PDA

View Full Version : FB: Wake Forest 54, Duke 48 Post Game Thread



Bob Green
09-11-2010, 03:52 PM
Discuss the game here. We turned it over too much. That's the bottom line.

roywhite
09-11-2010, 03:57 PM
Discuss the game here. We turned it over too much. That's the bottom line.

Well, turnovers certainly hurt. Unfortunately, I think defense is the larger issue. We didn't stop Wake often enough. Even with a good offense, it will be hard to outscore teams that have a decent or better running game.

I expected the defensive front to be an issue; I was a little more optimistic about the secondary because of recent recruiting efforts which have brought more speed to those positions. However, the young DB's seem to have a hard time defending both man and ball, and also bit on some fakes which left wide open Wake receivers.

On a positive, #33 Scott was terrific.

JasonEvans
09-11-2010, 04:03 PM
I would love to hear the receivers talk about whether the rain impacted those bobbled passes that turned into interceptions. Same with the punter. The ball just went right through our hands at some very inopportune moments.

We are great on offense, actually had some balance with a running attack at times today, but the D needs to be better and we must eliminate mental mistakes.

--Jason "I shudder to think about our run D versus the Bama rushing attack... shudder" Evans

cspan37421
09-11-2010, 04:09 PM
Yeah, looking at the stats, the major negatives for us were:

100 yds less rushing. Is that worth 6? Usually.
1 more TO than Wake. Not good, but not always worth 6.
Defense gives up 500 yards to Wake. Wow. That's a lot of yards.

I thought sophisticated game theory or some kind of statistical analysis had more or less demonstrated the wisdom of going for it on 4th down a whole lot more than historically common. It depends on where you are on the field, of course, but we were down 10 with maybe what - 9 minutes to go? - and inside their 20 yard line.

Had we gotten the first down - what an emotional punch in the gut it could have been for Wake. I guess we'll never know, but I think you show some onions there and stare them down in their own backyard. It's just one yard, gotta man up.

I can see the point that we got 2 more possessions, so we could in theory take the "sure" 3 and get the TD later, but boy, you're that close.... Maybe if you're at the 30 you kick it. Of course, our kicker, though he's good, apparently doesn't have anything like NFL range. Career long of 46 is nice but that leads you to think you've got to be inside the 30 to take a FG. I wonder how common that is in college.

cspan37421
09-11-2010, 04:12 PM
I would love to hear the receivers talk about whether the rain impacted those bobbled passes that turned into interceptions. Same with the punter. The ball just went right through our hands at some very inopportune moments.

We are great on offense, actually had some balance with a running attack at times today, but the D needs to be better and we must eliminate mental mistakes.

--Jason "I shudder to think about our run D versus the Bama rushing attack... shudder" Evans

I'd like to hear that too. Don't they wear gloves, though? I'm not sure what type of gloves are allowed, but there are rubberized gloves that are quite grippy even when wet.

We did have some balance running, but let's admit, Wake REALLY had balance. 271 air, 229 ground.

cspan37421
09-11-2010, 04:17 PM
VT just went down - and so did Boise State's chances of playing for the national title, even if they have a perfect season. I'm not sure they even play if there are no other undefeated teams. That VT win looks like yesterday's coffee grounds now.

ChrisP
09-11-2010, 04:17 PM
Look, I'm an optimist and I truly believe Coach Cut has Duke FB on the upswing but...let's face it, there's no virtually no way we beat 'bama on Saturday. Still, it would be nice to at least play a respectable game against them. With the defensive effort I saw today though, I think we'll be LUCKY not to give up 60+ to the Tide on our home field and that makes me very, very sad :(

I would actually be very happy if we could hold them in the 30's and maybe come out with a 35-21 final score but...that just doesn't seem likely with this "D" (or rather the lack of it!)

Bob Green
09-11-2010, 04:19 PM
On the positive side, sophomore Conner Vernon had eight catches for 181 yards including TD catches of 70 and 51 yards. Sophomore RB Desmond Scott rushed for 122 yards. And sophomore QB Sean Renfree passed for 358 yards and four TDs. Yeah, he threw three interceptions, but two came on passes that hit the receivers square in the hands.

CLW
09-11-2010, 04:22 PM
2 of the 3 turnovers were just bad breaks (off the receivers hands into Wake's). Renfree and Vernon have a very bright future. If the Blue Devils can improve on the defensive side of the ball they could definitely make some noise.

The ACC may be DOWN this year. GT goes down to KU and VT just lost to James Madison.

DukeUsul
09-11-2010, 04:38 PM
Our defense wasn't so hot, but being minus-2 in the TO department in a one score game is the difference. We gave WFU too many opportunities to beat our defense. If we hold on to those passes and don't muff that punt snap we have a good chance to win this game in spite of the deficiencies on our defensive side.

dukelifer
09-11-2010, 04:41 PM
I would love to hear the receivers talk about whether the rain impacted those bobbled passes that turned into interceptions. Same with the punter. The ball just went right through our hands at some very inopportune moments.

We are great on offense, actually had some balance with a running attack at times today, but the D needs to be better and we must eliminate mental mistakes.

--Jason "I shudder to think about our run D versus the Bama rushing attack... shudder" Evans
Yep- Duke's D against Alabama will not be pretty.

loran16
09-11-2010, 04:43 PM
2nd half Offense needs to improve also guys. I know the O is great and all, but this is two games in a row the O has come out flatfooted out of the gate. We look like a Ted Roof team...utterly exhausted.

Can't let that continue.

cspan37421
09-11-2010, 04:47 PM
Our defense wasn't so hot, but being minus-2 in the TO department in a one score game is the difference. We gave WFU too many opportunities to beat our defense. If we hold on to those passes and don't muff that punt snap we have a good chance to win this game in spite of the deficiencies on our defensive side.

Yes, but how many games can we realistically expect to win giving up 500 yards and 54 points to a team of WFU's caliber? [btw, stats I saw showed 1 more TO for us not 2].

It's really bad news, because when a team with such an unbalanced attack gives up that much, it's going to be constantly playing catch up, putting it in the air, letting the defense hang back in coverage, better chance for picks. We do have a good offense, but I don't know if it's good enough to overcome what the defense is leaving on the table. We shall see, though the AL game isn't going to tell us anything we don't already know.

mkline09
09-11-2010, 04:48 PM
Many will say the turnovers cost Duke the game, and they did hurt but lets face it giving up 54 points to Wake after giving up 27 to Elon is not a good sign.

I cringe to see how many points Alabama will get next week unless some serious adjustments are made. Didn't matter if Wake was throwing or running the defense was awful. They gave up 500 yards of offense and allowed two quarterbacks with a total of 0 game experience run or throw ruff shod all over them.

Numbers like that will probably help Duke end up being the worst defense in FBS. At least the running game looked legitimate and Renfree is the real deal. If Duke is to win many more games they are going to have to out score everybody. It is a shame because it isn't because there is a lack of effort it is just experience, technique and scheme are just all wrong right now.

DukeUsul
09-11-2010, 04:57 PM
Yes, but how many games can we realistically expect to win giving up 500 yards and 54 points to a team of WFU's caliber? [btw, stats I saw showed 1 more TO for us not 2].

It's really bad news, because when a team with such an unbalanced attack gives up that much, it's going to be constantly playing catch up, putting it in the air, letting the defense hang back in coverage, better chance for picks. We do have a good offense, but I don't know if it's good enough to overcome what the defense is leaving on the table. We shall see, though the AL game isn't going to tell us anything we don't already know.
Both ESPN and Yahoo are showing 4 TOs (3 INT and a FUM) to 2 (2 INT).

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=302540154
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/boxscore?gid=201009110009

I don't think we're arguing much different points. The D isn't very good. However, if we had held onto the ball, we could have won in spite of it today. I agree the D needs to improve for us to have a successful season.

Reilly
09-11-2010, 05:06 PM
One of WFU's TO's was the equivalent of a WFU 40 yard punt w/ no return by Duke. It was 3d and long and the WFU QB chucked it up there 40 yards from scirmmage and Duke intercepted. Functionally, it was more like 4 turnovers to 1. And of course 1 of our 4 was an immediate TD.

Reilly
09-11-2010, 05:11 PM
... Of course, our kicker, though he's good, apparently doesn't have anything like NFL range. Career long of 46 is nice but that leads you to think you've got to be inside the 30 to take a FG. I wonder how common that is in college.

Snyderwine made a 51-yard FG last year against WFU. A bit more on our 'good' kicker:

Second team All-ACC choice ... Academic All-ACC selection ... Lou Groza Award semifinalist ... played in 11 games with 10 starts ... did not play against North Carolina after suffering leg injury during pregame activities ... connected on 17-of-20 (.850) field goal attempts and all 24 PAT conversions ... led Duke in scoring with 75 points ... set school single-season records for both field goals made and field goal percentage ... point total ranks as the ninth-highest single-season total in Duke history ... in the ACC, ranked tied for first in PAT percentage, second in field goals per game (1.55), fifth in field goal percentage and 10th in points per game (6.8) ... nationally, ranked 15th in field goals per game, 21st in field goal percentage and 75th in points per game ... top scoring day came against Virginia with five field goals and one PAT for 16 points ... against the Cavaliers, booted field goals covering 25, 28, 34, 43 and 44 yards to match the second-highest single-game total in Duke history and earn ACC Player of the Week honors ... after missing first career attempt at Army, successfully booted 12 straight before having a 52-yard attempt blocked against Georgia Tech ... connected on a 51-yard attempt against Wake Forest to equal the 11th-longest field goal in school history ... recipient of the Bill Keziah Award as Dukeís Special Teams MVP.

arnie
09-11-2010, 05:12 PM
Look, I'm an optimist and I truly believe Coach Cut has Duke FB on the upswing but...let's face it, there's no virtually no way we beat 'bama on Saturday. Still, it would be nice to at least play a respectable game against them. With the defensive effort I saw today though, I think we'll be LUCKY not to give up 60+ to the Tide on our home field and that makes me very, very sad :(

I would actually be very happy if we could hold them in the 30's and maybe come out with a 35-21 final score but...that just doesn't seem likely with this "D" (or rather the lack of it!)

The only problem with the defense is that we are slow, weak and inexperienced. Also, tired late in the 4th quarter, but that was to be expected. While Cut has the program and on upswing; remember we were the worst Division 1 program most of the previous decade and a slight improvement doesn't yield much. My concern is how competitive we can be in the weak ACC. Can we pick up a couple of ACC teams and Army?

CLT Devil
09-11-2010, 05:21 PM
Geez, I really feel bad for our punter who had the ball slip through his hands for a Wake TD. He should have fallen on the ball but tried to hard to make up for his mistake by attempting to pick it up and kick it. That is a fundamental mistake and Cut was none too pleased about it.

The punter is a Junior, got yanked right after that play and did not get to kick again. The replacement kicker averaged what, 50 yards a punt? I would hate for someone who has been starting for three years (I am pretty sure) to lose his job over ONE play, but it looks like the fate might have it that way. We lose by 6, if he doesn't bobble the snap or just falls on it maybe we get those points back...lots of maybes in this one.

Fun game to watch minus the outcome. The secondary did look lost as on a couple of Wake TD's their guy was wide open, nobody even close. We are young and talented, but you can tell the communication just isn't there as far as coverages and what corner has safety support. Wake ran a nice fake reverse to get that one TD, but you always have to stick with your man no matter what...again, mental mistake. Kudos to their second string QB for playing like he did. Gutsy performance.

I am still confident in Renfree's abilities; two Int's were not really his fault, one of which was a ridiculously lucky play by Wake.

Finally, we have a placekicker who can actually hit a FG! In past years we would have found a way to miss that FG that was called back due to holding. This makes me very happy, we could have easily beat Wake two times of our last 3 meetings (not counting today) if we had a kicker who could hit a FG and even an extra point.

Devilsfan
09-11-2010, 05:25 PM
All I want fore Christmas is a defensive backfield. Refree is way too acurate. He should never hit his receivers in the hands. All and all I did not mind siting in the rain watching this team play. They're exciting!

Bob Green
09-11-2010, 05:37 PM
Chris Rwabukamba is playing because he's a smart experienced back, but he does not have top-level ACC physical gifts.

The quoted post is from the Elon post game thread but I'm looking for responses from those who were at the game.

With the score 14-7 Duke, Rwabukamba made a great play on the ball resulting in an interception. On TV it appeared he had a chance for a pick six but lacked the speed to pull it off as he was forced out of bounds as he scampered down the sideline. For those at the game, was that a legit pick six opportunity? A play which could have given Duke a 21-7 lead. Instead we get stopped, fumble the punt snap, and WF scores to tie it 14-14.

grossbus
09-11-2010, 05:51 PM
"there's no virtually no way we beat 'bama on Saturday. Still, it would be nice to at least play a respectable game against them"

no way for that, either. our secondary can't cover the chair i am sitting in.

DevilHorns
09-11-2010, 05:58 PM
"there's no virtually no way we beat 'bama on Saturday. Still, it would be nice to at least play a respectable game against them"

no way for that, either. our secondary can't cover the chair i am sitting in.

It's easy to put blame on the secondary; it would be much better if we could put any pressure on the qb!

OldPhiKap
09-11-2010, 06:42 PM
I am as disappointed as anyone, but I think there are some positives from the game.

1. Even with everything said above, we were an onside kick away from having the last shot to win.

2. We gave up 21 points on TO's, one of which (the first INT) was just a fantastic defensive play. Renfree was on target with about every throw.

3. Running game -- light years from last year.

4. Disciplined ball -- I only remember the one holding penalty on the kickoff return although there may have been more. But no stupid offsides, delay of games, and holds on passing.

5. We had Wake at one point something like 2-9 on third downs. It got away in the fourth quarter, unfortunately.

6. Defensive blown assignments -- yes, there were plenty -- but we were playing a potent option team and our defense is still young.

7. Renfree is tough as nails. He took a cheap spear right under the chin, and a few other cheap shots (I was surprised at how some of the Wake players carried themselves, although that is a whole different topic). The dude is a clear leader and clear winner.

8. We could have been left for dead at least twice -- when we went down 35-21 in the first half, and when we went down 54-38 and Wake had the ball with about 2 minitues IIRC. This team fought back. Never say die.


Am I happy? Hell no. But I'm glad that I give enough of a damn about Duke football to care and to expect to win. That's been dormant for about 20 years.

The ACC is obviously in scramble mode right now. After Alabama, we have a string of games in which we can prevail IF we learn from the mistakes and stay healthy. Building a program takes time. But this team can certainly finish in the top half of the conference and get to a bowl.



It wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, and it ain't over now. -- OPK

Duvall
09-11-2010, 06:45 PM
7. Renfree is tough as nails. He took a cheap spear right under the chin, and a few other cheap shots (I was surprised at how some of the Wake players carried themselves, although that is a whole different topic).

Don't be. The only surprise was seeing Chop Block U take cheap shots at offensive players as well as defenders.

OZZIE4DUKE
09-11-2010, 08:49 PM
It wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, and it ain't over now. -- OPK
You're darn tootin skippy it isn't over. We've only just begun. Far too many pessimists populating this board for my taste. Almost reminds me of late February 2001 when Carlos Boozer broke his foot. Next thing we knew there was the infamous "It's over" thread. And of course, it wasn't over - we won the National Championship instead. My friends, we ARE going to beat Alabama next week. :cool: http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif

badgerbd
09-11-2010, 09:01 PM
I thought sophisticated game theory or some kind of statistical analysis had more or less demonstrated the wisdom of going for it on 4th down a whole lot more than historically common. It depends on where you are on the field, of course, but we were down 10 with maybe what - 9 minutes to go? - and inside their 20 yard line.

Had we gotten the first down - what an emotional punch in the gut it could have been for Wake. I guess we'll never know, but I think you show some onions there and stare them down in their own backyard. It's just one yard, gotta man up.


I agree that we shouldn't have been so conservative there.

It was dynamic programming done by David Romer (Christina's husband) on NFL data that suggested teams should go for it a lot more often than they did.

cspan37421
09-11-2010, 09:22 PM
I am as disappointed as anyone, but I think there are some positives from the game.

1. Even with everything said above, we were an onside kick away from having the last shot to win.

2. We gave up 21 points on TO's, one of which (the first INT) was just a fantastic defensive play. Renfree was on target with about every throw.

3. Running game -- light years from last year.

4. Disciplined ball -- I only remember the one holding penalty on the kickoff return although there may have been more. But no stupid offsides, delay of games, and holds on passing.

5. We had Wake at one point something like 2-9 on third downs. It got away in the fourth quarter, unfortunately.

6. Defensive blown assignments -- yes, there were plenty -- but we were playing a potent option team and our defense is still young.

7. Renfree is tough as nails. He took a cheap spear right under the chin, and a few other cheap shots (I was surprised at how some of the Wake players carried themselves, although that is a whole different topic). The dude is a clear leader and clear winner.

8. We could have been left for dead at least twice -- when we went down 35-21 in the first half, and when we went down 54-38 and Wake had the ball with about 2 minitues IIRC. This team fought back. Never say die.


Am I happy? Hell no. But I'm glad that I give enough of a damn about Duke football to care and to expect to win. That's been dormant for about 20 years.


Kudos to you for rooting the team on. I hope you're not implying that those with constructive criticism don't give "enough of a damn" ... we care, and we have not been dormant. As far as expecting to win ... well, you got me there. I'm realistic, but I do always hope we win. I don't mind so much if there are certain highly talented players we can't get for academic reasons. It's the unforced errors that are the burr under the saddle.

A couple of points you brought up are, AFAIK, incorrect:

We DID get a delay of game. It was on the FG in the 4th quarter, when we had that 4th and 1 from inside the 20, which I and some others feel that we should have gone for. But the FG unit went on, and promptly got a delay of game penalty and turned a 33 yarder into a 38 yarder. Fortunately, it didn't cost us ... this time.

Second, the score was never 54-38. With 2 min to go it was 54-41. Your point stands, we didn't give up, we got a TD to bring it to 6.

Minor points, but it does take a tiny bit of the shine off our participation trophy.

hurleyfor3
09-11-2010, 09:37 PM
54-48? Well, it's five fewer points than Butler scored on us.

CameronBornAndBred
09-11-2010, 09:40 PM
Frustrating for the turnovers..but beyond that fact, it's hard to argue against that being one of the most exciting Duke football games I've seen in a long time. Glimpses of what will come in the future once the youth of the team learns to avoid the mistakes made today.

6th Man
09-11-2010, 09:48 PM
I hate losing to Wake again, but still have to hit the positives. Renfree, Vernon, and Desmond Scott are all Sophomores. We have a LOT to look forward to in the next few years with these guys. I'm sure Cut will address the defense and I have complete confidence it will improve.

nmduke2001
09-11-2010, 09:52 PM
Iím extremely excited about the future of this program. Renfree is a big time QB. If the defense can catch up to the offense, we will be a force to be reckoned with over the next few seasons.

Kewlswim
09-11-2010, 10:06 PM
Hi,

This does not belong in its own thread, so I will put it here. These young men are playing the best football Duke has seen around here since Anthony Dilweg hurled the pig-skin. I am not ready to concede the game to Alabama or anyone else for that matter.

Our boys can learn from their mistakes--in that way they are a different team from what we have seen around here for a while too. Alabama is ranked number one in the nation. Big Deal. Once they put the ball in play all rankings mean is we probably get to be on something besides ESPN3 on the West Coast. Our QB and receives will make the Alabama defenders have to do things they don't want to. Our D will tighten too. We shouldn't be scared about this opportunity, but excited about what it can bring us. We can gain more respectability if not out and out glory.

For those of you who are ready to give the game to Alabama, get off the bandwagon. Coaches Wade or Cameron (may their souls rest in peace) probably wouldn't want you around anyway.

GO DUKE!

devildeac
09-11-2010, 10:20 PM
I would love to hear the receivers talk about whether the rain impacted those bobbled passes that turned into interceptions. Same with the punter. The ball just went right through our hands at some very inopportune moments.

We are great on offense, actually had some balance with a running attack at times today, but the D needs to be better and we must eliminate mental mistakes.

--Jason "I shudder to think about our run D versus the Bama rushing attack... shudder" Evans

Wake played with the same ball. They were really lucky to get the 1st tipped INT as that ball seemed to hang in the air forever before they got it at turf level. The same receiver also had another ball go through his hands for a pick and then dropped about a 40 yard bomb at about the Wake 20.

devildeac
09-11-2010, 10:26 PM
Many will say the turnovers cost Duke the game, and they did hurt but lets face it giving up 54 points to Wake after giving up 27 to Elon is not a good sign.

I cringe to see how many points Alabama will get next week unless some serious adjustments are made. Didn't matter if Wake was throwing or running the defense was awful. They gave up 500 yards of offense and allowed two quarterbacks with a total of 0 game experience run or throw ruff shod all over them.

Numbers like that will probably help Duke end up being the worst defense in FBS. At least the running game looked legitimate and Renfree is the real deal. If Duke is to win many more games they are going to have to out score everybody. It is a shame because it isn't because there is a lack of effort it is just experience, technique and scheme are just all wrong right now.

I'll quote cbnaylor (I think) from the locked thread as say it woulda been nice to have 1 or 3 holding calls against Wake. Their last TD was a direct result of a jersey grab/full nelson on one of our DB as they ran about 15 yds to their left and to our 1 or so and then scored.

But, we just made too many mistakes today, especially our DB on 2 plays when we did not have a player within 10 yards of their WR.

devildeac
09-11-2010, 10:31 PM
The quoted post is from the Elon post game thread but I'm looking for responses from those who were at the game.

With the score 14-7 Duke, Rwabukamba made a great play on the ball resulting in an interception. On TV it appeared he had a chance for a pick six but lacked the speed to pull it off as he was forced out of bounds as he scampered down the sideline. For those at the game, was that a legit pick six opportunity? A play which could have given Duke a 21-7 lead. Instead we get stopped, fumble the punt snap, and WF scores to tie it 14-14.

I think I remember how the play unfolded after the INT. I am not sure he could have scored. They covered him fairly well/quickly as he ran it back.

devildeac
09-11-2010, 10:34 PM
It's easy to put blame on the secondary; it would be much better if we could put any pressure on the qb!

Using a 3-4, that will be difficult. Using smoke and mirrors and "multiplicity" or "multicality" or whatever it's being called this year will be difficult. Wake got away with a ton of holding today.

6th Man
09-11-2010, 10:36 PM
Wake played with the same ball. They were really lucky to get the 1st tipped INT as that ball seemed to hang in the air forever before they got it at turf level. The same receiver also had another ball go through his hands for a pick and then dropped about a 40 yard bomb at about the Wake 20.

Yes, that was Austin Kelly. 2 of Renfree's 3 picks were attributed to Kelly having the ball hit him in the numbers and not being able to hang on. For Duke to take the next step, you have got to catch these passes and you certainly can't do what they did on the punt in the first half. Speaking of which, Cut took Jones out after that play. I believe the other punter was Alex King and he did an outstanding job.

I think the rain hurt Duke a little more than it did Wake as the Deacs are more of a running team. The artificial grass at BB&T Field didn't seem to get as slick as normal grass might. However, if you want to win games you have to make the plays and limit mistakes. Duke simply made too many today to win and the magin for error is pretty slim. Rain or no rain you just have to make those catches.

devildeac
09-11-2010, 10:44 PM
Yes, that was Austin Kelly. 2 of Renfree's 3 picks were attributed to Kelly having the ball hit him in the numbers and not being able to hang on. For Duke to take the next step, you have got to catch these passes and you certainly can't do what they did on the punt in the first half. Speaking of which, Cut took Jones out after that play. I believe the other punter was Alex King and he did an outstanding job.

I think the rain hurt Duke a little more than it did Wake as the Deacs are more of a running team. The artificial grass at BB&T Field didn't seem to get as slick as normal grass might. However, if you want to win games you have to make the plays and limit mistakes. Duke simply made too many today to win and the magin for error is pretty slim. Rain or no rain you just have to make those catches.

The other punter was indeed Alex King and he hit a couple long ones, his first was probably too long as he out-kicked his coverage. We just might see a painting of him before the end of the year by one of our artists-in-residence on the board:D.

CameronBornAndBred
09-11-2010, 11:20 PM
The other punter was indeed Alex King and he hit a couple long ones, his first was probably too long as he out-kicked his coverage. We just might see a painting of him before the end of the year by one of our artists-in-residence on the board:D.
It will be easier to do as long as he has field time. ;) I had a nice chat with his dad last weekend at our tailgate; he was recruited as a QB, but obviously he has too much talent in front of him at that position. His dad was hoping he'd be the starting punter next year, he might get his wish much earlier than expected. I thought he did a fine job kicking.

Acymetric
09-11-2010, 11:39 PM
Did Cut have anything to say about this game?

-bdbd
09-12-2010, 01:01 AM
You're darn tootin skippy it isn't over. We've only just begun. Far too many pessimists populating this board for my taste. Almost reminds me of late February 2001 when Carlos Boozer broke his foot. Next thing we knew there was the infamous "It's over" thread. And of course, it wasn't over - we won the National Championship instead. My friends, we ARE going to beat Alabama next week. http://www.crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/devil9f.gif

So, Oz, are you picking us for the NC???! ;)

Obviously there's a lot of frustration as we didn't play our A game today, and - take this as a positive sign - most of us were actually expecting to win this one.

Look, I agree that we CAN challenge 'bama next week, especially in this age of NCAA balance (there just isn't as much difference between a top-5 team and a top-60 team as there was , say, 40 years ago). But if we DO come out of week-3 with a 1-2 record, I do worry about the team's confidence level heading into some truly "must win" games in weeks 4-6 now. :confused:

I suspect Coach will be doing some of his master-motivator magic in the coming few weeks.

In Cut we trust.
(Now bring on 'bama!)
:cool:

bluepenguin
09-12-2010, 08:08 AM
It wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, and it ain't over now. -- OPK
Blutarsky was "on a roll" when he said that. Can't say the same for Duke FB;)

davekay1971
09-12-2010, 08:36 AM
I was at the game and here are some positives (since I think we can all agree about the minuses - too many miscues, too many mental errors on defense, poor run defense)

1) The first half was a spectacle. Not always in Duke's favor, but it was sure entertaining
2) We may already have the best quarterback in the ACC. Wipe out two of Renfree's interceptions - they hit his receivers square in the hands. He's accurate, tough, he's got a cannon, he's got great touch. He's the real deal.
3) Our running game is much better than last year. Scott is a difference-maker. He's explosive, capable of hitting those home runs that Cut was looking for.
4) Will Snyderwine, as we already knew, is a great kicker.

Olympic Fan
09-12-2010, 11:36 AM
Sorry to be so late in replying to this thread. I was at the game and by the time I got back, I didn't feel like rehashing it. I wanted to watch Alabama, then I got caught up switching back and forth between Southern Cal and Virginia (amazing showing by the Cavs).

Let me start by saying it was a disheartening loss. It was a game Duke could have -- and probably should have -- won. It's a loss that will be hard to make up this season.

I know it is easy to blame the defense, which did perform poorly, but we all knew that the defense would struggle. We are at a stage where many of our experienced players are not ACC level physically (Rwabukamba, Adam Banks, Patrick Egboh ... even Charlie Hatcher) and our physically talented players (August Campbell, Ross Cockrell, Tyree Glover, Justin Foxx) are too young and simply have no experience -- which leads to mistakes.

Let me focus on one guy -- Ross Cockrell. If you have the game on tape or saw it in person, try to watch his performance. Cockrell is the most physically gifted DB we have -- a 6-foot corner with sub 4.5 speed and all the agility and quickness you want in a cover guy. But he tore up a knee at the end of his high school career and was hobbled most of his redshirt year at Duke. He's playing for the first time in two years.

Against Wake, he made a couple of glaring coverage mistakes (although on one long completion, he was the victim of a blatant push-off by the Wake receiver). He also made one of the most athletic interceptions Duke has had in years ... AND led the team in tackles (he had seven solo tackles and three assists).

My point is that Ross Cockrell will be a very good ACC corner one day (if he doesn't lose his confidence). He's not one now. And that describes a lot of guys on our defense.

The point somebody made about our defense wearing down ... for the most part, that's not true. Duke rotated an awful lot of players on defense, even with so many defensive snaps. It might have been true for two guys -- DT Charlie Hatcher and S Matt Daniels, who played the great majority of snaps. Daniels, BTW, is the one legitimate combination of ACC talent and experience on our defense right now.

The complaint our our lack of strength on defense is definitely true, especially up front. I don't see how that will change this year. And it only changes next year if guys like Bryant, Bruce, Sink and Hood develop. I am very confident that our young OL prospects will be very good. I'm more skeptical about our DL prospects.

Overall, I think going in, we all knew that Wake would have some measure of success against our defense. I thought the only thing that REALLY discouraged me was the number of busts that we had the secondary. Two of their long touchdowns came on plays where the secondary flat-out lost a receiver.

Still, didn't we all know that this was going to be a high-scoring game? Didn't half the people on the pregame board predict a shootout?

As tough as the defense was to take, to my mind that wasn't what cost us the game. I expected the young defense to struggle. But I expected Duke's passing game to shred Wake's defense too.

And it did ... to the tune of 48 points and 358 yards passing. I was even pleasantly surprised by the running game -- Desmond Scott goes for 122 yards, including a 63-yard TD run? When was the last time we had a 100-yard game against an ACC opponent?

But I thought it was the offense -- more specifically the passing game -- even more specifically the receivers -- that cost us the game. I expect the young defense to give you yards and points. But I expect our receivers to catch the damn ball when it's in their hards. I've argued and bragged that we have the best group of receivers in the ACC ... but they weren't that good at Wake.

Connor Vernon was -- eight catches for 181 yards and two TDs (both over 50 yards). He was an All-American.

But Donovan Varner is just as good and yesterday he had FOUR drops, including one that bounced off his hands and was intercepted. And even though Austin Kelly had 10 catches (for 73 yards and a TD), he had THREE drops, including one that bounced off his hands and was intercepted.

Think about it. Sean Renfree was 31 of 39 against Elon with three drops. Against Wake, he was 28 of 44 with nine drops. He's completing passes at a 71 percent rate. But he's hitting his receivers at an 86 percent rate. A few drops are normal -- but 12 out of 71 potential catches? That's awful for what's supposed to be a great receiving corps.

When you go back and reconstruct the game, you have to understand that Duke wasn't going to stop Wake very often and Wake was going to struggle to stop Duke. So why did Wake win? I'd say, go back and look at the game's six turnovers:

--With Duke up 14-7, Rwabukamba intercepts a pass at the Duke 15 and returns it to the Duke 43. I would say that without the INT, Wake scores a touchdown. So that leaves Duke PLUS one TD.

-- To open the second quarter, Duke lines up for its first punt (Wake has had one). Kevin Jones lets the center snap -- not a perfect snap, but not a real bad one -- sail through his hands. Then, instead of falling on the ball (which would have at least given the defense a chance), he tries to pick ip up, leading to a Wake pickup and TD on the play. That cancels the Duke TO edge and leaves the two teams even.

-- Duke takes the ensuing KO and marches right down the field. With 1st and 10 and the Wake 21, Renfree hits Kelly on a crossing pattern at about the 15. The ball bounces off his hands and is intercepted by Wake after about three tips. That TO cost Duke a TD -- leaving Wake up one TD.

-- After the two teams score three TDs in 30 seconds of gametime, Wake is up 28-21. Duke gets the ball after their long halfback pass for a score. Duke has to start at the Wake nine after a penalty on the kickoff, but the Devils get a quick firstdown to the Wake 26. On first down, Renfree hits Varner at the Duke 44 ... the ball bounces off his hands and is intercepted and returned to the Duke 26. Two plays later, Wake scores a TD ... leaving Wake up two TO touchdowns (not even counting the fact that if Varner catches the ball, Duke has the ball near midfield and driving again).

-- On Wake's first possession of the second half, the Deacs are 3rd and 13 at their own 17. Price heaves a deep ball to Williams over the middle. He appears to be open, but Cockrell makes a great recovery and takes the ball away from him at the Duke 39. Here's the key -- the play functioned as a punt for Wake -- a 44 yard punt with no return. I would argue that it didn't impact the TD balance in the game.

-- Late in the game, down 54-41 with just over two minutes left, Renfree throws an INT on the sideline. It's the one TO that's is his fault -- the Wake DB jumped the sideline pattern. It was was more a bad read than a bad throw -- but at that point in the game, Renfree may have been desperate. Still, Duke was at the Wake 39 and driving when he threw it. That cost Duke another TD chance -- and leaves Wake up three TDs in the TO balance.

THAT is why Duke lost the game by six points -- They either gave Wake or cost themselves four TDs while Wake's two mistakes cost themselves one TD and didn't give Duke any.

As bad as the defense was, Duke's passing game should have been good enough to win it. It would have been if our quality receivers would JUST HANG ONTO THE BALL WHEN IT'S IN YOUR HANDS.

As I said, disheartening. The defense will get better as the talented young guys get experience. The improvement in the running game appears to be real. And Renfree is going to be a great one.

But whatever Duke accomplishes this year, they'll never get that game back. I fear it's going to cost us any chance of a bowl game.

PS Kudos to Alex King, the walk-on who replaced Kevin Jones, as punter. He was superb -- a 48.6 average on four punts. Even the one long punt return wasn't a case of out-kicking his coverage -- Duke's two gunners actually overran the play.

OldPhiKap
09-12-2010, 11:57 AM
Kudos to you for rooting the team on. I hope you're not implying that those with constructive criticism don't give "enough of a damn"

Certainly not. Just giving a personal observation that, after not giving a rip for many years, Cut and Crew have me excited again. Certainly not a coment on anyone other than myself. And I certainly don't mean to imply that we don't have plenty of room for improvement.

OldPhiKap
09-12-2010, 12:09 PM
{great post shortened for space}

Great summation, Oly. I wish we had been able to put that one in the win column. Thankfully, the rest of the conference looks like they may give us one back that we would not have thought we would get.

Next play. Time to step up.

Cockabeau
09-12-2010, 12:31 PM
I don't understand the ire or the frustration.

1)five years ago the score would have been 54-13. We are scoring points-this is attractive to big time recruits. Win or lose doesn't really matter-its how we do it. The end game is attracting the 4 and 5 stars who usually go to stanford or wake. Our offensive system is looking attractive win or lose.

2)Everyone knew the defense would be extremely weak. Why is everyone so surprized? We don't have any pressure to the qb coming off the lines not a lick.You can have dion sanders out there in his prime,along with darrel Revis,champ bailey along with all the great saftey and they will look awful if know one is pressuring the QB. But we don't have champ bailey,derrel revis or asante samuel-we have Chris rwabakuama and Johnny willaims. On paper before we even played wake I could tell you that our defense is really going to reak this year.

Devilsfan
09-12-2010, 01:00 PM
Wake's football team may average more points per game than the basketball team under a new HC.

devildeac
09-12-2010, 02:04 PM
In the n&o today, I admire how Cut frankly said he was not satisfied at all with us "putting our heads down and letting guys go by us." Also was interesting to read that Renfree took the blame for ALL the INT but a bit later in the article and in another source, Kelly and Vernon said it was the fault of the "corps" for the drops/tips/INT. Good character traits.

Here are the links: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/12/676621/stats-dont-satisfy-renfree.html

and: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/09/12/676620/deacons-dump-devils.html

devildeac
09-12-2010, 02:05 PM
Did Cut have anything to say about this game?

See post#50.

devildeac
09-12-2010, 02:08 PM
I agree that we shouldn't have been so conservative there.

It was dynamic programming done by David Romer (Christina's husband) on NFL data that suggested teams should go for it a lot more often than they did.

I agree with the coaching decision here. We needed 2 scores and we took a FG here for a high likelihood 3 points. Unfortunately, we couldn't stop them and it turned into a 2 score game again. If we don't get the 1st down, then we have to stop them twice, still needing 2 scores for a tie or win.

devildeac
09-12-2010, 02:41 PM
Sorry to be so late in replying to this thread. I was at the game and by the time I got back, I didn't feel like rehashing it. I wanted to watch Alabama, then I got caught up switching back and forth between Southern Cal and Virginia (amazing showing by the Cavs).

Let me start by saying it was a disheartening loss. It was a game Duke could have -- and probably should have -- won. It's a loss that will be hard to make up this season.

I know it is easy to blame the defense, which did perform poorly, but we all knew that the defense would struggle. We are at a stage where many of our experienced players are not ACC level physically (Rwabukamba, Adam Banks, Patrick Egboh ... even Charlie Hatcher) and our physically talented players (August Campbell, Ross Cockrell, Tyree Glover, Justin Foxx) are too young and simply have no experience -- which leads to mistakes.

Let me focus on one guy -- Ross Cockrell. If you have the game on tape or saw it in person, try to watch his performance. Cockrell is the most physically gifted DB we have -- a 6-foot corner with sub 4.5 speed and all the agility and quickness you want in a cover guy. But he tore up a knee at the end of his high school career and was hobbled most of his redshirt year at Duke. He's playing for the first time in two years.

Against Wake, he made a couple of glaring coverage mistakes (although on one long completion, he was the victim of a blatant push-off by the Wake receiver). He also made one of the most athletic interceptions Duke has had in years ... AND led the team in tackles (he had seven solo tackles and three assists).

My point is that Ross Cockrell will be a very good ACC corner one day (if he doesn't lose his confidence). He's not one now. And that describes a lot of guys on our defense.

The point somebody made about our defense wearing down ... for the most part, that's not true. Duke rotated an awful lot of players on defense, even with so many defensive snaps. It might have been true for two guys -- DT Charlie Hatcher and S Matt Daniels, who played the great majority of snaps. Daniels, BTW, is the one legitimate combination of ACC talent and experience on our defense right now.

The complaint our our lack of strength on defense is definitely true, especially up front. I don't see how that will change this year. And it only changes next year if guys like Bryant, Bruce, Sink and Hood develop. I am very confident that our young OL prospects will be very good. I'm more skeptical about our DL prospects.

Overall, I think going in, we all knew that Wake would have some measure of success against our defense. I thought the only thing that REALLY discouraged me was the number of busts that we had the secondary. Two of their long touchdowns came on plays where the secondary flat-out lost a receiver.

Still, didn't we all know that this was going to be a high-scoring game? Didn't half the people on the pregame board predict a shootout?

As tough as the defense was to take, to my mind that wasn't what cost us the game. I expected the young defense to struggle. But I expected Duke's passing game to shred Wake's defense too.

And it did ... to the tune of 48 points and 358 yards passing. I was even pleasantly surprised by the running game -- Desmond Scott goes for 122 yards, including a 63-yard TD run? When was the last time we had a 100-yard game against an ACC opponent?

But I thought it was the offense -- more specifically the passing game -- even more specifically the receivers -- that cost us the game. I expect the young defense to give you yards and points. But I expect our receivers to catch the damn ball when it's in their hards. I've argued and bragged that we have the best group of receivers in the ACC ... but they weren't that good at Wake.

Connor Vernon was -- eight catches for 181 yards and two TDs (both over 50 yards). He was an All-American.

But Donovan Varner is just as good and yesterday he had FOUR drops, including one that bounced off his hands and was intercepted. And even though Austin Kelly had 10 catches (for 73 yards and a TD), he had THREE drops, including one that bounced off his hands and was intercepted.

Think about it. Sean Renfree was 31 of 39 against Elon with three drops. Against Wake, he was 28 of 44 with nine drops. He's completing passes at a 71 percent rate. But he's hitting his receivers at an 86 percent rate. A few drops are normal -- but 12 out of 71 potential catches? That's awful for what's supposed to be a great receiving corps.

When you go back and reconstruct the game, you have to understand that Duke wasn't going to stop Wake very often and Wake was going to struggle to stop Duke. So why did Wake win? I'd say, go back and look at the game's six turnovers:

--With Duke up 14-7, Rwabukamba intercepts a pass at the Duke 15 and returns it to the Duke 43. I would say that without the INT, Wake scores a touchdown. So that leaves Duke PLUS one TD.

-- To open the second quarter, Duke lines up for its first punt (Wake has had one). Kevin Jones lets the center snap -- not a perfect snap, but not a real bad one -- sail through his hands. Then, instead of falling on the ball (which would have at least given the defense a chance), he tries to pick ip up, leading to a Wake pickup and TD on the play. That cancels the Duke TO edge and leaves the two teams even.

-- Duke takes the ensuing KO and marches right down the field. With 1st and 10 and the Wake 21, Renfree hits Kelly on a crossing pattern at about the 15. The ball bounces off his hands and is intercepted by Wake after about three tips. That TO cost Duke a TD -- leaving Wake up one TD.

-- After the two teams score three TDs in 30 seconds of gametime, Wake is up 28-21. Duke gets the ball after their long halfback pass for a score. Duke has to start at the Wake nine after a penalty on the kickoff, but the Devils get a quick firstdown to the Wake 26. On first down, Renfree hits Varner at the Duke 44 ... the ball bounces off his hands and is intercepted and returned to the Duke 26. Two plays later, Wake scores a TD ... leaving Wake up two TO touchdowns (not even counting the fact that if Varner catches the ball, Duke has the ball near midfield and driving again).

-- On Wake's first possession of the second half, the Deacs are 3rd and 13 at their own 17. Price heaves a deep ball to Williams over the middle. He appears to be open, but Cockrell makes a great recovery and takes the ball away from him at the Duke 39. Here's the key -- the play functioned as a punt for Wake -- a 44 yard punt with no return. I would argue that it didn't impact the TD balance in the game.

-- Late in the game, down 54-41 with just over two minutes left, Renfree throws an INT on the sideline. It's the one TO that's is his fault -- the Wake DB jumped the sideline pattern. It was was more a bad read than a bad throw -- but at that point in the game, Renfree may have been desperate. Still, Duke was at the Wake 39 and driving when he threw it. That cost Duke another TD chance -- and leaves Wake up three TDs in the TO balance.

THAT is why Duke lost the game by six points -- They either gave Wake or cost themselves four TDs while Wake's two mistakes cost themselves one TD and didn't give Duke any.

As bad as the defense was, Duke's passing game should have been good enough to win it. It would have been if our quality receivers would JUST HANG ONTO THE BALL WHEN IT'S IN YOUR HANDS.

As I said, disheartening. The defense will get better as the talented young guys get experience. The improvement in the running game appears to be real. And Renfree is going to be a great one.

But whatever Duke accomplishes this year, they'll never get that game back. I fear it's going to cost us any chance of a bowl game.

PS Kudos to Alex King, the walk-on who replaced Kevin Jones, as punter. He was superb -- a 48.6 average on four punts. Even the one long punt return wasn't a case of out-kicking his coverage -- Duke's two gunners actually overran the play.

Great analysis. You have far more patience and skill than I do to summarize like that. I will partially disagree with you on your conclusion that the offense/receivers lost the game for us. But your argument/s is/are indeed good one/s. Give me a reasonable # of how many of the "drops" should have been caught, allowing our WR/TE a mistake or two and that the other team will play some D and break up a potential completion or two. 4? 6? 8? I think our receivers and QB are fantastic, our OL and RB improved but don't expect them to make every catch. However, if they make 1 or 2 of the expected receptions yesterday, then we may well win. But, 48 points should have been enough for the W as it would have been in every other game played in the history of the ACC. Except this one.

We can't give up 500 yards/4 TO/54 points and expect to win. We can't allow 4 opposing teammates to average 4+ yds/carry (totaling about 270+ yards) in the same game. I think Cut said something to the TV crew before or after the 1st half that we needed to tackle better and more often. We can't have our DB sucked in on fakes/play action/reverses and not be within 10 yards or more of their WR and give up huge gainers/TDs like we did yesterday. And, BTW, I do agree that Duke and Cockrell were absolutely screwed on that no-call around mid-field on Wake's 1st drive. A blatant offensive pass interference call that was incredibly missed/ignored. That let Wake out of a huge hole (3rd and long?) from fairly deep in their own territory.

tommy
09-12-2010, 07:01 PM
It is a shame because it isn't because there is a lack of effort it is just experience, technique and scheme are just all wrong right now.

. . . How'd you like the play?

tommy
09-12-2010, 07:03 PM
The only problem with the defense is that we are slow, weak and inexperienced.

Those don't seem to be significant obstacles to success . . .

devildeac
09-12-2010, 07:08 PM
Great analysis. You have far more patience and skill than I do to summarize like that. I will partially disagree with you on your conclusion that the offense/receivers lost the game for us. But your argument/s is/are indeed good one/s. Give me a reasonable # of how many of the "drops" should have been caught, allowing our WR/TE a mistake or two and that the other team will play some D and break up a potential completion or two. 4? 6? 8? I think our receivers and QB are fantastic, our OL and RB improved but don't expect them to make every catch. However, if they make 1 or 2 of the expected receptions yesterday, then we may well win. But, 48 points should have been enough for the W as it would have been in every other game played in the history of the ACC. Except this one.

We can't give up 500 yards/4 TO/54 points and expect to win. We can't allow 4 opposing teammates to average 4+ yds/carry (totaling about 270+ yards) in the same game. I think Cut said something to the TV crew before or after the 1st half that we needed to tackle better and more often. We can't have our DB sucked in on fakes/play action/reverses and not be within 10 yards or more of their WR and give up huge gainers/TDs like we did yesterday. And, BTW, I do agree that Duke and Cockrell were absolutely screwed on that no-call around mid-field on Wake's 1st drive. A blatant offensive pass interference call that was incredibly missed/ignored. That let Wake out of a huge hole (3rd and long?) from fairly deep in their own territory.

After working in the yard all after noon and re-thinking this post, I realized an error. My next to last sentence in my 1st paragraph should have read "...in many other games played..." . What I did learn from the N&O in Raleigh today was that we now apparently have the ACC FB record for most points scored in a loss. Sorry about the error and need for the correction:o. Surprised someone didn't realize this before me.

CameronBornAndBred
09-12-2010, 07:26 PM
What I did learn from the N&O in Raleigh today was that we now apparently have the ACC FB record for most points scored in a loss.
Wooohoooo! We got a record!
Actually, I haven't looked them up, but I'm thinking there was more than one record posted yesterday. While it wasn't a record, I know that Wake scored it's 3rd longest TD off a pass at our expense. You can't have the score we had and not have something new written in the books.

devildeac
09-12-2010, 08:26 PM
Wooohoooo! We got a record!
Actually, I haven't looked them up, but I'm thinking there was more than one record posted yesterday. While it wasn't a record, I know that Wake scored it's 3rd longest TD off a pass at our expense. You can't have the score we had and not have something new written in the books.
I think I also read that it was the 2nd or 3rd highest scoring game in ACC FB history. I'm not sure I read of any other all-time records being set. 70 points combined in a half might be a record of some sort.

Richard Berg
09-13-2010, 03:03 AM
They also said on ESPN3 that 95 points was the most ever scored at the Deacs' stadium. Of course, we went on to add 7 more in garbage time, so I'm pretty sure that record is firmly "ours."

devildeac
09-13-2010, 08:17 AM
They also said on ESPN3 that 95 points was the most ever scored at the Deacs' stadium. Of course, we went on to add 7 more in garbage time, so I'm pretty sure that record is firmly "ours."

If we had executed an onside kick in a recoverable fashion (a wfu guy basically grabbed it before it went OOB. We didn't even have a chance at it), it would not have been garbage time. I had quite a bit of confidence in our O if we had recovered it with about 1:30 left on the clock and the ball near mid-field. Sigh.

formerdukeathlete
09-13-2010, 10:45 PM
Don't be. The only surprise was seeing Chop Block U take cheap shots at offensive players as well as defenders.

I watched the game on the wide screen, so you can only see so many of the cheap shots and chop blocks. This is something that not many folks realize about Wake Forest and Grobe. If you talk to Duke footballers who say played in the 2005 game, Wake dove at every D lineman's knees and shins with cut blocks. These hurt like crazy and cause injuries. It got so bad that the Conference office had to request Wake to stop doing this. Wake even went for Renfree's knees on late hits, cheap shots. To me this was very transparent.

I think they will have a tougher go of it against Stanford on Saturday with PAC 10 officials. The ACC officials last Saturday let Wake get away with murder.

Back to the Duke game. We just dont have enough talent at linebacker and in the secondary.

OldPhiKap
09-13-2010, 10:51 PM
I watched the game on the wide screen, so you can only see so many of the cheap shots and chop blocks. This is something that not many folks realize about Wake Forest and Grobe. If you talk to Duke footballers who say played in the 2005 game, Wake dove at every D lineman's knees and shins with cut blocks. These hurt like crazy and cause injuries. It got so bad that the Conference office had to request Wake to stop doing this. Wake even went for Renfree's knees on late hits, cheap shots. To me this was very transparent.

I think they will have a tougher go of it against Stanford on Saturday with PAC 10 officials. The ACC officials last Saturday let Wake get away with murder.

Back to the Duke game. We just dont have enough talent at linebacker and in the secondary.

I'm not sure anyone has the depth of talent as Alabama does this year. Have to play smarter, and out-execute. Cut says that we've practiced better than we've played. We need to bring that if we want to have a shot at this.

devildeac
09-19-2010, 07:20 AM
Shame we couldn't score 68 on the Deacs. Or even 58:(.

Devil in the Blue Dress
09-19-2010, 11:39 AM
Shame we couldn't score 68 on the Deacs. Or even 58:(.
Interesting that today so much is being made of the outcome of the Duke - Alabama game, but little is being said about the shellacking that Wake took..... Stanford 68, Wake 24. .... and Wake wasn't even playing the #1 team. Wake lost by 44; Duke, by 49.