Would you prefer...

[Lord Ash]

Can I ask; which would folks here prefer?

I ask in light of the discussion of regular season success vs NCAA success.

[ForeverBlowingBubbles]

Regular season - get a 1-4 seed in the tourney, beat UNC twice

NCAA - at least an elite 8 appearance this year.

that's the ideal, much more weight on tourney success, especially since it seems like its been forever since we've gotten to the elite 8.

[hurleyfor3]

The first choice is pretty much 1990. We ended the year 29-9, so went into the tourney 24-8. I think it's even closer to what Maryland did in 2001, and they were about as happy as any fanbase I recall to have made a Final Four. (Until they lost to us, of course.)

I don't have a good amalgam for the second case. Kansas in 1997 and '98? Stanford a few times? I'll take Choice A, easily.

[Reddevil]

A deep NCAA run would be most enjoyable, but I wish the option also included the ACC Championship.

[Duvall]

The first choice is pretty much 1990. We ended the year 29-9, so went into the tourney 24-8. I think it's even closer to what Maryland did in 2001, and they were about as happy as any fanbase I recall to have made a Final Four. (Until they lost to us, of course.)

I don't have a good amalgam for the second case. Kansas in 1997 and '98? Stanford a few times? I'll take Choice A, easily.

It's pretty much Duke 2008, with one less regular season loss.

Choice A would at least be a nice change of pace.

[Kedsy]

I picked the poorer regular season/Championship game appearance, but ONLY because I don't think I'd be able to stand listening to the whining on these boards if we lose in the 2nd round of the tournament again.

If you asked which scenario would in my opinion be a "better season," I'd probably choose the 27-3 option.

[DUKIE V(A)]

To me, the 27-3 season is the better year, but I'd still take the 20-10 and making it to the Title Game. If you added an ACC Tournament Crown to the 27-3 season, I'd take that. I think Duke's success in the ACC Tournament is often overlooked and taken for granted by many of our own fans.

[airowe]

Can I ask; which would folks here prefer?

I ask in light of the discussion of regular season success vs NCAA success.

I think you would have had very different results in 2002...

[superdave]

I am definitely craving a Final Four. It sort of feels like the 1998 and 1999 seasons where we clawed our way back to relevance after some recruiting misses, recruits who didnt pan out, injuries etc that caused a few mediocre seasons by Duke standards.

Our talent level and experience suggest a very high ceiling if we can continue to develop. But I'd much rather take a few losses early on and get hot in March.

[Olympic Fan]

I didn't vote in the poll because I thought the choices were too limiting. But if anybody is interested (and I don't blame you if you aren't), my priorities -- IN ORDER -- are:

1. The NCAA title (get this and anything else is gravy)
2. A Final Four appearance
3. An official ACC championship (which means the ACC Tourney title)
4. Two or more wins over UNC
5. A trip to the Sweet 16
6. An ACC regular season title (you can argue that the regular season is a greater accomplishment than the tourney -- and I might agree -- but the tourney winner is the official conference champion, so until they change the rule, that's the one I want most).
7. A top 10 AP finish

Those are pretty much my goals every year. Last year, Duke accomplished No. 3, No. 5 and No. 7. Obviously, you can't get No. 1 without getting No. 2, but a season that ends with A FF appearance (even if a title doesn't follow) is still a great season.

You could throw in a lot of other things ... actually this year, I probably would have made No. 8 Win the Preseason NIT title -- and Duke's already done that.

Anyway, those are my priorities, pretty much every season/

[jv001]

Regular season - get a 1-4 seed in the tourney, beat UNC twice

NCAA - at least an elite 8 appearance this year.

that's the ideal, much more weight on tourney success, especially since it seems like its been forever since we've gotten to the elite 8.

I would take either as long as we beat unc everytime we play them. Go Duke!

[MarkD83]

If any team is 20-10 going into the NCAA they at best get a 4 or 5 seed. That means they would probably have to beat two of the top seeds in their region and a top seed from another region, unless their are a lot of upsets.

[ice-9]

I believe the vast majority of college basketball fandom would vote the first option ANY DAY for their team.

Further, 10 vs. 3 losses is more a reflection of schedule than anything else. A team capable of reaching the championship game is a GREAT team regardless of regular season record.

(Of course the opposite is not true -- it's possible for a good team to lose early in the tournament, but any team that can reach the Final Four is a good one. Yes even George Mason, especially when you beat the Tarholes along the way there. :))

[devildownunder]

The ACC tourney records are identical, meanwhile the difference between the regular season records is 7 wins and the difference between the NCAA tourney records is 4 wins.

So the question is, basically: Which do you value more, 7 extra regular-season wins or 4 extra postseason wins during the most high-profile event of the year.

Even if two of the extra reg-season wins were against UNC, I have to take the tourney wins; a FF banner is forever, both in the rafters and in the mind. Games against UNC are life and death in the moment but they have the unique quality also being fleeting, of acting as seasons unto themselves somehow.

I'll take the relative permanence of a FF apperance any day, if I have to choose.

[devildownunder]

I picked the poorer regular season/Championship game appearance, but ONLY because I don't think I'd be able to stand listening to the whining on these boards if we lose in the 2nd round of the tournament again.

If you asked which scenario would in my opinion be a "better season," I'd probably choose the 27-3 option.


Are you sure the better reg. season is a better year? The scenario works out to 29-5 with a high-profile season-ending upset loss vs. 26-12 with a cinderella finish and some thrilling upset wins along the way. Unless the NC game loss is to UNC, I don't see how the former is a better season, unless total wins and win% are the only relevant metrics.

[Jarhead]

No vote in this poll for me. The first choice is for a 26-12 overall record, far below our average of 29-5 for the last ten years. The second choice is for a 29-5 record, no more than the status quo. Who would want either one? Either vote is a vote for mediocrity. Does anyone think that a true Duke fan would vote for mediocrity? Our team is clearly better that last year. Let's wish on them at least some improvement. I might vote for a 28-3 regular season, and 8-1 in the tourneys. That's a 36-4 record, overall. You pick the tourney they win. The Firm and it's able staff are surely capable of that.

[devildownunder]

No vote in this poll for me. The first choice is for a 26-12 overall record, far below our average of 29-5 for the last ten years. The second choice is for a 29-5 record, no more than the status quo. Who would want either one? Either vote is a vote for mediocrity. Does anyone think that a true Duke fan would vote for mediocrity? Our team is clearly better that last year. Let's wish on them at least some improvement. I might vote for a 28-3 regular season, and 8-1 in the tourneys. That's a 36-4 record, overall. You pick the tourney they win. The Firm and it's able staff are surely capable of that.

I feel safe saying that no one here is "wishing" for mediocrity. A hypothetical was posed that intentionally presented two options that had flaws. The idea being to force the audience to consider what it values most.

[NSDukeFan]

I didn't vote in the poll because I thought the choices were too limiting. But if anybody is interested (and I don't blame you if you aren't), my priorities -- IN ORDER -- are:

1. The NCAA title (get this and anything else is gravy)
2. A Final Four appearance
3. An official ACC championship (which means the ACC Tourney title)
4. Two or more wins over UNC
5. A trip to the Sweet 16
6. An ACC regular season title (you can argue that the regular season is a greater accomplishment than the tourney -- and I might agree -- but the tourney winner is the official conference champion, so until they change the rule, that's the one I want most).
7. A top 10 AP finish

Those are pretty much my goals every year. Last year, Duke accomplished No. 3, No. 5 and No. 7. Obviously, you can't get No. 1 without getting No. 2, but a season that ends with A FF appearance (even if a title doesn't follow) is still a great season.

You could throw in a lot of other things ... actually this year, I probably would have made No. 8 Win the Preseason NIT title -- and Duke's already done that.

Anyway, those are my priorities, pretty much every season/

I read this after I voted, and feel comfortable with my vote, because I think I agree with what you have posted. I value a final four appearance very highly and for that reason chose to have the lesser record and championship game appearance.

[brevity]

A hypothetical was posed that intentionally presented two options that had flaws. The idea being to force the audience to consider what it values most.

Exactly. It's not an interesting poll unless it's challenging in some way.

The first option is tempting to me, not because of the better end result, but because it's so unlike Duke in the K era. When was the last time Duke was a surprise Final Four team? Heck, when was the last time Duke defeated a higher-seeded team? By comparison, UNC made the 2000 Final Four as an 8 seed.

So the question becomes: do you want a team that isn't all that impressive for several months, then surges at the right time? Or do you want what we've had, a team that maintains a standard of excellence all season and then gets upset by a lower seeded team that happened to get hot?

Emotions run high. Probably a better question for the offseason.

[Kedsy]

Are you sure the better reg. season is a better year? The scenario works out to 29-5 with a high-profile season-ending upset loss vs. 26-12 with a cinderella finish and some thrilling upset wins along the way. Unless the NC game loss is to UNC, I don't see how the former is a better season, unless total wins and win% are the only relevant metrics.

Well, I see your point, and there is certainly merit to it. It just seems to me that 27-3 is a dominant regular season, over the course of 3 and a half months, while the cinderella option is a hot streak over a couple weeks.

I guess to me it's a comparison of the 2005-06 team, which was #1 in the country for most of the year, went 27-3 in the regular season, won the league regular season title (although they also won the ACC tournament), and then flopped in the tourney vs. the 1989-90 team, which was 23-7 in the regular season, lost early in the ACCT, and got clobbered in the NCAA championship game. Of course I loved the fact that the 1990 team went to the championship game (so I'm not suggesting we should in any way discard or discount what was a truly tremendous year), but I honestly think the 2006 team had the better year.


No vote in this poll for me. The first choice is for a 26-12 overall record, far below our average of 29-5 for the last ten years. The second choice is for a 29-5 record, no more than the status quo. Who would want either one? Either vote is a vote for mediocrity. Does anyone think that a true Duke fan would vote for mediocrity? Our team is clearly better that last year. Let's wish on them at least some improvement. I might vote for a 28-3 regular season, and 8-1 in the tourneys. That's a 36-4 record, overall. You pick the tourney they win. The Firm and it's able staff are surely capable of that.

I'm going to assume you're being sarcastic here, because I can't imagine anybody really thinking either of these options are "mediocrity."

[Lord Ash]

As mentioned, there were only two options on purpose:)

[OZZIE4DUKE]

I don't want either choice, and don't expect either choice as defined. So I can't vote.

[-bdbd]

I think most fans anywhere would take the option of making it to the NCAA final. The tourney is what really matters, and everything else is pretty much prelude.

:cool:

[Kedsy]

I think most fans anywhere would take the option of making it to the NCAA final. The tourney is what really matters, and everything else is pretty much prelude.

:cool:

I really can't agree with this sentiment. In my opinion, the journey (i.e., the season and ACC tournament) matters as much or more than the destination (NCAAT).

[JayZee]

I remember an article by, I think, Al Featherston documenting the difference between the early K years and the last 15 or so. Basically the difference was in the 80s and 90s, Duke did fine in the regular season and "out performed" in the NCAAs. How many #1 seeds did we beat in going to all those Final Fours?

After 1995, K seemed to change his strategy and we have done exceedingly well in the regular season and the ACC tourney, while our NCAA success has been relatively less strong, at least compared to our regular season success. How many #1 seeds have we been since 1998? For a while it seemed like every year.

As for my vote, I am torn. I hate championship game losses. 1986 and 1999 still hurt after all these years. 1994 too. For me they hurt even more than Cal in 93, Indiana in 02. Uconn 2004 was pretty bad, but still not as bad as those championship losses.

I'll take door #2...

[devildownunder]

I remember an article by, I think, Al Featherston documenting the difference between the early K years and the last 15 or so. Basically the difference was in the 80s and 90s, Duke did fine in the regular season and "out performed" in the NCAAs. How many #1 seeds did we beat in going to all those Final Fours?

After 1995, K seemed to change his strategy and we have done exceedingly well in the regular season and the ACC tourney, while our NCAA success has been relatively less strong, at least compared to our regular season success. How many #1 seeds have we been since 1998? For a while it seemed like every year.



I'll take door #2...

I don't think K's strategy really changed much. What you describe here has a lot more to do with the difference between competing while you're building a program into a perennial top-5 power and, later, competing as that power. You become much more high profile, in your recruiting and otherwise. That leads to a lot more no.1 seeds and a lot fewer upsets.