a realistic offer to buy an NBA franchise. As for the "country club lifestyle", I don't know what you witnessed, with your all-access pass, but the players at Duke live in the same dorms as the rest of the students (not some athletes-only Taj Mahal, like the Joe B. Hall Lodge and garden of earthly delights at the U. of Kentucky)-- this is another of your lurid, unsupported, and outrageous assertions, calculated to get a reaction, without having to document the truth of the situation or the facts on the ground. It's almost not even worth the time to argue with you-- but then all of us Duke grads are learning this same sorry fact about the vast majority of the ink-stained wretches in your profession, these last few weeks.
I try to stay away from these sorts of arguments but I just had to say...wow. Whether or not I agree with the manner in which you argued every point, you've said much of what's been on a lot of people's minds (including my own). Well done. I'm tired of defending Duke to the people whose hate for it is based on misperceptions and blinded bias. Sadly, no one at ESPN is going to read your rant...and sadder still, even if someone did, they wouldn't mention it. Duke love isn't what sells.

Edit: And while I'm obviously biased as a Duke alum/student, it's easier for us to know the truth rather than merely speculate, which is what journalists are frequently left/forced to do. And I'll add that it's not a Coach K or bust thing for me either. I have the utmost respect for other great coaches out there that also espouse personal greatness and ethics, Tom Izzo absolutely being one. Bob Huggins...not so much.

tecumseh
03-31-2010, 11:56 PM
One of the more recent trivia facts about WVU athletics was that Chris Henry and Pacman Jones were roommates. Something to ponder when rooting for their athletic departments success.

Mudge
04-01-2010, 12:10 AM
I try to stay away from these sorts of arguments but I just had to say...wow. Whether or not I agree with the manner in which you argued every point, you've said much of what's been on a lot of people's minds (including my own). Well done. I'm tired of defending Duke to the people whose hate for it is based on misperceptions and blinded bias. Sadly, no one at ESPN is going to read your rant...and sadder still, even if someone did, they wouldn't mention it. Duke love isn't what sells.

Edit: And while I'm obviously biased as a Duke alum/student, it's easier for us to know the truth rather than merely speculate, which is what journalists are frequently left/forced to do. And I'll add that it's not a Coach K or bust thing for me either. I have the utmost respect for other great coaches out there that also espouse personal greatness and ethics, Tom Izzo absolutely being one. Bob Huggins...not so much.

Actually, there is a better than decent prospect that at least one (former) ESPN writer/editor is going to read it, as that was Jon Pessah's role, when he belched up that hatchet job on Coach K in ESPN Magazine a couple of years ago-- maybe his agitation tactics didn't work sufficiently well-- he is no longer with ESPN, which suggests that he was unable to provoke enough of the Duke nation to read (and retort to) his slams on Coach K to merit being kept on the payroll... it's the main reason I gave up reading Bill Simmons and returned for cash the copy of "To Hate Like This..." that someone bought me for Christmas-- these activities only put money in the pocket of uninformed, irredeemable, knuckleheaded Duke-haters.

Starter
04-01-2010, 12:28 AM
I checked out Pessah's article and bio. All I can say is that I'm simply looking forward to his future commentaries on "Tigers Woods."

As for his article last summer predicting doom for Coach K and Duke, honestly, I can't kill him on the premise. I can understand someone thinking that way at the time. That doesn't change that I'm ecstatic they're proving him wrong, particularly since I know how much that probably gets under his skin.

Enjoy the Final Four, Mr. Pessah. And the Masters, I guess -- Tigers is playing, in case you haven't heard.

devildownunder
04-01-2010, 01:56 AM
I am still waiting for a psychiatrist or psychologist to sound off on a related topic: With white kids who express hatred for white players like Ferry, Hurley, and JJ, it is almost like a self-hatred being expressed. Or else, insane physical jealousy of a perceived rival.

Oh, well.... This is an uncomfortable topic for most of us, including me, and I will hereby retreat to looking up restaurants in Indy. :) ;)

sagegrouse

Sorry to harp on something that makes you uncomfortable but if you ever hear an explanation for this phenomenon that you feel has the ring of truth, please post it here and let me know about it. I'm not white and I really don't get it. It's extremely rare for me to feel like someone's ethnic background is a real barrier to me understanding their perspective or feelings but this would appear to be one of those times.


I am, however, 100% certain that the number of white stars Duke has had over the years has hurt Duke in the likeability sweepstakes -- with white and non-white fans.

papa whiskey
04-01-2010, 06:53 AM
Doug Gottleib is filling in for Mike Golic on Mike and Mike. He is talking about how Coach K influences officials but if you listen to him talk he acknowledges that all coaches influence officials but Coach K is just better at it. He then choked on a big chug of haterade lol.

weezie
04-01-2010, 07:00 AM
I know many people here love the ESPN lineup but "Mike and Mike" just make me want to cry with their completely tiresome act. Adding Dougie G to the mix just makes it all so much worse. A panoply of boobdom.

TampaDukie
04-01-2010, 07:01 AM
Gottleib has been pretty measured and rational lately, so I'm not trying to throw any shade his way, but I thought his argument this morning was so stupid. Coach K casts a bigger shadow than the other coaches because the refs are afraid he might call up and get them unassigned from Duke's games? Really, Doug?

It made me laugh a few minutes later when Jim Boeheim came on and refuted what he said, by saying the refs don't care about the coaches and don't respond any differently to them. And then he pointed out that "people used to say Dean Smith got all the calls, and then Bob Knight, and then Coach K, and John Thompson." Indeed.

millerecu
04-01-2010, 07:04 AM
I wake up to Mike and Mike every morning. I usually love it (except all the baseball talk drives me crazy). Anyway, when I heard Doug spew his nonsense regarding his (and other un-named coaches) Krzyzewski Effect theory I was floored. What a bafoon. So now we have Duke gets all the calls because they are elitist and white and the K effect. Nothing to do with the guys just being talented at what they do. Not only that but I thought Duke was soft? Why in the world would coach want a more physical game if we are just so dang soft? What a tool! And Mike Greenie pretty much called him that!

weezie
04-01-2010, 07:13 AM
Geez, I'm tired if this topic.

slower
04-01-2010, 07:20 AM
If you listen to complete idiots like "Mike and Mike", this is the quality of the discourse.

dukemsu
04-01-2010, 08:22 AM
the officials in the Duke/WV game will be more scrutinized on every call than any officiating crew in memory.

Good luck, gentlemen.

dukemsu

roywhite
04-01-2010, 08:53 AM
Geez, I'm tired if this topic.

Yeah, let's win two more games.

That should get some reaction.

CrazieDUMB
04-01-2010, 09:10 AM
People always wonder what it is about Duke that evokes so much real hate. This is what I’ve come up with so far, and I think it explains the majority of not only the hate that appears in journalism, but the hate that journalism reflects.

Elitism/class – fair or not, Duke will always be viewed as an elitist university. Never mind the fact that we meet 100% of need based aid, and all the other facts everyone on this board knows anyway. The fact is we have a gothic campus (featuring a full-fledged cathedral) and the best education money can buy. Furthermore, all this can be yours for the low low price of roughly $200,000. This is our image, and the fact is we will never be able to escape from it.

My response to this is that I refuse to apologize for making the best of my opportunities. Like many (I might even say most) Duke students, my parents were of upper-middle class means. I went to a good high school, I took an SAT class, and I was on the crew team. My parents always emphasized the importance of education throughout my life (together they have a masters’ and a MD), and pushed me to do the absolute best I could. Yes, I earned my Duke admission. But most people do not have the kind of advantages I had (and what most Duke students have), so even if we work hard it’s discounted by the fact that we should succeed given what (most of us) have. Naturally, people don’t like people that had an easier life than them and then go on to brag about how successful they are. Not that we’re essentially arrogant, but by simply wearing a Duke t-shirt it’s perceived that we’re showing off.

Winning – eventually everyone gets sick of a winner, and we’ve been winning for 25 years. Everyone hates the Yankees (although they have the benefit of a huge home city and pop stars like Jay-Z wearing Yankee hats), the Lakers, etc. Furthermore, most people relish the opportunity to see successful people fail (See Stewart, Martha and Woods, Tiger). Call it jealousy, call it whatever you want, it is what it is. This is exacerbated by the fact that we’ve been able to achieve so much success without having any real scandals, simply by doing things the “right way.”

Laettner/Redick – this goes hand in hand with the Elitism case, but it doesn’t help our two most successful players basically looked like they walked off the cover of a J-Crew catalog. Secondly, I don’t think it’s unfair to say that both of these players responded to the hate by putting on a face of arrogance. Once again, this is our image.

Whiteness – I don’t really feel very qualified to talk about race, so I’ll go ahead and paraphrase what other people have said. One part I’ve heard is that when people see people that look just like them be successful, it makes them jealous. I can say hey, I’m not Lebron James because that guy is a freak of nature. You can’t really say that about someone like JJ – he basically became the best by practicing the most (and his athleticism doesn’t come in the traditional way). This can make a lot of people feel inadequate. Another thing is that we have a perception of playing whitey’s game. This consists of drawing charges, setting screens, etc. Many people think this is a less entertaining form of basketball than watching someone go crazy dunking. Futhermore, people think of drawing charges as BS, and basically winning by doing the “crap” details of the game right. Once again, it evokes an image not of somebody working their way up from the playground but by attending basketball camps that teach them the right form in the sixth grade. I’m not trying to say that there’s something wrong with playing the game the way Duke plays, it’s just not something that the rest of the world is going to identify with.

The only thing that really bothers me is that people really do hate Duke. As the preceding five paragraphs suggest, I understand not liking Duke. I get why people don’t want to root for us. But like in all areas of life, when dislike turns to hate it strips the victim of their humanity. Hate is the reason people think it’s ok to throw batteries at JWill’s mom (I think it was JWill, not sure though). It’s the reason people resort to the most inhuman verbal abuse that can think of when they see Duke in person. Also, because our society has established that real hate is acceptable if it’s in a basketball arena, I don’t ever see this changing or anyone standing up against it.

Listen people, it is what it is. Get over the fact people get jealous. Get over the fact that we do things differently from other people, and we've been extremely successful. I'm going to be watching the Final Four.

alteran
04-01-2010, 09:57 AM
I would never say that acting on the hatred is ok nor would I ever condone that kind of thing. It is completely and totally out of bounds.

Matches said:

With us the attitude we project at times (and again - NOT talking about the players - I'm talking fans and coach) is that we believe that when we win, it's because we were better people than the opposition. Not that we have better players, or a better coach, but because there's something about us that makes us inherently better. People respond very angrily to those they perceive as stuck up. No one really thinks Kentucky fans are stuck up. Unhinged, maybe, but that's a whole 'nother thing.


I would agree with that. Sometimes Duke fans, and Coach K as well come across as apple polishers.

So do fans of other schools. The fact that we have some "apple polishers" doesn't differentiate us.

Channing
04-01-2010, 10:01 AM
the officials in the Duke/WV game will be more scrutinized on every call than any officiating crew in memory.

Good luck, gentlemen.

dukemsu

hopefully we dont land up with a situation like FSU a few years back when the refs went overboard in swallowing their whistles.

alteran
04-01-2010, 10:03 AM
hopefully we dont land up with a situation like FSU a few years back when the refs went overboard in swallowing their whistles.

Yeah, or maybe the UConn game where the officials freaked the hell out and just completely torpedoed the game in a fit of... I dunno... nerves or something.

Vincetaylor
04-01-2010, 10:18 AM
Yeah, or maybe the UConn game where the officials freaked the hell out and just completely torpedoed the game in a fit of... I dunno... nerves or something.

This is just what I was thinking. The "Duke get's all the calls" voices were just as loud in 2004. Then comes the UCONN game and we get absolutely hosed by the refs. That better not happen again.

RelativeWays
04-01-2010, 10:34 AM
Don't know about JJ but Laettner did not come from a wealthy family

KyDevilinIL
04-01-2010, 10:40 AM
Here's the deal, gang. Absolutely no one griping about officiating in Duke games actually wants the game to be called fairly. Instead, they want every single possible call to go against Duke. When that doesn't happen, these people freak the heck out.

Some people want Duke to lose every single time Duke plays, and those people are unwilling to accept any other outcome than a loss as valid. The root of this issue has never been the sanctity of the game or the preservation of fairness or any of that. The issue for these people is not that a call or two here or there might give Duke an advantage; the issue for these people is that Duke is not pre-loaded with every possible disadvantage in every game.

We will get jobbed by the refs on Saturday. Mark it down. There will not be a directive to the officials to call it tighter or whatever, but refs are human. They can hear, and they know what sort of nightmare they are about to enter. There is a 100 percent chance the chatter this week influences the whistles on Saturday. It'll be a subconscious thing for the refs, but the seed is planted, and this one's going to sprout.

diablesseblu
04-01-2010, 10:42 AM
http://www.wralsportsfan.com/voices/blogpost/7342555/

CrazieDUMB
04-01-2010, 10:47 AM
Don't know about JJ but Laettner did not come from a wealthy family

When I was talking about coming from good families I was speaking more about the duke student body. WRT Redick/Laettner, their true history didn't matter because they simply looked like those arrogant WASP-y duke kids. Redick's father was a potter in rural VA, IIRC.

davekay1971
04-01-2010, 10:49 AM
Don't know about JJ but Laettner did not come from a wealthy family

Don't let reality get in the way of assumptions and perceptions! :)

I mean, look at me. Typical Dukie. My Dad grew up in Depression era rural Illinois, went to the Naval Academy during WWII (and because it was free and his family couldn't afford to send him anywhere that cost money), and was a career Navy fighter pilot. Mom grew up in Lexington, NC, raised by her two elementary school-educated mill worker parents, went to NC State because she had a scholarship and was a career civilian weapons engineer for the Navy. They were frugal enough to put me through private school AND Duke, I'm now a doctor, so of course I'm a privileged guy who had everything handed to me. I mean, c'mon, you know I got into Duke and med school through connections, not hard work. You know I got my residency and fellowship and job through daddy's contacts. It was all handed to me. Just like all Dukies.

Funny thing is, during four years at Duke I kept meeting all these Dukies who had parents alot like mine. Wierd. Could never figure out where all those spoiled rich Dukies were hiding...though I suspected they were hiding behind the SAE lions.

DukieInKansas
04-01-2010, 11:11 AM
Don't let reality get in the way of assumptions and perceptions! :)

I mean, look at me. Typical Dukie. My Dad grew up in Depression era rural Illinois, went to the Naval Academy during WWII (and because it was free and his family couldn't afford to send him anywhere that cost money), and was a career Navy fighter pilot. Mom grew up in Lexington, NC, raised by her two elementary school-educated mill worker parents, went to NC State because she had a scholarship and was a career civilian weapons engineer for the Navy. They were frugal enough to put me through private school AND Duke, I'm now a doctor, so of course I'm a privileged guy who had everything handed to me. I mean, c'mon, you know I got into Duke and med school through connections, not hard work. You know I got my residency and fellowship and job through daddy's contacts. It was all handed to me. Just like all Dukies.

Funny thing is, during four years at Duke I kept meeting all these Dukies who had parents alot like mine. Wierd. Could never figure out where all those spoiled rich Dukies were hiding...though I suspected they were hiding behind the SAE lions.

If they were hiding behind the SAE lions, they had to be pretty small folks.

RelativeWays
04-01-2010, 11:15 AM
Don't let reality get in the way of assumptions and perceptions! :)

I mean, look at me. Typical Dukie. My Dad grew up in Depression era rural Illinois, went to the Naval Academy during WWII (and because it was free and his family couldn't afford to send him anywhere that cost money), and was a career Navy fighter pilot. Mom grew up in Lexington, NC, raised by her two elementary school-educated mill worker parents, went to NC State because she had a scholarship and was a career civilian weapons engineer for the Navy. They were frugal enough to put me through private school AND Duke, I'm now a doctor, so of course I'm a privileged guy who had everything handed to me. I mean, c'mon, you know I got into Duke and med school through connections, not hard work. You know I got my residency and fellowship and job through daddy's contacts. It was all handed to me. Just like all Dukies.

Funny thing is, during four years at Duke I kept meeting all these Dukies who had parents alot like mine. Wierd. Could never figure out where all those spoiled rich Dukies were hiding...though I suspected they were hiding behind the SAE lions.

Did your dad spend much time in Pensacola? My dad is from there and its one of the main Naval air stations in the US. Have seen the Blue Angels buzz Pensacola Beach and scare the $%&^ of the sunbathers too many times to count.

Indoor66
04-01-2010, 11:38 AM
Redick's father was a potter in rural VA, IIRC.

He probably still is, it wasn't that long ago!

slower
04-01-2010, 11:46 AM
Here's the deal, gang. Absolutely no one griping about officiating in Duke games actually wants the game to be called fairly. Instead, they want every single possible call to go against Duke. When that doesn't happen, these people freak the heck out.

Some people want Duke to lose every single time Duke plays, and those people are unwilling to accept any other outcome than a loss as valid. The root of this issue has never been the sanctity of the game or the preservation of fairness or any of that. The issue for these people is not that a call or two here or there might give Duke an advantage; the issue for these people is that Duke is not pre-loaded with every possible disadvantage in every game.

We will get jobbed by the refs on Saturday. Mark it down. There will not be a directive to the officials to call it tighter or whatever, but refs are human. They can hear, and they know what sort of nightmare they are about to enter. There is a 100 percent chance the chatter this week influences the whistles on Saturday. It'll be a subconscious thing for the refs, but the seed is planted, and this one's going to sprout.

God, I hope you're wrong.

But I won't be surprised if you're right. :(

BlueDevilCorvette!
04-01-2010, 11:55 AM
I often wear Duke apparrel (and I have a lot of stuff). During the past 2 weeks I've been approached by UNC fans in a very negative manner all while minding my own business. This is what has been said to me in the past 24 hours.

I tore my ACL and had surgery 2 weeks ago thus I'm currently walking around with this bulky leg brace on. Yesterday, while browsing through Lowe's one of their employees approached me and said, "You need to take that Duke shirt off, that's why your leg is messed up". I simply responded, "I'm going to pray for you because you have some personal issues".

Today, I'm walking out of Wal-Mart headed into the parking lot. A woman driving a car, who was waiting for me to cross, pulls up to me and say, "I ought to run your butt over for wearing that Duke shirt". She then began to boldly exclaim that she was a UNC fan. I smiled and said, "Don't be mad because UNC is playing in the Not Invited Tournament (N.I.T.)". She was rendered speechless and sped off.

Have any of you had any similar verbal jabs thrown at you during the past week or so?

throatybeard
04-01-2010, 12:00 PM
I tore my ACL and had surgery 2 weeks ago thus I'm currently walking around with this bulky leg brace on. Yesterday, while browsing through Lowe's one of their employees approached me and said, "You need to take that Duke shirt off, that's why your leg is messed up". I simply responded, "I'm going to pray for you because you have some personal issues".

Today, I'm walking out of Wal-Mart headed into the parking lot. A woman driving a car, who was waiting for me to cross, pulls up to me and say, "I ought to run your butt over for wearing that Duke shirt".

This is why I'm so glad I no longer live in North Carolina.

weezie
04-01-2010, 12:03 PM
Mercy yes! One of my oldest friends, who didn't go to unc but cheers for them, hasn't even texted a congratulations on our FF presence. And this is after hearing her bleat and crow all last year about the 'holes.

But the best was on the flight to Houston last week when a woman sitting me stood up and tapped me on the shoulder to announce that she was a ky fan and that "Sorry, but Duke won't be going to Indy." My resposne was "You think so, do you? Worry about your own team."
I sure hope she has choked on her own bile and gnashed her teeth down to nubs. She was ugly and she's now uglier, if that's possible.

coldriver10
04-01-2010, 12:16 PM
I often wear Duke apparrel (and I have a lot of stuff). During the past 2 weeks I've been approached by UNC fans in a very negative manner all while minding my own business. This is what has been said to me in the past 24 hours.

I tore my ACL and had surgery 2 weeks ago thus I'm currently walking around with this bulky leg brace on. Yesterday, while browsing through Lowe's one of their employees approached me and said, "You need to take that Duke shirt off, that's why your leg is messed up". I simply responded, "I'm going to pray for you because you have some personal issues".

Today, I'm walking out of Wal-Mart headed into the parking lot. A woman driving a car, who was waiting for me to cross, pulls up to me and say, "I ought to run your butt over for wearing that Duke shirt". She then began to boldly exclaim that she was a UNC fan. I smiled and said, "Don't be mad because UNC is playing in the Not Invited Tournament (N.I.T.)". She was rendered speechless and sped off.

Have any of you had any similar verbal jabs thrown at you during the past week or so?
I guess it depends on how they said those things. I've made jokes to patients who wear UNC stuff in the hospital/clinic, saying "It's okay, we'll take care of you anyway." But I say it with a smile and obviously mean it in a lighthearted way, and it oftentimes breaks the ice. I can see the examples you gave being lighthearted ribbing or mean-spirited, all depending on how they said it.

Zeb
04-01-2010, 12:39 PM
...of course you will be rooting for West Virginia-- it's the only faint hope you can still hold that the weak, flawed house-of-cards argument that you made 2 years ago will not be shown to be the puddle of piddle that it always was.

...you should be ashamed of yourself, as someone who claims to be concerned about exploitation of poor, minority athletes, to claim that you are supporting WVU this weekend-- you contemptible hypocrite.



Game, set, match.

Let's see Mr. Pessah respond to Mudge's post. My guess is he won't.

P.S. I was at the K Academy Pessah attended. He's a better writer than he is a basketball player. And I think he's a crappy writer.

Billy Dat
04-01-2010, 12:53 PM
Adding a little levity to this thread, some hatred from an unlikely source, Grant Hill!

On the Dan Patrick radio show, Grant was talking about the 2009 Coach K Academy and said that he, Laettner, Hurley, Jay Williams and Dave McClure were taking it to Scheyer, The Plumlees, Zoubek and other guys on this year's team in pick-up. He stressed that Jay Williams was killing Scheyer "on one leg". Based on that, he was worried about this year's team and didn't think they were going to be very good. Classic.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/danpatrick/blog/104701/index.html?eref=sihp

4decadedukie
04-01-2010, 12:57 PM
I guess it depends on how they said those things. I've made jokes to patients who wear UNC stuff in the hospital/clinic, saying "It's okay, we'll take care of you anyway." But I say it with a smile and obviously mean it in a lighthearted way, and it oftentimes breaks the ice. I can see the examples you gave being lighthearted ribbing or mean-spirited, all depending on how they said it.


And that, of course, is the point. A wonderful rivalry between university communities that (at their heart) have respect for each other is a great thing; when, however, it becomes vitriolic and nasty, it can be ruinous.

I often wonder how many of the “pro UNC, hate Duke” crowd are actually Tar Heel alumni, and how many are simply Carolinians who support “their” state university, while detesting Duke because it simply is not “their” – or any – state university?

JonPessah
04-01-2010, 01:02 PM
1) I'm angry because I don't believe that even liberal, left-wing, bleeding-heart Jon Pessah really believes most of the half-baked, outlandish, and unsupported claims that you made in Krunch Time-- you knew you were being paid to get a rise out of people, be outrageous, and draw in readers-- and if it pissed off a bunch of toffs at Duke, so much the better, as Coach K's inherently conservative world view is inimical to yours, and ESPN's hierarchy (living cheek-by-jowl with UConn and several other Big East schools) has never had any love lost for Duke and the ACC (even before the ACC absconded with BC, Miami, and Virginia Tech, and had Syracuse and West Virginia available for the asking). You took advantage of the unprecedented access to K, not, for example, to reveal many of the incredible charitable works that he does that never get mentioned anywhere (because that's dog bites man), but rather to trump up a thin gruel of imaginary and supposed failings of the man, in order to argue that he has lost his fastball, and is phoning it in, and is ready to quit any moment-- you must be feeling particularly foolish at this moment, as this year's squad challenging for the National Championship, despite the imminent loss of only one key player, even before the matriculation of Kyrie Irving heralds the start of a third Golden Era of Duke basketball under Coach K, already belies your sour, warped assessment of 2+ years ago... of course you will be rooting for West Virginia-- it's the only faint hope you can still hold that the weak, flawed house-of-cards argument that you made 2 years ago will not be shown to be the puddle of piddle that it always was.

2) No, Duke is not "as much a part of the exploitive system as any other member of the college entertainment industry"-- Duke offers its student athletes more in return than all but a handful of other major Division I schools (Stanford, Northwestern, Notre Dame, perhaps Georgetown)-- Duke offers its student athletes a college degree second in quality to none at the Div. I level, and does virtually everything in its power to ensure that those athletes earn and receive their degrees. Duke graduates athletes (minority or not) at among the highest rates of any Div. I school, over any time period you care to consider. Before you made your silly, childish retort that you "will be rooting for West Virginia" this weekend, did you even stop to think about what Bob Huggins has done for/with the vast majority of his basketball recruits over the last 30 years that Coach K has been at Duke? I am the first person to say that Huggins is a great (on-court) basketball coach, who gets terrific results from his often talent-limited squads-- but what has happened to his players off the court is not a pretty picture-- do a little research on the sad current state of Dontonio Wingfield and Steve Logan (two of Huggins' all-time highest profile recruits); look into what has happened with Cory Blount, one of Huggins' most successful pro players. Look at the incredibly tiny number of Huggins' players who have gotten their degrees and/or gone on to any meaningful success in their careers, outside of pro basketball-- and contrast that with the enormously wide-ranging success of K's players (off the court), and then tell me with a straight face that there is no difference between what K is doing and what Huggs is doing-- K is absolutely doing God's work, while Huggs is doing whatever he can that serves his own purposes... you should be ashamed of yourself, as someone who claims to be concerned about exploitation of poor, minority athletes, to claim that you are supporting WVU this weekend-- you contemptible hypocrite.

3) And finally, if Duke should make high-powered corporate executives accessible to their student athletes, WHAT OF IT? This is only another way that Duke attempts to more than pay back its athletes' labors with near priceless (and legal, under the rules) rewards. If anything, you should be awed that Duke can provide the kind of access to power (and education) that allows an athlete like Reggie Love the opportunity to become the right-hand man to the President of the United States. If you really cared about the athletes, you would be thrilled that Jason Williams has been able to land on his feet, and earn a high six-figure income for his oratorical skills, after his pro basketball career was tragically cut short after 1 season, or that Brian Davis has done so well for himself in real estate development (without ever playing NBA basketball) that he was able to beat the nearly 10 years older Michael Jordan to the punch, in making a realistic offer to buy an NBA franchise. As for the "country club lifestyle", I don't know what you witnessed, with your all-access pass, but the players at Duke live in the same dorms as the rest of the students (not some athletes-only Taj Mahal, like the Joe B. Hall Lodge and garden of earthly delights at the U. of Kentucky)-- this is another of your lurid, unsupported, and outrageous assertions, calculated to get a reaction, without having to document the truth of the situation or the facts on the ground. It's almost not even worth the time to argue with you-- but then all of us Duke grads are learning this same sorry fact about the vast majority of the ink-stained wretches in your profession, these last few weeks.

1. For the record, I stand by everything I wrote. While it is true that the story did not detail the K's charitable activities (please write to the editor in chief of the magazine about why some of that was edited out of the story), there is no question that Mike himself wondered if he could compete in a recruiting world that had changed dramatically. That he has succeeded is a credit to his dedication and is something of surprise even to him. As I wrote, we sat for hours talking about how the game changed, how it no longer worked at it once did, and he was not sure how much longer he wanted to keep doing it. He said that over and over again, as did his wife and others. Choose not to believe that, but it is true.

2-3: You are missing the point. The system as a whole is exploitive and corrupt. It uses cheap labor, which is mitigate by paying people under the table. These are the rules of the game. Everyone involved knows it, especially someone who was president of the coaches association as Mike was for several years. And if you are part of the system, you are part of the problem.
Let's assume Duke plays strictly by the rules. Duke does not play intra-squad scrimmages, they play against many of the teams that bend and break the rules. And yes, the coach of the team they will play Saturday is among the worst offenders. But if these teams didn't exist, who does Duke play?

gcashwell
04-01-2010, 01:05 PM
Adding a little levity to this thread, some hatred from an unlikely source, Grant Hill!

On the Dan Patrick radio show, Grant was talking about the 2009 Coach K Academy and said that he, Laettner, Hurley, Jay Williams and Dave McClure were taking it to Scheyer, The Plumlees, Zoubek and other guys on this year's team in pick-up. He stressed that Jay Williams was killing Scheyer "on one leg". Based on that, he was worried about this year's team and didn't think they were going to be very good. Classic.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/danpatrick/blog/104701/index.html?eref=sihp

April Fool's!

Underdog5
04-01-2010, 01:26 PM
Was at the Y a few weeks ago playing hoops. After a particularly hard smack to my face, I made a routine foul call. Guy that knows I'm a Duke alum says to his brother, "typical... Duke punks think they get all the calls". I rolled my eyes and shook my head and the next thing I know, the guy and his brother are jumping on me!!! We were separated but only after a cracked rib and a black eye. Explained the story to the Y administrators and they cancelled my membership because "this Duke elitist attitude has been a problem for them in the past". By the time I get outside the police had been called and I GET LOCKED UP! They joked that unfortunately for me, "they were two officials that K couldn't influence". Finally get to see a judge who pauses in his proceedings to state that "as a Princeton grad, he is appalled be the growing hatred against a school like Duke and will not allow it to continue in his courtroom". I said "SCREW YOU BUDDY. BRING ON THE PUNISHMENT. IT'S US AGAINST THE WORLD".

Ok none of this happened but that is what I would have said to the judge.

spinoza
04-01-2010, 01:44 PM
Before you made your silly, childish retort that you "will be rooting for West Virginia" this weekend, did you even stop to think about what Bob Huggins has done for/with the vast majority of his basketball recruits over the last 30 years that Coach K has been at Duke?

I am the first person to say that Huggins is a great (on-court) basketball coach, who gets terrific results from his often talent-limited squads-- but what has happened to his players off the court is not a pretty picture-- do a little research on the sad current state of Dontonio Wingfield and Steve Logan (two of Huggins' all-time highest profile recruits); look into what has happened with Cory Blount, one of Huggins' most successful pro players.

Look at the incredibly tiny number of Huggins' players who have gotten their degrees and/or gone on to any meaningful success in their careers, outside of pro basketball-- and contrast that with the enormously wide-ranging success of K's players (off the court), and then tell me with a straight face that there is no difference between what K is doing and what Huggs is doing


These are the type of background stories "Mike and Mike" would NEVER discuss....

cruxer
04-01-2010, 01:45 PM
I'm not really surprised that Grant would playfully call Laettner a jerk. Wasn't that the perception anyway? He was a donkey, but he was OUR donkey! :-)

-c

BleedsP287
04-01-2010, 02:12 PM
I think the Duke hate is just symptomatic of modern society in general. I think it's sad, there is way too much hate out there these days.

I love my Devils as much as anyone in the world. I went to every home game once I got tickets (I was a grad student in the early '90s). But I don't hate Carolina, I respect them. I even cheer them on when they play out of conference because I'm an ACC fan (having graduated from UVA and Duke).

The Duke hate stems from the same place the Carolina hate does. None of it is all that rational. I just blow them a kiss and keep moving. Anyone so inclined to dedge up and cultivate a hatred of the Duke University Basketball program is not worth any investment of my time or emotion.

diveonthefloor
04-01-2010, 03:35 PM
All the Duke hate?

Who gives a flying frack.....??!!!???

Bring it on! I hope it gives all our guys motivation and a chip on their shoulder so they can use it to play like monsters this coming weekend and Monday!

Go ahead, all you accidental basketball fans! Hate Duke! Go ahead! Hate us! PLEASE!

:p:cool::D

JonPessah
04-01-2010, 05:13 PM
First, Mr. Pessah, I, for one, appreciate your coming to the Board to defend yourself. I am certain that most of us can have a civil conversation with you. I am certainly willing to do so.

Second, let me assure you that poster Mudge speaks for himself and not for the Board as a community. In fact, none of us speaks for the Board as a whole. Even the editors/moderators. Each of us has his/her own opinion about things – same as you.

Most of us are not journalists, though at least three inhabit this place. As far as I know, none of them has weighed in on either your blog post or your post here. Still, there are some very knowledgeable people here – steeped in basketball, professional writing, statistics, a physicist or two – even some doctors – certainly lawyers, who know how to argue and who know how to present data. Many are experts in their field, perhaps more accomplished than you know.

It’s also true we have young people whose skills are yet to develop and more mature people who may not be as analytical or as measured as they might be. Still, we are generally pretty good observers and often comment on what we see.

For example, we generally recognize an insult when we see it. Indeed, in your blog (http://trueslant.com/jonpessah/) you started your post with a two-lede insult. (Unfortunately, the DBR filter will not allow to submit your actual word.) Nevertheless, your first paragraph is on its face condescending to your ‘friend’ Kashmir Hill.



In the same breath you use the term ‘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.’ Having spent time on campus – apparently with less than full approbation – you knew full well when you wrote that, you were slapping our face. That has always been the Carolina insult – often painted on our Campus Drive bridge in powder blue. We certainly recognized your purpose.

So, you are clearly willing to engage in condescending and sophomoric language at the very start of your blog – even risking the good will of a colleague. Good setup for an article’s theme? Professional? I think in hindsight you would agree that the answer is ‘no’ on both counts.

Despite your history as journalist, you didn’t introduce yourself in a credible fashion. Moreover, your personal feelings (what? Resentment? Anger? Envy?) are displayed so transparently that a reader must think you did it deliberately. So why… do you accuse Mudge of being angry at you? After all, you knew someone would be. Why don’t you just trumpet it, instead of feigning concern for the tone of the discourse?



You got what you wanted. You trolled for it and now you come to defend yourself? Daring of you. Maybe even… arrogant?

In your blog, you then try to explain – in what can only be described as in a smarmy manner – your effort at treating Coach K fairly and describing the university in respectful terms. Yet, even there one can see your anger – still not understanding that your “man at a crossroads” theme was 180 degrees inaccurate – and defensively painting yourself as a victim when called out on it. Bleah! Even if… doubtful as it is … your quotes were correct, you still committed an unnecessary hatchet job. To what purpose?

Evidence of current Duke hatred? You bet.

And, that defensiveness is seen again when you respond to Mudge’s commentary:



Mudge never suggested purity. What he did say was that Duke was succeeding in the system not only on the playing court, but also in the classroom. Duke athletes graduate at a much higher rate than nearly every other university. (Duke, Stanford and Notre Dame are the consistent leaders in this regard.) Therefore, fair exchange is not exploitive. Agree or disagree with the system, Mudge made a fair observation.

Furthermore, your argument is a bit half-baked – your phrase “college entertainment industry that generates billions of dollars of revenue” – suggests that it is a for-profit industry. And you well know that’s not true. Football and basketball are major funding sources for non-revenue sports. Without them, the college experience would not be as enriching as it is. (That the system is sometimes abused is of no relevance to your commentary.)

Then you kind of get into it a bit deeper than you know.



Are you condoning paying high school players under the table? Seems to me that’s exactly what you’re doing. Surely you are not that foolish. Why do you equate that with what Duke does? So far, Duke has never been involved in a scandal, not regarding money or grades or nearly anything. (Knock on wood.) And don’t bother raising the David Thompson thing or the Corey Maggette contentions. You’d lose either on the facts or the triviality of it. In any event, all long past . What you said here suggests that you are so cynical as to believe that all colleges cheat. Most don’t as a matter of simple truth. So your high school payments have something to do with Duke? Please...that comparison is simply feckless.

And what’s this about a country club lifestyle? Are you speaking of Duke or Lamar (to take one example)? Every university is different. And few of them, including Duke, are country clubs. Even with a world class golf course, I doubt you can say that, aside from the golfers, there is even a country club atmosphere. (I might go with 24-Hour Fitness Center.) All of the gyms and weight rooms reek of perspiration. The meals given to those on athletic scholarships are cafeteria quality. No liquor (most are too young, anyway). So what does your statement mean? At Duke, the athletes live in dorms that are ok, but not luxurious. Same for most of the other NCAA schools. And where does that $397,000 come from? Even at Duke the total value of a full scholarship is only about $200,000 plus room and board. I doubt room and board add up to another $197,000. (Well, maybe redshirts get a chunk I didn’t count.) For state universities, the number is far lower, but the degree is nonetheless valuable.

And access to Wall Street? Maybe a few. But not true for most. Indeed, most Duke students don’t have that. Many don’t want it, anyway. By making that contention, you are playing the so-called ‘elite, rich, white school’ argument which, if you’ve read this thread, has been shown to be factually unsupportable.

Your exaggerations here, together with your resentment, really lead readers to a rejection, not of your facts so much, but of your logic and eventually to label you as a Duke hater-in-fact -- not even a Duke hater of the UNC kind -- just a garden-variety green-eye. At least after college Duke and UNC graduates have no trouble working alongside one another. Can you say that now of your relationship with Ms. Hill? I expect your condescending attitude toward her may have just become intolerable to her.

Drop by anytime. We can continue this dialogue.

I appreciate the civility. Only have time to address one or two points, but more than happy to keep the conversation alive.

First, if you are referring to the final word of my lead as a slur, I have to say this is the first I am hearing that. Which is not to say that I doubt what you say, but I have spent much time on your campus, know scores of administrators, professors, and graduates, and have never heard the term interpreted as an insult. That includes Kashmir, who is a friend -- she recruited me to TrueSlant -- and wrote to tell me how much she enjoyed my post.

Given that I followed with a few example sof how out of control the Hate Duke thing had become, I'm wondering if preconceptions don't color your conclusions. I understand you consider my story on K a hatchet job. We will have to agree to disagree. The one thing I will say is I reached my conclusions came after long talks with dozens of people closest too him, from Tom Butters to and dozens of players who saw both the good and bad side of K. Butters, who I admire greatly for his insistence that everything he told me was on the record—one of only a handful of the 100-plus people I interviewed for the story willing to do so, which also tells you something— called to tell me how fair he thought I had been.

He also warned me that others in Durham would not agree.

As to the point of college basketball being an exploitive system, let's discuss briefly the point you make here:

Furthermore, your argument is a bit half-baked – your phrase “college entertainment industry that generates billions of dollars of revenue” – suggests that it is a for-profit industry. And you well know that’s not true. Football and basketball are major funding sources for non-revenue sports. Without them, the college experience would not be as enriching as it is. (That the system is sometimes abused is of no relevance to your commentary.)

The system is not abused, it's abusive. That the revenue generated by basketball and football programs benefit the athletes of the non-revenue sports does not change the fact that the revenue earned is being done so on the backs of young men—many of them from poverty-ridden backgrounds—who are being exploited. If anything, it makes it worse.

Take two small example: a coach is breaks his contract and moves to another school, but a player can not leave without sitting out a year. Why? A players jersey is sold in your school store for $100, but the player is not allowed to market himself to earn a living and perhaps help support his family. Why?

There are countless of other examples that would take far to long to get into, but keep and eye on two cases out west. One is the lawsuit Ed O'Bannon has brought against UCLA and the NCAA for continuing to use and profit by marketing him without compensation. The other is the agent who is suing Reggie Bush for money he claims to be owed when he cut a deal with Bush while the star was still at USC. Bush lawyers wanted to go to confidential arbitration; judge turned down the request and the case is now in discovery. If Bush does buy him off -- as he did his partner -- the accuser's lawyers will pull back the curtain on just how exploitive college football really is.

You can not play in the sandbox without getting your hands dirty. And that includes the media which fails to report what is clearly knows is going on. but then, looks who owns the media and their relations with the NCAA, and you begin to understand the lack of in-depth reporting.

Duke Parent 06
04-01-2010, 05:28 PM
Although not the first to express the sentiment, I remember Dale Earnhardt Sr. saying something along the lines of, "It doesn't matter if the crowd boos or cheers, as long as they're making noise." Better to be the team the media loves to hate than the team nobody covers.

When I was a relatively young lawyer I had a case in which Lee Bailey represented the other side. One morning our judge spent half an hour viciously tearing him apart for something he said. People heard it out in the hallway and came in to listen. It was so bad that as pompous a person as Bailey was I felt sorry for him. When we finally walked out of the courtroom, Bailey was totally calm and smiling. He said "I don't give a f*** what the judge says about me as long as I win" and with that he went off to lunch. (And he did win.)

We shouldn't care what they say about us. Go out there and win. GO DUKE.

Mudge
04-01-2010, 10:57 PM
1. For the record, I stand by everything I wrote. While it is true that the story did not detail the K's charitable activities (please write to the editor in chief of the magazine about why some of that was edited out of the story), there is no question that Mike himself wondered if he could compete in a recruiting world that had changed dramatically. That he has succeeded is a credit to his dedication and is something of surprise even to him. As I wrote, we sat for hours talking about how the game changed, how it no longer worked at it once did, and he was not sure how much longer he wanted to keep doing it. He said that over and over again, as did his wife and others. Choose not to believe that, but it is true.

2-3: You are missing the point. The system as a whole is exploitive and corrupt. It uses cheap labor, which is mitigate by paying people under the table. These are the rules of the game. Everyone involved knows it, especially someone who was president of the coaches association as Mike was for several years. And if you are part of the system, you are part of the problem.
Let's assume Duke plays strictly by the rules. Duke does not play intra-squad scrimmages, they play against many of the teams that bend and break the rules. And yes, the coach of the team they will play Saturday is among the worst offenders. But if these teams didn't exist, who does Duke play?

1) OK, for the sake of moving the argument forward, let's assume that some of the things you claim (such as the idea that K was thinking of hanging it up) are true... you implied in your article that, while K was considering this, he was only half-heartedly devoting himself to his duties as the coach at Duke-- this I can never accept-- it is antithetical to everything the guy teaches, and the way he has lived his life-- the one thing K has been about his whole career (life, even) is a passionate, 100% commitment to competing as hard as he (and his team) can, selling out completely (within the letter and spirit of the rules) to win. I don't believe for a second that K was ever phoning it in-- he would have been trying his absolute best to win, right up until the time he decided he had to quit-- and then he would be gone-- he's not going to go halfway.

2) & 3) This is where your ability to reason logically completely falls apart for me: So, the fact that many schools/coaches exploit their poor minority players to make money off of them (and allegedly give little in return) means that Duke is equally culpable, even if Duke doesn't do this, because Duke plays games against (and thus profits from) these other exploitive schools-- and Duke, apparently, in your scorebook, comes in for even greater disapprobation, seeing as you have made it clear that you'll be rooting for our opposing school (and their coach who is one of the biggest exploiters/violators of the rules)? Where to start with this tortured logic...

A) We have two kinds of schools here: one which doesn't give a damn whether its players get a degree while they're there, or what happens to them after they exhaust their eligibility; another which goes to great lengths to see that its players get substantive degrees, and facilitates access to the corridors and wielders of economic power, both during and after their stay at the school. Both schools make money off of the players' performances, but because YOU are concerned about the exploitation of the poor minority players, you are going to support the school that more fully exploits and discards its players like used Kleenex-- yeah, that makes sense to me.

B) If you bother to look, you can find evidence of this same economic exploitation in nearly every nook and cranny of our society-- including the ones that lead to some of the most lucrative and/or prestigious occupations in the country: In medical school and residency, experienced doctors take advantage of residents and med students by compelling them to work inhumanly long workweeks for miniscule pay, to hold hospital costs down, while still paying the senior doctors high wages; in accounting, new associates at Big 8/6/4 firms are worked like dogs during tax season (and the rest of the year too) to get audits done, and paid a pitiful hourly wage, so that senior partners can reap the rewards from the associates' efforts; the same low wage/high labor structure is used by most large law and architecture firms to boost the pay of the firm's partners; the same happens in the entertainment industry (e.g.- TV production); investment banking uses the same concept.

The difference between these "sweat shop" environments and the true sweat shops of Nike's Asian shoe factories and Levi Strauss's Central American garment factories is that, in the examples cited above, young people put in long hours for low/no pay with the idea that it will pay off after they go through it-- either in the knowledge that they will gain while there, or in the promotions (to much higher paying positions) that they will earn by way of doing their jobs well-- they keep their "eyes on the prize", because they know that the sweat equity that they are putting in on the lowest rung of the totem pole can (and does!) pay off, if they learn their lessons well.

This is exactly the opportunity that Duke is offering its players: they have an opportunity to go through a 4-5 year leadership laboratory class with one of the most respected corporate leadership training experts in the world, receive one of the most respected college degrees in the world, and be offered regular (and continuing) access to some of the most powerful and connected political and business leaders in the world, if they are willing to commit themselves fully to their apprenticeships as Duke students and basketball players. That seems like a pretty fair deal to me-- and not unlike the one that supreme court law clerks, congressional interns, medical students/interns, accounting, law, architecture, and investment banking junior associates, and television and movie production assistants agree to.

The difference between Duke and West Virginia, Kentucky, Memphis and their ilk, is that those schools neither offer the quality of degree that Duke does, nor do they work diligently to ensure that the player even gets a degree (sometimes they even actively sabotage the player's ability to get his degree and/or prevent the player from taking classes that might interfere with his sport)... and once the player is no longer eligible to play, these schools are anything but preoccupied with the socioeconomic condition of their former players. These other schools are the closer equivalents to the Third World sweat shops-- and they are even worse, in one sense, because the players at these schools all THINK they are going to reach the golden ring of a big pro contract and career (when the vast majority will not), and so their ignorance ensures that they aren't even making an informed deal. At least in the real sweat shops of the third world, none of the participants expects their labors to lead to a progression to positions of wealth or power- they just hope to be able to feed their families tomorrow.

But I guess, under your preferred scenario, everyone would be better off, if the colleges offered six- and seven-figure salaries to these largely uneducated, poor minority athletes, to do with as they see fit-- because that's always the way NYC residents want to do business-- throw everything open to the dictatorship of the marketplace, because, inevitably, with more wealth in NYC than anywhere else in the country/world, the best and most dominant participants will end up in NYC. We can return to the glorious days of CCNY and St. Johns dominating college basketball (and the associated point-shaving scandals that that brought us)-- and New Yorkers can celebrate their dominance over the rest of the country in another athletic endeavor-- what a typical Yankee fan, acting like he did something personally to merit the latest Series win by Stinkbrenner's pocketbook.

Does it ever occur to you that throwing open the coffers of college sports to these financially (and academically) uneducated athletes makes about as much sense as making the assets of the multi-million dollar trust fund fully accessible to the 18-year old prodigal son, and saying "Have at it!" You can't be unaware of the epidemic of bankruptcy and financial ruin among former NFL players, with some 70% of them broke within 5 years of leaving the league, no matter how long they were in the league, nor how much they made while there-- and this is with players considerably older than the 18-year olds that you want to start paying market wages.

And before you start with some criticism of my outdated concept of nobless oblige, this isn't some form of updated benevolent autocracy that I'm advocating-- it's simply pragmatic acknowledgement that, whether the players like it or not, the best thing the colleges can do for them is to force them to grow up a little and get an education, before people start showering them with money. It's like your mom making you take cod liver oil to prevent illnesses-- it's good for you, whether you like it or not-- and if you don't, then leave home (in this case, college) and go live on your own (a` la Brandon Jennings), but stop trying to tell the colleges how they ought to do things in their own house-- nobody is holding a gun to the players' heads, and making them attend the colleges, and forcing them to accept the great deal the colleges are trying to offer them.

DevilHorns
04-01-2010, 11:47 PM
Saw this posted on wildcatnation. Read the first letter of every headline from the top down. Subliminal hate haha.

http://www.fark.com/sports/

oldnavy
04-02-2010, 06:41 AM
1) OK, for the sake of moving the argument forward, let's assume that some of the things you claim (such as the idea that K was thinking of hanging it up) are true... you implied in your article that, while K was considering this, he was only half-heartedly devoting himself to his duties as the coach at Duke-- this I can never accept-- it is antithetical to everything the guy teaches, and the way he has lived his life-- the one thing K has been about his whole career (life, even) is a passionate, 100% commitment to competing as hard as he (and his team) can, selling out completely (within the letter and spirit of the rules) to win. I don't believe for a second that K was ever phoning it in-- he would have been trying his absolute best to win, right up until the time he decided he had to quit-- and then he would be gone-- he's not going to go halfway.

2) & 3) This is where your ability to reason logically completely falls apart for me: So, the fact that many schools/coaches exploit their poor minority players to make money off of them (and allegedly give little in return) means that Duke is equally culpable, even if Duke doesn't do this, because Duke plays games against (and thus profits from) these other exploitive schools-- and Duke, apparently, in your scorebook, comes in for even greater disapprobation, seeing as you have made it clear that you'll be rooting for our opposing school (and their coach who is one of the biggest exploiters/violators of the rules)? Where to start with this tortured logic...

A) We have two kinds of schools here: one which doesn't give a damn whether its players get a degree while they're there, or what happens to them after they exhaust their eligibility; another which goes to great lengths to see that its players get substantive degrees, and facilitates access to the corridors and wielders of economic power, both during and after their stay at the school. Both schools make money off of the players' performances, but because YOU are concerned about the exploitation of the poor minority players, you are going to support the school that more fully exploits and discards its players like used Kleenex-- yeah, that makes sense to me.

B) If you bother to look, you can find evidence of this same economic exploitation in nearly every nook and cranny of our society-- including the ones that lead to some of the most lucrative and/or prestigious occupations in the country: In medical school and residency, experienced doctors take advantage of residents and med students by compelling them to work inhumanly long workweeks for miniscule pay, to hold hospital costs down, while still paying the senior doctors high wages; in accounting, new associates at Big 8/6/4 firms are worked like dogs during tax season (and the rest of the year too) to get audits done, and paid a pitiful hourly wage, so that senior partners can reap the rewards from the associates' efforts; the same low wage/high labor structure is used by most large law and architecture firms to boost the pay of the firm's partners; the same happens in the entertainment industry (e.g.- TV production); investment banking uses the same concept.

The difference between these "sweat shop" environments and the true sweat shops of Nike's Asian shoe factories and Levi Strauss's Central American garment factories is that, in the examples cited above, young people put in long hours for low/no pay with the idea that it will pay off after they go through it-- either in the knowledge that they will gain while there, or in the promotions (to much higher paying positions) that they will earn by way of doing their jobs well-- they keep their "eyes on the prize", because they know that the sweat equity that they are putting in on the lowest rung of the totem pole can (and does!) pay off, if they learn their lessons well.

This is exactly the opportunity that Duke is offering its players: they have an opportunity to go through a 4-5 year leadership laboratory class with one of the most respected corporate leadership training experts in the world, receive one of the most respected college degrees in the world, and be offered regular (and continuing) access to some of the most powerful and connected political and business leaders in the world, if they are willing to commit themselves fully to their apprenticeships as Duke students and basketball players. That seems like a pretty fair deal to me-- and not unlike the one that supreme court law clerks, congressional interns, medical students/interns, accounting, law, architecture, and investment banking junior associates, and television and movie production assistants agree to.

The difference between Duke and West Virginia, Kentucky, Memphis and their ilk, is that those schools neither offer the quality of degree that Duke does, nor do they work diligently to ensure that the player even gets a degree (sometimes they even actively sabotage the player's ability to get his degree and/or prevent the player from taking classes that might interfere with his sport)... and once the player is no longer eligible to play, these schools are anything but preoccupied with the socioeconomic condition of their former players. These other schools are the closer equivalents to the Third World sweat shops-- and they are even worse, in one sense, because the players at these schools all THINK they are going to reach the golden ring of a big pro contract and career (when the vast majority will not), and so their ignorance ensures that they aren't even making an informed deal. At least in the real sweat shops of the third world, none of the participants expects their labors to lead to a progression to positions of wealth or power- they just hope to be able to feed their families tomorrow.

But I guess, under your preferred scenario, everyone would be better off, if the colleges offered six- and seven-figure salaries to these largely uneducated, poor minority athletes, to do with as they see fit-- because that's always the way NYC residents want to do business-- throw everything open to the dictatorship of the marketplace, because, inevitably, with more wealth in NYC than anywhere else in the country/world, the best and most dominant participants will end up in NYC. We can return to the glorious days of CCNY and St. Johns dominating college basketball (and the associated point-shaving scandals that that brought us)-- and New Yorkers can celebrate their dominance over the rest of the country in another athletic endeavor-- what a typical Yankee fan, acting like he did something personally to merit the latest Series win by Stinkbrenner's pocketbook.

Does it ever occur to you that throwing open the coffers of college sports to these financially (and academically) uneducated athletes makes about as much sense as making the assets of the multi-million dollar trust fund fully accessible to the 18-year old prodigal son, and saying "Have at it!" You can't be unaware of the epidemic of bankruptcy and financial ruin among former NFL players, with some 70% of them broke within 5 years of leaving the league, no matter how long they were in the league, nor how much they made while there-- and this is with players considerably older than the 18-year olds that you want to start paying market wages.

And before you start with some criticism of my outdated concept of nobless oblige, this isn't some form of updated benevolent autocracy that I'm advocating-- it's simply pragmatic acknowledgement that, whether the players like it or not, the best thing the colleges can do for them is to force them to grow up a little and get an education, before people start showering them with money. It's like your mom making you take cod liver oil to prevent illnesses-- it's good for you, whether you like it or not-- and if you don't, then leave home (in this case, college) and go live on your own (a` la Brandon Jennings), but stop trying to tell the colleges how they ought to do things in their own house-- nobody is holding a gun to the players' heads, and making them attend the colleges, and forcing them to accept the great deal the colleges are trying to offer them.

Word of advice to JonPessah, get out now while you can. Mudge is shredding you!! Your argument is weak and using Duke as the foil to your hypothesis was a really, really poor choice. Admit your failure and move on while you still have some dignity.

Spret42
04-02-2010, 08:08 AM
Yeah, I am not sure who this other guy is but it is ridiculous to root for WVU over Duke because you think the system is unfair to certain people. A guy like Huggins should really be a guy who is coaching at the professional/developmental level. I am not sure he should be doing it at a university.

I think Duke and Coach K have done a wonderful job of identifying those who actually have the talent and intellect to benefit from what Duke has to offer. That is really the genius. He hasn't brought in the type of people who have no business in higher education. There are a lot of people who simply don't have that ability. Hell, I am one of them. My parents wasted my entire childhood trying to convince me of this because they felt, as most parents do, it was in my best interest. I eventually put myself through college and graduated. In retrospect that was a huge mistake on my part, but I digress.

CrazieDUMB
04-02-2010, 08:40 AM
Mudge, excellent pwnage. Usually I don't really care about the details of the haters' arguments, because I always know deep down they don't make sense. It's extremely refreshing to see someone slice and dice someone's arguments so thoroughly. Bravo!

CDu
04-02-2010, 08:50 AM
Mudge, you probably could have just stopped with this point you made: it's poor logic to say that Duke should be blamed for exploiting the poor players and then instead cheer in favor of a team that is UNEQUIVOCALLY WORSE about exploiting their players.

If the problem is a universal problem throughout college basketball, then why even pick a team to cheer for? If everyone is to blame, then don't watch college basketball. If you want to watch college basketball in spite of this exploitation, then you should probably come up with a different/less hypocritical reason to cheer against Duke.

Talking about more just introduces an opportunity to nitpick a secondary comment and distract from the main fallacy of his argument.

_Gary
04-02-2010, 09:08 AM
Thank you DBR! Thank you so much. I can't believe Gottlieb said what he did on Mike and Mike at ESPN. And thank you Jim Boeheim for setting that record straight (although once the horse is out of the barn much damage can never be undone).

I've been saying for a few years now that ESPN in particular has too many guys both in front of and behind the cameras that are biased against Duke. And it's really shown up in the last week at that network. Over and over and over - on many different shows, both on television and through their radio network - they have continued their onslaught against Duke basketball and Coach K. The past 7 days have been absolutely brutal as announcer after announcer and commentator after commentator has either insinuated or outright stated that "Duke gets all the calls" and "Duke is hated and should be hated because..." It's at an all-time high right now. The level of venom has never been higher as far as I can remember.

I'm pleading with the level-headed people at ESPN who do value unbiased reporting to please do what Dick Vitale did Sunday night and speak out against the unreasonable hate and the unreasonable lies of people like Gottlieb. It has got to stop and it can't be done in a corner on one radio program in the dead of night. The effort at slander has been significant and sustained and the effort at righting this wrong will have to be significant and sustained. Please, someone there take the first step by calling this nonsense out on prime-time. It's time the lying and very deliberate attempts to foster "Duke hate" be called out at ESPN.


Gary

El_Diablo
04-02-2010, 09:17 AM
You can not play in the sandbox without getting your hands dirty. And that includes the media which fails to report what is clearly knows is going on. but then, looks who owns the media and their relations with the NCAA, and you begin to understand the lack of in-depth reporting.

But if you're going to cry foul over dirty hands...why bypass criticism of the dirtiest programs in order to take potshots at the program with the cleanest hands in the sandbox? Coach K wants his players to graduate and do well...not just use them up and spit them out. NCAA players would be a LOT better off if every program were run like Duke's.

And why are you rooting for WVU now? Huggins' players sported a 28% graduation rate over his entire tenure at Cincinnati, including four times at 0%. When he was forced out of that job, two of his players had a GPA of 0.0. [I won't get into his DUI, since we're talking about the players here.] But didn't you mention some problem about coaches being able to leave for bigger contracts while the players were stuck at a school that was marketing their jerseys for $100 each? I seem to recall that after being given a second chance at K-State, Huggins bounced out as soon as he could. Meanwhile, Coach K has been at Duke for 30 years and turned down huge contracts at the NBA level.

Tell me again why you're rooting for West Virginia? You must have some principled reason other than spite...right?

El_Diablo
04-02-2010, 09:23 AM
Mudge, you probably could have just stopped with this point you made: it's poor logic to say that Duke should be blamed for exploiting the poor players and then instead cheer in favor of a team that is UNEQUIVOCALLY WORSE about exploiting their players.

If the problem is a universal problem throughout college basketball, then why even pick a team to cheer for? If everyone is to blame, then don't watch college basketball. If you want to watch college basketball in spite of this exploitation, then you should probably come up with a different/less hypocritical reason to cheer against Duke.

Talking about more just introduces an opportunity to nitpick a secondary comment and distract from the main fallacy of his argument.

I'll quote this to reinforce it.

Pessah, this is why you're being excoriated on DBR. Your overarching reasoning is extremely weak.

diveonthefloor
04-02-2010, 09:25 AM
Thank you DBR! Thank you so much. I can't believe Gottlieb said what he did on Mike and Mike at ESPN. And thank you Jim Boeheim for setting that record straight (although once the horse is out of the barn much damage can never be undone).



Again, regarding the haters....WHO GIVES A CRAP!?!
Just win!

And just in case y'all were wondering,
Gottlieb wanted Duke to recruit him back in "the day."
K wanted Wojo instread (Wojo was in the high school class one year before dapper Doug, and never recruited Gottlieb.)
Does anyone remember the Billy Packer saga? same song, different verse.

dukemsu
04-02-2010, 09:41 AM
It's pretty funny that Gottlieb in the span of 24 hours has managed to infuruiate not one but two of the fanbases at the Final Four. His ludicrous assertions that K controls the officials via his telephone were followed up yesterday and this morning by stating that Izzo is an overrated coach because he's only one a single national title.

Gottlieb is just doing what he does, throwing verbal bombs to try and keep his profile up. He's Midcard 4 Life, always at the kids' table, always trying to sit with the adults. And this is his strategy to get there. Good luck.

The K thing is the most pointedly ridiculous theory I've heard in quite awhile. Thanks to Coach Boeheim for calling in and amplifying just how absurd it really was.

dukemsu

_Gary
04-02-2010, 09:54 AM
Again, regarding the haters....WHO GIVES A CRAP!?!

Thankfully many in the civil rights movement didn't think this way or segregation might still be in effect. Listen, I understand that at times you have to just throw up your hands, roll your eyes, and say, "Forget these idiots and let them spew their stupidity - it will die down eventually." There's certainly a place and time for that type of strategy. But when people start lying, in public, and defaming individuals it's also appropriate to publicly renounce that nonsense and encourage others to do the same. With all that's transpired this past week I think that time has come and I'd encourage those with public outlets [i.e. microphones] on ESPN to speak up.

Gary

P.S. And before anybody says it: No, I'm not comparing the current Duke situation to the Civil Rights movement and situation. It's just an example pointing out that at times we have to speak up instead of just ignoring a lie/injustice.

CrazieDUMB
04-02-2010, 10:12 AM
I don't think this is necessarily ESPN's fault. Their job is to reflect what the rest of the nation is thinking. The only reason they throw Duke against the wall is because it's what people want to hear. Yes they should have some journalistic (talking head-ic?) integrity, but remember, they are primarily an entertainment network. They're not going to change until the public sentiment towards Duke changes, and that's not going to change until we have some sustained losing years and/or K leaves.

People think Duke gets all the calls. Gottleib was just throwing out his hair-brained reason behind why that might be the case. I'd be willing to bet he doesn't even believe what he said, but he owes it to the haters to give them what they want- that is, any possible reason to hate Duke, no matter how unfounded.

The idea that ESPN would publicly apologize for this is rediculous - the guy is a talking head, it's his job to give his opinion. He didn't openly lie about anything, he speculated.

BoC
04-02-2010, 10:22 AM
Listen, I understand that at times you have to just throw up your hands, roll your eyes, and say, "Forget these idiots and let them spew their stupidity - it will die down eventually."

This is an important quote, because I think more and more Duke fans are starting to think this way.

I, too, feel like you have to stand up to the irrational hate by speaking out against it, because that's how you keep it from completely taking over. Think kudzu.

The Duke hate phenomena really took off with Gary Williams screaming to an official "How badly do you want them [Duke] in the final game?!", and Billy Packer with his assertion in that final game against Arizona that "...Duke sure is getting a lot of calls" (both quotes paraphrased).

That was in 2001. We are now in 2010. How long do you want to wait, for the hate to die down on its own?

jaytoc
04-02-2010, 10:45 AM
I don't think this is necessarily ESPN's fault. Their job is to reflect what the rest of the nation is thinking.


Um, where did you get that idea?

theAlaskanBear
04-02-2010, 10:47 AM
Duke will always be hated, because there is a certain amount of jealousy involved. But we seem to play the anti-hero to teams like Carolina, Kentucky, UConn, etc in the media and I am not sure why.

I honestly think Jordan has a great deal to do with it. The whole country fell in love with Jordan as the world's greatest basketball player, and that reflected very positively on UNC.

Plus, we have to remember that ESPNs rise to total dominance of sports has really only occurred in the last decade or so. During that time, Duke had very brief success (2001) and kind of tailed off in the tournament, while teams like UConn, Kansas, UNC were rising again. During this time period we also have had the imminently hateable JJ, who for four years galvanized fanbases against us.

Every time I hear stupid filth spewed about Duke on ESPN, I get angry, because it reminds how far professionalism has fallen in TV. Not just ESPN, but the cable news channels. But I have heard so much crap over the last 5 days. I DONT CARE ANYMORE. I do, but I dont, you know? The only way to shut people up will be to win. And even then you will always have people who live in their own reality.

LETS GO DUKE!

rsvman
04-02-2010, 11:13 AM
Anyone else find it sublimely ironic that the guy for whom writing is an occupation composes the most unintelligible posts of anybody on the forum? Half the time I can't even tell what he's trying to say.

Mudge, I think you might be wasting your time. I have an image in my head of Mr. Pessah sitting at his computer, Webster's dictionary on his lap, trying to figure out what all those big words mean.....

Exiled_Devil
04-02-2010, 11:17 AM
I don't think this is necessarily ESPN's fault. Their job is to reflect what the rest of the nation is thinking. The only reason they throw Duke against the wall is because it's what people want to hear. Yes they should have some journalistic (talking head-ic?) integrity, but remember, they are primarily an entertainment network. They're not going to change until the public sentiment towards Duke changes, and that's not going to change until we have some sustained losing years and/or K leaves.

People think Duke gets all the calls. Gottleib was just throwing out his hair-brained reason behind why that might be the case. I'd be willing to bet he doesn't even believe what he said, but he owes it to the haters to give them what they want- that is, any possible reason to hate Duke, no matter how unfounded.

The idea that ESPN would publicly apologize for this is rediculous - the guy is a talking head, it's his job to give his opinion. He didn't openly lie about anything, he speculated.

First of all, ESPN's job is not to tell people what they want to hear. Its to get people to watch commercials. And the way they do that is to build stories around sports. Gott just likes to build up controversial stories. That would be no problem, if he wasn't allowed to say outrageous things without anyone (except Beoheim) calling him on his BS.

The problem with Gott throwing out this idea that Coach K can pick his refs so the refs go easy on him is the number of people who will believe him, unless the more even-headed hosts around him challenge him on his data and logic.

Of course, data and logic are woefully missing in most news coverage today, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't look to return it to the world of journalism.

CrazieDUMB
04-02-2010, 11:34 AM
I don't think this is necessarily ESPN's fault. Their job is to reflect what the rest of the nation is thinking.

Um, where did you get that idea?

Welcome to cable news. A long time ago network heads figured out that people don't watch the news to get educated, they watch the news to reinforce their own opinions. At least, networks that focus on parroting their viewers' ideas tend to do better and sell more ads.

There's no objectivity police. In an ideal world our news organizations would strive to higher standards of journalism, but that has never been the goal in cable. Take it for what it is. If you want honest and legitimate analysis, you won't always find it at ESPN, especially on a talking head show.

His opinion isn't out of line because it's him, not an institutional ESPN thing, and he WAS called on his BS by the two other people on the show.

I guess my only point is to take it for what it is, and don't expect them to act seriously. It's sports, for gosh sakes.

roywhite
04-02-2010, 11:46 AM
Welcome to cable news. A long time ago network heads figured out that people don't watch the news to get educated, they watch the news to reinforce their own opinions. At least, networks that focus on parroting their viewers' ideas tend to do better and sell more ads.

There's no objectivity police. In an ideal world our news organizations would strive to higher standards of journalism, but that has never been the goal in cable. Take it for what it is. If you want honest and legitimate analysis, you won't always find it at ESPN, especially on a talking head show.

His opinion isn't out of line because it's him, not an institutional ESPN thing, and he WAS called on his BS by the two other people on the show.

I guess my only point is to take it for what it is, and don't expect them to act seriously. It's sports, for gosh sakes.


Whether it be ESPN, or cable shows in general, credibility does matter. On ESPN, I'll pay attention to what Jay Bilas, or Bobby Knight, or even Dick Vitale have to say, because they've shown the ability to analyze and be consistent. I won't pay attention to the Gottlieb types, and after a time, I'll change the channel.

So sensationalism, or manufactured controversy, is not only disingenuous, it's a bad business practice.

dukejim1
04-02-2010, 11:54 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/tournament/2010/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5040237

Channing
04-02-2010, 12:16 PM
can someone explain this "Duke's smugness and elitism bothers me" line of thinking?

I don't recall any of the players on the Duke team EVER acting elite or smug (same with the coaches). In post game interviews, I have never heard our players or coaches be anything but complimentary to opposing teams. Even against UMD, Scheyer kind of shrugged off their chants aimed at him. One thing every coach, hands down, says is that Duke hustles and plays as hard or harder than anyone they have seen. That doesn't represent a team that is full of itself, but rather a team that is humble and fighting for every opportunity they can get.

Is it the fans? Yes, Duke fans have come to "expect" a certain level of play. But that is no different than Kentucky fans (who are worse, imo), UNC fans, UConn fans, and so on and so forth. TDD is no better and no worse than any of the many fan forums out there in terms of irrationality and exuberance. There is no smugness or elitism that pervades the Duke board that isnt present on the other fan sites.

Is it the students? Has to be. Yes, Duke is an elite private university. However, if you wander down Franklin Street, you will certainly see your fair share of BMWs rolling around. Similarly, at Duke there are plenty of students who take out significant debt to pay for their education. Additionally, while Duke's tuition is sky high (40k maybe??), UNC's out of state tuition is still 23k. That ain't exactly free folks, and is financially unattainable for a majority of families. Baylor's tuition is right at 27k and Villanova's is at 38k. Both fanbases have hurled those accusations at us, and they seem to be a little hypocritical.

Coach K? Probably, although I am not sure why. Yes, he rides the referees. Please show me a coach that doesnt. Frank Martin nearly bursts a vessel every game yelling at the regs. Gary sweats up a storm stomping and complaining. Huggins turns a shade of purple he screams so hard. Its part of the game. Like the players, I have never heard coach K be anything but gracious in an interview.

Have these just become buzz words that people throw around despite their absolute inaccuracy? Marcus Ginyard had some direct and pointed comments about the Duke program this past offseason. Reggie Bullock just made some comments about Duke's players. Roy compared his program's season to a massive disaster in Haiti (if that isn't elitism then I don't kno what is). We have seen opposing players mock our team. I have never seen or heard such behavior from a Duke program.

So if anyone can explain the on going basis for these assertions, I', all ears (and I know I am preaching to the quire).

Duke79UNLV77
04-02-2010, 12:23 PM
http://www.theonion.com/articles/mike-krzyzewski,17190/

coldriver10
04-02-2010, 12:35 PM
Is it the students? Has to be. Yes, Duke is an elite private university. However, if you wander down Franklin Street, you will certainly see your fair share of BMWs rolling around. Similarly, at Duke there are plenty of students who take out significant debt to pay for their education. Additionally, while Duke's tuition is sky high (40k maybe??), UNC's out of state tuition is still 23k. That ain't exactly free folks, and is financially unattainable for a majority of families. Baylor's tuition is right at 27k and Villanova's is at 38k. Both fanbases have hurled those accusations at us, and they seem to be a little hypocritical.
I think this is where it begins and ends. Duke students are stereotyped as being born with silver spoons in their mouths which, despite the fact that Duke meets all need-based aid, may have some modicum of truth considering the parents of the average Duke student make ~$200,000 (http://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-draws-rich-kids-all-colors). Add to this the perception that Duke is "white", smart, and highly successful (and, therefore, cocky) and the well-publicized strain with the overarching Durham community (44% Black, median household income almost less than tuition at $41,000) and you've got the recipe for perceived "eliticism." When the people of our own city hate us, how can we expect the rest of the nation to do anything but?

jdj4duke
04-02-2010, 12:41 PM
http://www.theonion.com/articles/mike-krzyzewski,17190/

Dumb. So dumb it looks like the Onion might have been hacked, or their staff missed the April 1 deadline.

CDu
04-02-2010, 12:44 PM
Dumb. So dumb it looks like the Onion might have been hacked, or their staff missed the April 1 deadline.

Pretty much all of the stuff from the Onion is dumb and/or sarcastic. This looks pretty par for the course from them, actually.

For example, look at the one for Albert Pujols:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/john-wall,17152/

tecumseh
04-02-2010, 12:48 PM
I was a little surprised that Stuart Scott who is not a talking head got in a cheap shot after Dukes win over Baylor. "And the key play was a charging foul that was a block by Zoubek and would have been his 4th foul" or some such nonsense. When he was "reporting" on the game for Sportscenter.

He is a UNC alum and it was far from obvious that was such a key play for a number of reasons as pointed out earlier.

CDu
04-02-2010, 01:01 PM
I was a little surprised that Stuart Scott who is not a talking head got in a cheap shot after Dukes win over Baylor. "And the key play was a charging foul that was a block by Zoubek and would have been his 4th foul" or some such nonsense. When he was "reporting" on the game for Sportscenter.

He is a UNC alum and it was far from obvious that was such a key play for a number of reasons as pointed out earlier.

Well, several the actual talking heads were harping on it, so I'm not surprised that an unabashed UNC homer would bring it up as well.

CDu
04-02-2010, 01:02 PM
Really? The silly stuff from the Onion (which is by definition a satirical website) gets bumped into the Duke Hate Tsunami thread?

killerleft
04-02-2010, 01:26 PM
can someone explain this "Duke's smugness and elitism bothers me" line of thinking?

I don't recall any of the players on the Duke team EVER acting elite or smug (same with the coaches). In post game interviews, I have never heard our players or coaches be anything but complimentary to opposing teams. Even against UMD, Scheyer kind of shrugged off their chants aimed at him. One thing every coach, hands down, says is that Duke hustles and plays as hard or harder than anyone they have seen. That doesn't represent a team that is full of itself, but rather a team that is humble and fighting for every opportunity they can get.

Is it the fans? Yes, Duke fans have come to "expect" a certain level of play. But that is no different than Kentucky fans (who are worse, imo), UNC fans, UConn fans, and so on and so forth. TDD is no better and no worse than any of the many fan forums out there in terms of irrationality and exuberance. There is no smugness or elitism that pervades the Duke board that isnt present on the other fan sites.

Is it the students? Has to be. Yes, Duke is an elite private university. However, if you wander down Franklin Street, you will certainly see your fair share of BMWs rolling around. Similarly, at Duke there are plenty of students who take out significant debt to pay for their education. Additionally, while Duke's tuition is sky high (40k maybe??), UNC's out of state tuition is still 23k. That ain't exactly free folks, and is financially unattainable for a majority of families. Baylor's tuition is right at 27k and Villanova's is at 38k. Both fanbases have hurled those accusations at us, and they seem to be a little hypocritical.

Coach K? Probably, although I am not sure why. Yes, he rides the referees. Please show me a coach that doesnt. Frank Martin nearly bursts a vessel every game yelling at the regs. Gary sweats up a storm stomping and complaining. Huggins turns a shade of purple he screams so hard. Its part of the game. Like the players, I have never heard coach K be anything but gracious in an interview.

Have these just become buzz words that people throw around despite their absolute inaccuracy? Marcus Ginyard had some direct and pointed comments about the Duke program this past offseason. Reggie Bullock just made some comments about Duke's players. Roy compared his program's season to a massive disaster in Haiti (if that isn't elitism then I don't kno what is). We have seen opposing players mock our team. I have never seen or heard such behavior from a Duke program.

So if anyone can explain the on going basis for these assertions, I', all ears (and I know I am preaching to the quire).

There are too many ex-Heels in journalism. They get confused when Duke players use complete sentences and are polite to them- it just reeks of elitism and smugmatism. Throw in a few Reggie Bullock-type childish quotes and the "immaturity quotient" kicks in. Voila!

theAlaskanBear
04-02-2010, 01:34 PM
LOL @ the Coach K Onion piece. That was hate, that was just funny!!!

78Devil
04-02-2010, 02:40 PM
I think Duke Hate is all about Coach K. He is contained, and never shows emotion (or at least very little) to the press. They can't break him down, and even though I am a huge fan of his, I have to confess that his calm (and conversely his yelling on the court) would be very annoying to me if he was not our coach. He is a good man who sets high standards, and takes pride in doing so. That can come across as arrogant. Americans like their heroes flawed (which we all are), but they also like the flaws to show.

GODUKEGO
04-02-2010, 03:35 PM
This is so distasteful that it probably deserves its own thread. I hope Coach K uses it as a motivation.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2010/04/duke-coach-mike-krzyzewski-voices-displeasure-with-newspapers-uh-interesting-artwork/1

Here is the picture the article is referring:

http://www.collegehoopsjournal.com/2010/04/02/indy-star-yanks-coach-k-devil-doodle-from-newsstands/

Indoor66
04-02-2010, 03:43 PM
This is so distasteful that it probably deserves its own thread. I hope Coach K uses it as a motivation.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2010/04/duke-coach-mike-krzyzewski-voices-displeasure-with-newspapers-uh-interesting-artwork/1

Here is the picture the article is referring:

http://www.collegehoopsjournal.com/2010/04/02/indy-star-yanks-coach-k-devil-doodle-from-newsstands/

That newspaper drawing is an attempt to be a little "too cute." It will backfire to Duke's benefit.

rsvman
04-02-2010, 03:44 PM
"Juvenile" is too kind a word.



In my opinion.

oldnavy
04-02-2010, 04:13 PM
K is completely correct, the hate is THEIR problem, not ours. Hate only poisions the hater. I get as upset at times with the nonsense as the next guy, but it is Easter weekend the most special time of year for me, AND Duke is in the FF. How upset can I get?? :D

I hope that everyone has a blessed weekend!!

sleepybear
04-02-2010, 04:27 PM
K is completely correct, the hate is THEIR problem, not ours. Hate only poisions the hater.

J. D. Salinger said it best
"Most of the people you hate, don't know, the rest don't care."

dukeforester
04-02-2010, 04:30 PM
Not sure if this is posted elsewhere, but this just posted at ESPN. This is way beyond the normal Duke hate level and appearing in the Indianapolis Star on the front of the sports section is absolutely unacceptable. Let's hope it just adds more motivation to the team.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5051114

DevilHorns
04-02-2010, 04:31 PM
Not sure if this is posted elsewhere, but this just posted at ESPN. This is way beyond the normal Duke hate level and appearing in the Indianapolis Star on the front of the sports section is absolutely unacceptable. Let's hope it just adds more motivation to the team.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5051114

Posted in the Duke Hate Tsunami thread already.

dukeforester
04-02-2010, 04:33 PM
Yes, just saw it. Sorry for not checking before posting, but it really made me mad.

Mods can delete this thread.

weezie
04-02-2010, 04:38 PM
The Indy paper should take pics of some of these rubes strolling around downtown in their XXXL yellow wv tshirts and navy butler crocs. It's quite a scene.
We're getting the usual amount of hoots and hollers from the lumpish hordes.
Sorry, but they invite the condescension.

CrazieDUMB
04-02-2010, 05:15 PM
Here's the latest

http://www.sbnation.com/2010/4/2/1398649/duke-final-four-2010-ncaa-tournament

Most of what he says is too inane to even respond to. At this point I really just don't care anymore.

Poincaré
04-02-2010, 05:28 PM
It is time...to do what our detractors accuse us of doing: buy the results we want. We need to buy all the major sports outlets and fire the numbskulls who keep writing these steaming piles of dog poop.

weezie
04-02-2010, 05:30 PM
So why "publish" this crap SBNation?
You'll make it up to us? Why bother?
The old Elton Brand letter exchange? Are you all that lazy and and bored that you pull that old chestnut out AGAIN?!
I'm so truly sorry that I now get your rather dull poached articles. You're the Sports Illustrated of the web: outdated info and yawn inducing stories.
Very deletable.

Tiresome and pitiful retreads. Remind me not to click on your advertising, too.

CAT Blue Devil
04-02-2010, 06:11 PM
Here's the latest

http://www.sbnation.com/2010/4/2/1398649/duke-final-four-2010-ncaa-tournament

Most of what he says is too inane to even respond to. At this point I really just don't care anymore.

Looking at his SBNation bio: Washington DC resident, fan of UNC. Probably just way too bitter by way of the continual ACC competitiveness of Duke. Great fodder for a psych evaluation. Hope that he puts as much time into the rest of his life as he does into his diatribe against Duke.

House G
04-02-2010, 08:44 PM
I am fairly certain that Coach K was a guest on the Mike and Mike show on the day prior to Gottlieb's hatchet job. Talk about timing! I guess it's asking too much for him to take a coaching job like Lavin.

BD80
04-02-2010, 08:57 PM
First, why so angry? Hasn't Duke taught you to argue your point without insulting the integrity of the person you are arguing against?

Second, regarding how to reconcile writing about social injustice with at times rooting against Duke would be to believe that Duke is as pure as you say. I ask you to consider that Dukes does not play in a vacuum. They are as much a part of an exploitive system as any other member of the college entertainment industry, one that generates billions of dollars of revenue.

And is there really that much difference between paying the top high school stars under the table as attracting upper middle class players with a country club lifestyle that costs $397,000 per player and access to many of the post powerful executives on Wall Street?

Either way, they still pay in the same game.

Pessah is a Pisher. Ignore him and his ignorance. He has no interest in getting facts straight. All he wants are factoids that he can manipulate. His comment regarding: "upper middle class players with a country club lifestyle that costs $397,000 per player," says it all. He should know that that number is inflammatory and completely lacking context. He doesn't care. His professes that his misspelling of "Dukie" is due to his ignorance, but in the next breath claims he has intimate knowledge of the "bunker" mentality because of extensive and intimate conversations with Coach K and the Duke "family." Even times he claims to write "pro-Duke" articles, there are bitter little digs thrown in.

Frankly, Pessah's appearance on this board raises great suspicion. Pessah admits that the Duke "family" felt betrayed by his "article" after they had granted him such intimate access. I would caution posters here from being goaded into an argument that he could twist for publication by close-cropping quotes and reproducing statements out of context (like the "$397,000 per player"). And he impugns the morality of college basketball coaches ...

The Lacrosse team and the lax players' out of control conduct leading up to the infamous incident, is as much to blame for the current spate of hate as anything. It reinforced a stereotype which may not be numerically true but may be more influential than Duke alum and fans care to admit - Northeastern, wealthy and entitled. Is it fair? Not by a long shot. Is there some basis? Unfortunately, yes.

The Duke hatred can be compared to the "ugly American" stereotype. There are enough obnoxious Americans to have earned a stereotype which lead to occasional less than cheerful greetings. The key is what happens next. Do Americans and Dukies charm or annoy? Rather than belittle the NC local that hates on the Duke on our shirt, or shout at the Frenchman who refuses to speak English, or flame the attention-seeking journalists, let's rise above and give them reason to root for Duke, or at least hate us less.

JonPessah
04-02-2010, 09:02 PM
Game, set, match.

Let's see Mr. Pessah respond to Mudge's post. My guess is he won't.

P.S. I was at the K Academy Pessah attended. He's a better writer than he is a basketball player. And I think he's a crappy writer.

Wow, going after a guy's game is really hitting below the belt.

I continue to be disappointed at the level of discourse many of you feel you need to make a point. That said, you continue to miss mine: if you play in the sandbox, you get dirty. Has Mike Krzyzewski ever spoken out against Huggins' poor behavior and wretched graduation rates? Has he ever used his bully pulpit to address the many objectionable things he knows go on in college basketball? Or even to address the lacrosse situation on his own campus?

I have never said that Mike wasn't an exceptional coach. But I will say that most of the coaches and players I've known who think they've been treated unfairly will tell you that to your face.

moonpie23
04-02-2010, 09:03 PM
good safety tip from BD......remember, "off the record" does not exist on the internets....

sleepybear
04-02-2010, 09:17 PM
Then again, whether Duke has ever done it right depends on who's talking -- and what they're talking about.

(http://insider.espn.go.com/ncaa/insider/news/story?id=2563683&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnca a%2finsider%2fnews%2fstory%3fid%3d2563683) - Pessah 2006

stickdog
04-02-2010, 09:33 PM
Wow, going after a guy's game is really hitting below the belt.

I continue to be disappointed at the level of discourse many of you feel you need to make a point. That said, you continue to miss mine: if you play in the sandbox, you get dirty. Has Mike Krzyzewski ever spoken out against Huggins' poor behavior and wretched graduation rates? Has he ever used his bully pulpit to address the many objectionable things he knows go on in college basketball? Or even to address the lacrosse situation on his own campus?

I have never said that Mike wasn't an exceptional coach. But I will say that most of the coaches and players I've known who think they've been treated unfairly will tell you that to your face.

So you are angry at Coach K because he has not trashed other coaches in his profession by name and because he has not trashed you personally for trashing him in print after he give you special access to write an article about him?

What was that my mother told me about not having anything good to say about someone?

coldriver10
04-02-2010, 10:44 PM
I continue to be disappointed at the level of discourse many of you feel you need to make a point. That said, you continue to miss mine: if you play in the sandbox, you get dirty. Has Mike Krzyzewski ever spoken out against Huggins' poor behavior and wretched graduation rates? Has he ever used his bully pulpit to address the many objectionable things he knows go on in college basketball? Or even to address the lacrosse situation on his own campus?
So what you're saying is that you'd rather root for Germany than for Switzerland?


No, I'm not actually comparing WVU to WWII-era Germany. I did, however, intentionally invoke Godwin's Law, meaning this discussion can be considered resolved and I have won the internet.

noyac
04-02-2010, 10:50 PM
At the open practice today I heard a few boo's rain down when Duke was announced and during Coach K addressing the fans. It was only a few people but I didn't hear anyone booing Izzo or the Spartans.

Duke05-14
04-03-2010, 12:03 AM
Wow, going after a guy's game is really hitting below the belt.

I continue to be disappointed at the level of discourse many of you feel you need to make a point. That said, you continue to miss mine: if you play in the sandbox, you get dirty. Has Mike Krzyzewski ever spoken out against Huggins' poor behavior and wretched graduation rates? Has he ever used his bully pulpit to address the many objectionable things he knows go on in college basketball? Or even to address the lacrosse situation on his own campus?

I have never said that Mike wasn't an exceptional coach. But I will say that most of the coaches and players I've known who think they've been treated unfairly will tell you that to your face.

I have a new theory for why people pick on Duke: because they know Duke fans are going to be more or less civil about it. I'm not sure how much time Mr. Pessah spends on other schools' forums, but I'm pretty sure if he had been this controversial towards Maryland (or even UNC or State), he would have had his sexuality and ancestry questioned by now, and his personage, private property, and most likely family threatened.

On a similar note with regards to media bias, look at who ESPN employs. Jay Bilas is one of the most unbiased commentators out there. Jay Williams is also decidedly neutral. They're almost apologetic about being Duke alum to a fault. Meanwhile, Hubert Davis is unabashedly pro-UNC (even picking them to win a 30-pt blowout loss), and don't get me started on Stuart Scott. Digger Phelps is very pro-UNC, and Gottlieb just has a serious inferiority complex after being pwned by K's "he knows a thing or two about alarmingly unathletic." And I know people like to call Vitale "Dukie V," but really I've come to realize that he just rides the bandwagon. He had a huge hard-on for UNC the last couple years.

I WOULD like to hear Mr. Pessah's comments to the very valid concerns raised on the board. I won't get into the argument about whether or not the system is exploitive, because you can slant the argument however you want to make a story. As others have mentioned, any hierarchical organization can be considered exploitive to one degree or another (medicine, military, corporate America). In the grand scheme of things, there are far bigger deals to get worked up about, even college football would be a better place to start.

But if you ARE that bothered by an establishment that takes advantage of people, why root for any of the teams? And if you HAVE to root for one team, why root for one of the worst offenders and against one of the best?
It seems to me that if Mr. Pessah feels that strongly about the issue, he has 2 options: he can either withdraw his support for any and all college basketball, or he can root for WV and undermine his whole argument.

It doesn't make a lot of sense logically, so I'm forced to believe that there's something more emotional about it. If that's the case, it's OK. It's sports, you're allowed to pick sides. That's half the fun. Your reason doesn't even have to be good. It can be because Duke is perceived as rich, or white, or unathletic, or too successful, or too clever, or too fanatical, or whatever. But, you can't give us some cheeky, hypocritical, moral high-horse argument that is more full of holes than UNC's defense.

gwlaw99
04-03-2010, 12:11 AM
Are we really sure this is Jon Pessah and not a forum troll? I can't imagine a real person actually making an argument with so many obvious holes.

If it actually is him, I wonder if he will be quitting his job as a journalist soon because of the way the media exploit people for stories to make a profit? If you play in the sandbox, you get dirty, right?

heyman25
04-03-2010, 12:35 AM
Mudge, excellent pwnage. Usually I don't really care about the details of the haters' arguments, because I always know deep down they don't make sense. It's extremely refreshing to see someone slice and dice someone's arguments so thoroughly. Bravo!

Great retort to Jon Pessah!

Jim3k
04-03-2010, 01:49 AM
I appreciate the civility. Only have time to address one or two points, but more than happy to keep the conversation alive.

First, if you are referring to the final word of my lead as a slur, I have to say this is the first I am hearing that. Which is not to say that I doubt what you say, but I have spent much time on your campus, know scores of administrators, professors, and graduates, and have never heard the term interpreted as an insult. That includes Kashmir, who is a friend -- she recruited me to TrueSlant -- and wrote to tell me how much she enjoyed my post.

Given that I followed with a few example sof how out of control the Hate Duke thing had become, I'm wondering if preconceptions don't color your conclusions. I understand you consider my story on K a hatchet job. We will have to agree to disagree. The one thing I will say is I reached my conclusions came after long talks with dozens of people closest too him, from Tom Butters to and dozens of players who saw both the good and bad side of K. Butters, who I admire greatly for his insistence that everything he told me was on the record—one of only a handful of the 100-plus people I interviewed for the story willing to do so, which also tells you something— called to tell me how fair he thought I had been.

He also warned me that others in Durham would not agree.

As to the point of college basketball being an exploitive system, let's discuss briefly the point you make here:

Furthermore, your argument is a bit half-baked – your phrase “college entertainment industry that generates billions of dollars of revenue” – suggests that it is a for-profit industry. And you well know that’s not true. Football and basketball are major funding sources for non-revenue sports. Without them, the college experience would not be as enriching as it is. (That the system is sometimes abused is of no relevance to your commentary.)

The system is not abused, it's abusive. That the revenue generated by basketball and football programs benefit the athletes of the non-revenue sports does not change the fact that the revenue earned is being done so on the backs of young men—many of them from poverty-ridden backgrounds—who are being exploited. If anything, it makes it worse.

Take two small example: a coach is breaks his contract and moves to another school, but a player can not leave without sitting out a year. Why? A players jersey is sold in your school store for $100, but the player is not allowed to market himself to earn a living and perhaps help support his family. Why?

There are countless of other examples that would take far to long to get into, but keep and eye on two cases out west. One is the lawsuit Ed O'Bannon has brought against UCLA and the NCAA for continuing to use and profit by marketing him without compensation. The other is the agent who is suing Reggie Bush for money he claims to be owed when he cut a deal with Bush while the star was still at USC. Bush lawyers wanted to go to confidential arbitration; judge turned down the request and the case is now in discovery. If Bush does buy him off -- as he did his partner -- the accuser's lawyers will pull back the curtain on just how exploitive college football really is.

You can not play in the sandbox without getting your hands dirty. And that includes the media which fails to report what is clearly knows is going on. but then, looks who owns the media and their relations with the NCAA, and you begin to understand the lack of in-depth reporting.

I was a bit busy for the past day or so, and didn't respond promptly. However, in the meantime, a number of our community have done so even more authoritatively than I would have been.

I can certainly second most of what they have said.

But, your sandbox analogy has been demonstrated to be totally illogical. Think about that: If you are against dirt, why do you root for the dirty party and against the clean group that stands for your values?

I think the only answer is that you believe that Duke is as crooked as everyone else. You believe Duke just hasn't been caught.

I suppose that is a possibility. Then I looked at the Duke Alumni Magazine which just came out this week. It set my teeny doubts to rest. There is a story there about the extent to which Duke makes certain it is in compliance with NCAA rules. It's quite impressive and I urge you to read it. Your next story ought to be about Duke setting the standard for compliance.

I will close by expressing my doubts about your claim that you never understood about the deliberate misspelling of 'Dukie.' IMO, it is not credible on its face. The word been a rallying call for UNC since before I arrived on campus in 1960 -- 50 years ago. Are you admitting that you are so unperceptive as to have missed it?

The early use of the misspelled word did not have the 'ie' ending, only the 'ooky' ending, and that only by UNC folks. It was not until the early '70's that the Duke community began to counteract it it by spelling it correctly. That's still a history of about 40 years.

Misusing the University's name in any form has always been an insult, but the 'ooky' is particularly connected to the rivalry. Given that the rest of the world has long known it, your claim of ignorance can only be seen as disingenuous. Your compounding the situation with other factual errors amidst your claim of intimacy means your claim of good faith will always be met with scorn. Anyone with intimate knowledge of Duke could not be as unaware as you claim.

For confirmation, just ask Kashmir which is the correct spelling and what are the consequences of your misspelling. I am sure she will tell you that you will seen as having abdicated any claim to objectivity.

killerleft
04-03-2010, 02:19 AM
BD80 says:

"The Lacrosse team and the lax players' out of control conduct leading up to the infamous incident, is as much to blame for the current spate of hate as anything. It reinforced a stereotype which may not be numerically true but may be more influential than Duke alum and fans care to admit - Northeastern, wealthy and entitled. Is it fair? Not by a long shot. Is there some basis? Unfortunately, yes."

(If I missed your sarcasm or humor regarding that statement, please disregard the following, and accept my humble apology.)

Rewriting history there, bub? Didn't see the settlement announcement regarding the Lax coach just this week? Missed the whole "innocent" part of the Atty. General's decision and the felony conviction of the Durham DA?

Or is there just something in your make-up that requires beating yourself with a whip now and then? The only thing out of control is your willingness to buy the equivalent of the Brooklyn Bridge from some folks who hated - and still hate - the majority of their students.

Repeat after me (this is therapy): "I am a happy guy. I am not responsible for the hatred that people have for me and my kind (alumni and/or friends of Duke). These haters are the ones who show cruelty and immaturity. I refuse to believe that when some juvenile idiot calls Coach K "Rat Face" that I have in fact been the impetus and reason for such namecalling. In the future, I will recognize the meanness and stupidity inherent in such "witch hunts" whether they be directed toward Duke or, well, "witches"."

No need to thank me. Just get better.

snowdenscold
04-03-2010, 03:59 AM
I think this is where it begins and ends. Duke students are stereotyped as being born with silver spoons in their mouths which, despite the fact that Duke meets all need-based aid, may have some modicum of truth considering the parents of the average Duke student make ~$200,000 (http://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-draws-rich-kids-all-colors). Add to this the perception that Duke is "white", smart, and highly successful (and, therefore, cocky) and the well-publicized strain with the overarching Durham community (44% Black, median household income almost less than tuition at $41,000) and you've got the recipe for perceived "eliticism." When the people of our own city hate us, how can we expect the rest of the nation to do anything but?

Isn't the average income of a Duke student's parents misleading? I'd be curious what the median is, because with a small enough sample size of 6000, several mega-millionaires can really skew things...