Cutcliffe on the hot seat?

[kingboozer]

http://www.athlonsports.com/college-football/college-footballs-coaches-hot-seat-spring-practice-edition

I find this a little ridiculous but thought it's an interesting topic non the less. I think Cutcliffe has done a great job with the tools he has and has a lot of potential long team as a head coach. I also think he's a great ambassador for the university and seems to be a very good person overall. The only thing that makes me nervous is the reports of Tennessee fans growing impatient with Dooley and ready to win. I know he turned them down once but who knows if they call back again?

[Verga3]

http://www.athlonsports.com/college-football/college-footballs-coaches-hot-seat-spring-practice-edition

I find this a little ridiculous but thought it's an interesting topic non the less. I think Cutcliffe has done a great job with the tools he has and has a lot of potential long team as a head coach. I also think he's a great ambassador for the university and seems to be a very good person overall. The only thing that makes me nervous is the reports of Tennessee fans growing impatient with Dooley and ready to win. I know he turned them down once but who knows if they call back again?

"A little ridiculous,"..."interesting topic"?? Complete BS. Completely bogus. What a great source (dripping sarcasm). What is your issue with Cut?

[Greg_Newton]

Duke would be insane to fire Cutcliffe. It would be nice to win some more games this year, but changing a culture isn't something that happens overnight. He's doing a pretty darn good job in my book. The depth and level of athletes and attitudes in general are night and day from a decade ago.

[kingboozer]

"A little ridiculous,"..."interesting topic"?? Complete BS. Completely bogus. What a great source (dripping sarcasm). What is your issue with Cut?

It's actually not BS and it is an interesting topic. I have absolutely no issue with Cut, if you read my post I gave him a lot of credit for what he's done, I was simple trying to start off a conversation as to what we need to do to keep moving in the right direction. If people are seeing him as a coach on the hot seat, don't you think fans/boosters will start rumbling eventually? I think as a Duke fan and with Cut's history at Tennessee it'd be stupid not to feel threatened, we can't compete with that type of program and what they can offer. I don't know why your dripping sarcasm, a publication that's been around for years like Athlon Sports is a good source. Don't twist my words into something I didn't say, no issues here.

[Verga3]

It's actually not BS and it is an interesting topic. I have absolutely no issue with Cut, if you read my post I gave him a lot of credit for what he's done, I was simple trying to start off a conversation as to what we need to do to keep moving in the right direction. If people are seeing him as a coach on the hot seat, don't you think fans/boosters will start rumbling eventually? I think as a Duke fan and with Cut's history at Tennessee it'd be stupid not to feel threatened, we can't compete with that type of program and what they can offer. I don't know why your dripping sarcasm, a publication that's been around for years like Athlon Sports is a good source. Don't twist my words into something I didn't say.

Thanks for all the credit that you give our football coach. I would just drop this tact if I were you. Some folks could missinterpret your "pro-Cut" message.

[mkline09]

I think Cut is pretty much safe unless he goes 3-9 again. Then he might be feeling the seat get luke warm but not hot. He is not in a pressure packed job. He isn't fighting a furious fan base foaming at the mouth with unrealistic expectations every year. He is dealing with small fan base that has only a moderate interest in football. Now that will change a bit if Duke starting winning with regularity. He has the passion, he has the accumen and now he is working on getting the talent. He has made Duke Football into something to keep an eye on at the very least and while it hasn't been always pleasant to watch, this program is far from the embarrassment it has been over the Frank/Roof eras. So overall I think the job is his as long as he wants it and as long as he doesn't suffer some severe head injury that causes him to act in an unscrupulous manner or he turns his program over to an assitant coach who is running wild.

[OldPhiKap]

No. Obviously.


And the argument being proposed is -- Cut is struggling at Duke, so Tennessee is dying to snatch him up? I need another cup of coffee to think about that one.

Anyone who has watched Duke football for any length of time knows that it will take a massive effort to turn our program around. Cut is on his way to doing that. This is assenine.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Cutcliffe is totally safe at Duke. He may not be winning as much as we or he would like, but he has helped change the culture of football at Duke, and that was one of his goals.
However, there is one coach on his staff that is on MY hotseat. Kurt Roper, you need to rewrite your playbook or turn over the reigns.

[75Crazie]

Putting "Cutcliffe" and "hot seat" in the same sentence is just moronic. However, nothing in college sports surprises me any more. I still have a grudge about Red Wilson being fired the day after wrapping up his second straight winning season by upsetting Carolina. I know Butters gets a lot of credit for sticking with K, but that showed the other side of the coin, and I still haven't forgiven Butters for that.

[jv001]

Putting "Cutcliffe" and "hot seat" in the same sentence is just moronic. However, nothing in college sports surprises me any more. I still have a grudge about Red Wilson being fired the day after wrapping up his second straight winning season by upsetting Carolina. I know Butters gets a lot of credit for sticking with K, but that showed the other side of the coin, and I still haven't forgiven Butters for that.

Yeh, that wasn't one of Tom's better decisions. Red did a lot for Duke University and was a great guy. Memories! GoDuke!

[sagegrouse]

Cutcliffe is totally safe at Duke. He may not be winning as much as we or he would like, but he has helped change the culture of football at Duke, and that was one of his goals.
However, there is one coach on his staff that is on MY hotseat. Kurt Roper, you need to rewrite your playbook or turn over the reigns.

I was disappointed last year. I thought Duke had the best QB in the conference and the best kicker in the country. Cutcliffe could not be blamed for thinking so as well. But it was not the case. It may be coaching in the case of Renfree, but I don't think so. It was probably injuries in the case of Snyderwine.

I am still hopeful for Renfree, but I agree with CBB that the offense needs to be a lot more imaginative. We saw some creativity in spring football; maybe we'll get something exciting in the fall.

sagegrouse

[freedevil]

Duke would be insane to fire Cutcliffe. It would be nice to win some more games this year, but changing a culture isn't something that happens overnight. He's doing a pretty darn good job in my book. The depth and level of athletes and attitudes in general are night and day from a decade ago.

Spot. On.

[Mike Corey]

The only reason Cutcliffe's seat is warm is because the University bought him heated cushions.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

The only reason Cutcliffe's seat is warm is because the University bought him heated cushions.
In the Escalade?;)

[bob blue devil]

as a member of the duke community and supporter of duke football, i find the idea that cut isn't doing a good enough job and should be replaced offensive. football results have been at least acceptable given the state of the program he took over and, more importantly, he's represented duke university well in a high profile position.

the author of the article probably just ran out of guys to throw on there - otherwise it would be a top 25 list (instead of top 20), right?

[OZZIE4DUKE]

The only reason Cutcliffe's seat is warm is because the University bought him heated cushions.

Love it! And very insightful comment, Mike! :cool:


As much as I've criticized Curt Roper, here and in another semi-public forum, I think their creativity that we saw in the spring game in using the 3 quarterbacks, and the passing downfield we saw there, bodes well for the team. So I'm willing to wait and see what actually happens in games next fall. Let's remember - Roper calls plays in Cut's offense, not something of his own design. And having a healthy breakaway running back will also help!

[sagegrouse]

as a member of the duke community and supporter of duke football, i find the idea that cut isn't doing a good enough job and should be replaced offensive. football results have been at least acceptable given the state of the program he took over and, more importantly, he's represented duke university well in a high profile position.

the author of the article probably just ran out of guys to throw on there - otherwise it would be a top 25 list (instead of top 20), right?

You are absolutely right! So, here's how you write a piece like this. You have some knowledge of a few coaches who are vulnerable (read J. Feinstein re the doofus, Randy Edsall at UMd). Then you take the 1A list of coaches in the BCS conferences and sort them by record. Then you pick and choose to get your list. A coach with a 15-33 record glows like Rudolph's nose. So you put him on the list of the most vulnerable coaches.

End of story.

sage

[killerleft]

Putting "Cutcliffe" and "hot seat" in the same sentence is just moronic. However, nothing in college sports surprises me any more. I still have a grudge about Red Wilson being fired the day after wrapping up his second straight winning season by upsetting Carolina. I know Butters gets a lot of credit for sticking with K, but that showed the other side of the coin, and I still haven't forgiven Butters for that.

First, I think Coach Cut deserves several more years to make Duke a real competitor in the ACC. And I find it interesting that Red Wilson's name has come up. Let's hope that Duke won't make the sad mistake of letting its current coach go. It might be instructive to know (as many of us certainly do) that Duke has had three winning seasons since those two straight 6-5 years.

Wilson's years since then were spent at Duke, also. Here is a good story that condenses Red's contributions to Elon College and Duke University. The story ran just before Elon and Duke played football in 2010. And, by the way, you could call him Shirley and be entirely correct!

http://www.thetimesnews.com/articles/sides-36592-coach-lived.html

[devildeac]

http://www.athlonsports.com/college-football/college-footballs-coaches-hot-seat-spring-practice-edition

I find this a little ridiculous but thought it's an interesting topic non the less. I think Cutcliffe has done a great job with the tools he has and has a lot of potential long team as a head coach. I also think he's a great ambassador for the university and seems to be a very good person overall. The only thing that makes me nervous is the reports of Tennessee fans growing impatient with Dooley and ready to win. I know he turned them down once but who knows if they call back again?

If Tennessee is interested, I heard Butch Davis is available for the right price ;>) .

[blazindw]

In my 4 years at school (2000-2004), I saw 5 football wins. The only time most students went to the games was when the rumor got out we were winning (which didn't happen till the first game of my junior year). I remember the OT game against Rice where there were so few fans in the stands, the students were able to run down to the open end of the field for the 2nd OT to put pressure on Rice's offense. And I saw every game except one. Granted, I was working for the team for 3 of those years, but I've seen how bad it can get, how it feels when no one cares enough to show up at the games, and when they do, they're gone by halftime.

It takes time to build (or in our case, rebuild) a program. Ted Roof tried and wasn't successful, but I credit him for getting that initial seed of working hard and seeing some results into the minds of football players that put on the Duke uniform. Coach Cutcliffe has taken that to a new level, a level even I thought I wouldn't see for decades at Wallace Wade. Before, it was a miracle when we were losing by single digits. Now, our players EXPECT to win every single game and, most importantly, they are ANGRY if they do lose. Coach Cutcliffe has our team thinking like a major football program, and the amenities that have been put in to help that growth (the new football building, new practice fields, improved stadium culture at Wallace Wade) is all a part of that...we're not thinking like a FCS school. We're thinking like the Ole Misses, the Texas Techs, those teams that know they should be going "bowling" every single year and start to compete to be in the top half of the conference.

Getting to a bowl game is the next step, which involves beating the teams we should (the DII opponent, the lower half of the ACC, our mid-tier nonconference opponents), beating our football rivals (UNC, Wake) and competing against the top half of the ACC and perhaps stealing a game or two (we came close against VT last season). I love that every year we are competing and we're just THIS close to winning more games than losing. This is the year that we need to take that next step. But, I'm glad there's more of us thinking this way as opposed to 10 short years ago, when many of my class thought we would never see the football team win while we were in school.

[CameronBornAndBred]

The Chronicle was down this morning, so it took me a bit to find this quote..but it speaks volumes since it is not coming from a Duke supporter.


"Those days of Duke being a pushover... are long gone,” said Hurricanes linebacker Sean Spence at the time.

Not only have current ACC players seen the Blue Devils’ improvement under head coach David Cutcliffe, but recruits have taken notice of the progress made on the gridiron too. And now many prospects view the Duke program in a new light, allowing it to be on the same playing field as its conference foes in recruiting

http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/mannings-visit-changes-recruiting

[dyedwab]

As Duke fan and and Duke alum, I believe that everything Duke does should be as good as it possibly can be. Coach Cutcliffe has turned the football program in the direction of that happening - something that hadn't occurred in a fairly long while.

Our football program has made slow but steady progress on the field, but the culture surrounding it has improved exponentially under Cutcliffe. In my book, he's got an awful lot of slack in that rope before someone starts tugging on it.

[HaveFunExpectToWin]

If Tennessee is interested, I heard Butch Davis is available for the right price ;>) .

A match made in heaven...

[PDDuke85]

As Duke fan and and Duke alum, I believe that everything Duke does should be as good as it possibly can be. Coach Cutcliffe has turned the football program in the direction of that happening - something that hadn't occurred in a fairly long while.

Our football program has made slow but steady progress on the field, but the culture surrounding it has improved exponentially under Cutcliffe. In my book, he's got an awful lot of slack in that rope before someone starts tugging on it.

Back to back 7 win seasons and it will be "Welcome to David Cutcliffe Field at Wallace Wade Stadium"

Cut inherited a program that was pulseless. The progress on the field is to the point of leaving games somewhat angry after a loss, rather than either accepting defeat as the norm, or not going at all.

In Cut I Trust.

[OldPhiKap]

In my 4 years at school (2000-2004), I saw 5 football wins. The only time most students went to the games was when the rumor got out we were winning (which didn't happen till the first game of my junior year). I remember the OT game against Rice where there were so few fans in the stands, the students were able to run down to the open end of the field for the 2nd OT to put pressure on Rice's offense. And I saw every game except one. Granted, I was working for the team for 3 of those years, but I've seen how bad it can get, how it feels when no one cares enough to show up at the games, and when they do, they're gone by halftime.

It takes time to build (or in our case, rebuild) a program. Ted Roof tried and wasn't successful, but I credit him for getting that initial seed of working hard and seeing some results into the minds of football players that put on the Duke uniform. Coach Cutcliffe has taken that to a new level, a level even I thought I wouldn't see for decades at Wallace Wade. Before, it was a miracle when we were losing by single digits. Now, our players EXPECT to win every single game and, most importantly, they are ANGRY if they do lose. Coach Cutcliffe has our team thinking like a major football program, and the amenities that have been put in to help that growth (the new football building, new practice fields, improved stadium culture at Wallace Wade) is all a part of that...we're not thinking like a FCS school. We're thinking like the Ole Misses, the Texas Techs, those teams that know they should be going "bowling" every single year and start to compete to be in the top half of the conference.

Getting to a bowl game is the next step, which involves beating the teams we should (the DII opponent, the lower half of the ACC, our mid-tier nonconference opponents), beating our football rivals (UNC, Wake) and competing against the top half of the ACC and perhaps stealing a game or two (we came close against VT last season). I love that every year we are competing and we're just THIS close to winning more games than losing. This is the year that we need to take that next step. But, I'm glad there's more of us thinking this way as opposed to 10 short years ago, when many of my class thought we would never see the football team win while we were in school.

About as well-said as I could imagine.

I always think back to Cut's comment when he first came to Duke about the conditioning of our team. Something to the effect that it was the softest, most out-of-shape team he had ever seen in D1. You look at where we have gone in that metric alone, and tell me we haven't progressed.

We are moving in the right direction, and in the right way. We also have a very tough schedule this year. So the boys better strap their helmets on and get ready to fight. Game On.

[dukeballboy88]

Cutcliffe is totally safe at Duke. He may not be winning as much as we or he would like, but he has helped change the culture of football at Duke, and that was one of his goals.
However, there is one coach on his staff that is on MY hotseat. Kurt Roper, you need to rewrite your playbook or turn over the reigns.

I agree with this. I read this as I am holding the remote I had to buy, because I smashed my other one, after we decided to kick a fg on 4th and 1 to go up 6 against Wake. I dont know whose call it was but its way to conservative for me. It seemed like when we got in the red zone we were happy just to get 3.

[budwom]

I'd say he's safe for the time being, but not "totally safe" in the intermediate term. I'd consider him to be on the warm seat.
Another three win season, and the seat will get distinctly warmer.
p.s. Cut certainly bears responsibility for Roper and his playcalling for what it's worth. That must improve if we expect our record to improve.

[wilko]

The only "hot seat" Cutcliffe is on are the black vinyl seats in his car when he leaves the top down.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

I am hesitant to even reply to this thread and dignify the article with a response, as it is further proof that anyone with a pulse is now able to portray themself as an "expert" and get published on the internet. That being said...

Cutcliffe is far from the hot seat. The program has made remarkable progress, and continues to be on the way up. He is a class act and has brought a sense of hope that we haven't had since Fred Goldsmith's miracle in 1994. If, for some dumb reason, we were were to get rid of him, it would be incredibly difficult for us to find a replacement, as it would be final proof that it is impossible to win at Duke, and no one in their right mind would want to take on that challenge.

However, as much as I am supportive of Coach Cut, I do think there is much more room for improvement and I'm sure he realizes this. There continue to be too many dumb mistakes - much like the military academies structure their style of play around their core competencies, we allegedly have brighter players than most of our opponents - at least in the classroom, if not on the football field - so we need to cut down on the mental errors, both by coaches and players.

[moonpie23]

yeah, he's on the hot seat......by that i mean, NO he's DEFINITELY NOT on the hot seat...


bad thread....can we lock?

[Greg_Newton]

Before, it was a miracle when we were losing by single digits.

Great post overall, and I think this is the type of detail we tend to forget (or not realize, if you didn't really follow Duke football a decade ago). The simple fact that we have a team that is consistently competitive with legitimate BCS conference teams and demands some measure of respect from opponents is a huge accomplishment, as ridiculous as that sounds.

Building a BCS conference program "from scratch" is one thing; building one from where Duke was when Cut inherited the reins is magnitudes more difficult.

[Acymetric]

I'd say he's safe for the time being, but not "totally safe" in the intermediate term. I'd consider him to be on the warm seat.
Another three win season, and the seat will get distinctly warmer.
p.s. Cut certainly bears responsibility for Roper and his playcalling for what it's worth. That must improve if we expect our record to improve.

I think this is more or less accurate. Cut has done a great job, I'm a huge Cut fan, and have been to as many games as work and geographic location permitted the past few years (starting with Roof's last game against unc...ugh) but there has to be measurable improvement in wins eventually. Obviously we have improved from where we were before Cut got here, but have we improved upon his first season or two? I'm not in the bowl or bust camp (I assume there is such a camp based on posts at the end of last season) but 3 wins would be a bad look and less than three would be pretty concerning.

Anyways, see you guys at the Devil Walk!

[blazindw]

We also have a very tough schedule this year. So the boys better strap their helmets on and get ready to fight. Game On.

Here's what we are looking at with our schedule (note, we don't have BC, Maryland and NC State this year, two of which would be considered at the bottom of the ACC in terms of talent):

Non-conference:
FIU
@Stanford
NC Central
Memphis

ACC:
@Wake
UVa
@VT
UNC
@FSU
Clemson
@GT
Miami

Here's how we should approach them:

Should Wins/Must Wins/Gotta Wins
FIU
NC Central
Memphis

Football Rivals (UNC + teams we've played very tough the past few years):
Wake
UNC
UVa

Middle of the Pack
GT
Miami (though will be much improved this year)

Reaches
Clemson

Stretches
Stanford
FSU
VT

If we win all of those first two categories, pick off one or both of the middle of the pack and play tough against the final 4, that's 7-8 wins. We probably should have won against VT last year and I know our boys will be out for revenge, but it will be tall orders to go to Palo Alto, Tallahassee and Blacksburg and pull out victories. Victories in those games could be viewed as program-defining.

[dukebballcamper90-91]

Anyone on this board who thinks he has done a good job is completely biased. Take of the duke goggles, in 4 years at Duke he has 6 conference wins and the acc is a horrible football conference. His should be extremely hot.

[duke09hms]

Here's what we are looking at with our schedule (note, we don't have BC, Maryland and NC State this year, two of which would be considered at the bottom of the ACC in terms of talent):

Non-conference:
FIU
@Stanford
NC Central
Memphis

ACC:
@Wake
UVa
@VT
UNC
@FSU
Clemson
@GT
Miami

Here's how we should approach them:

Should Wins/Must Wins/Gotta Wins
FIU
NC Central
Memphis

Football Rivals (UNC + teams we've played very tough the past few years):
Wake
UNC
UVa

Middle of the Pack
GT
Miami (though will be much improved this year)

Reaches
Clemson

Stretches
Stanford
FSU
VT

If we win all of those first two categories, pick off one or both of the middle of the pack and play tough against the final 4, that's 7-8 wins. We probably should have won against VT last year and I know our boys will be out for revenge, but it will be tall orders to go to Palo Alto, Tallahassee and Blacksburg and pull out victories. Victories in those games could be viewed as program-defining.

That unfortunately is a huge IF for Duke Football. I would say our ceiling is accomplishing that "IF" and getting into a bowl at 6 wins. I put the most-likely win count at 3 with a range of 2-6.

We will probably drop 1 of the must-wins (most likely FIU, Mario Cristobal is a great coach and will be looking for revenge) and pick up a rivalry win (most likely Wake Forest, although they've won something like 11 straight against us). Wake is possibly the only team in the ACC that might have less talent than us. We've had success against UVA in the past, but their new coach has been bringing in some monster recruiting classes, and UNC really outclasses us talent-wise.

So Duke Football 2012 - most likely 3 wins, at most 6 if we're extremely lucky, and I'm hoping for 4. We really get screwed by not playing any of BC, MD, or NC State this year, and there is a decent chance we go winless in the ACC.

[OldPhiKap]

Anyone on this board who thinks he has done a good job is completely biased. Take of the duke goggles, in 4 years at Duke he has 6 conference wins and the acc is a horrible football conference. His should be extremely hot.

You do know Cut has the best winning percentage of any Duke coach since Steve Spurrier, right?

http://www.nationalchamps.net/NCAA/database/duke_database.htm

[DukieInKansas]

I think Coach Cutcliffe had much more to do than just win games since he arrived on campus. As has been discussed, improving Duke football is more than just winning games. Upgrades to the facilities and changes in attitudes of the players and fans need to happen as part of the process. This leads to better recruits.

I went to a lot of games when I was on campus - some in the rain, some where I wasn't sure I could find anyone to go with me, a lot of them losses as I recall. After graduation, I didn't see many games - living in Kansas limits the tv possibilities. I have watched more games in the years since Coach Cutcliffe came than in the way too many years to count between my graduation and his arrival. I have even flown back to Durham to attend a game and hope to fit one into my fall schedule this year. I think Coach Cut is making progress and will continue to do so. Didn't I just see that a highly ranked junior just committed to Duke? I think he will get the program back where it was long before my time at Duke. I don't think he is on the hot seat now and I fully expect the improvements to continue to happen so that he won't be on the hot seat in the near, and not so near, future.

I'm looking forward to the next football season.

[Bluedog]

You do know Cut has the best winning percentage of any Duke coach since Steve Spurrier, right?

http://www.nationalchamps.net/NCAA/database/duke_database.htm

While I agree that Cut has had a major turnaround and is NOT on the hot seat, that link isn't updated with last season's results. If you include it, Cut's winning percentage of .3125 is basically equivalent to that of Barry Wilson (0.307) and Fred Goldsmith (0.304), while being superior to the anemic results of Franks (.135) and Roof (.118). Cut's ACC winning percentage (.1875) is better than that of Wilson's (.133) and negligibly worse than Goldsmith's (.2).

[arnie]

While I agree that Cut has had a major turnaround and is NOT on the hot seat, that link isn't updated with last season's results. If you include it, Cut's winning percentage of .3125 is basically equivalent to that of Barry Wilson (0.307) and Fred Goldsmith (0.304), while being superior to the anemic results of Franks (.135) and Roof (.118). Cut's ACC winning percentage (.1875) is better than that of Wilson's (.133) and negligibly worse than Goldsmith's (.2).

In fairness to Goldsmith and Wilson, I don't think they had the opportunity to play nearly as many
non-Division 1A games as Cut. Wilson's teams were fairly competive, but they lost most of the close ones (a familiar theme).

[Devilsfan]

Why would you permit this thread to even appear. Coach Cut is the best head coach Duke could ever hope to have running their program. He's ethical to a fault, knowledgable, a great teacher and has former (now multi-millionaire players) returning for council and futher instruction. Maybe whoever started this thread doesn't deserve a quality person like Cut running their program.

[Olympic Fan]

In fairness to Goldsmith and Wilson, I don't think they had the opportunity to play nearly as many
non-Division 1A games as Cut. Wilson's teams were fairly competive, but they lost most of the close ones (a familiar theme).

What a bizarre thead ...

Poor Barry Wilson ... he inherited a program that had won 15 games in the two previous years and was coming off a bowl trip and an ACC co-championship.

Wilson won 4-4-2-3 games, essentially starting the dive to the bottom of the BCS. And you're defending the guy because he didn't get to play as many D-11 schools (he played two in four years). They guy turned a competitive ACC progrm into a joke.

Goldsmith caught lightning in a bottle in his first year (with seniors recruited after the 1989 bowl season), but when hey left, his program bottomed out quickly -- 3 .. 0 ... 2 ... 4 wins in his last four seasons (he only got to play one D-2 program in that time.

Those are the guys who helped destroy Duke football ... culinnating in the nightmare that it became under Franks and Roof (12 wins in seven seasons ... three of those 1-AA wins).

Cutcliffe has made TREMENDOUS progress. It's true that he needs to take another step, but he's taken the worst football program in the BCS (and one of the worst in all of Division 1-A) and made it cmpetitive. He's won twice as many ACC games in his four years than Roof and Franks manahed in the previous eight years combined.

Yeah, at some point he's got to take the program another step forward, but he's pulled us out of the gutter ... and can't see how any rational fan can think he deserves to be on the hot seat for not getting us airborne yet.

[Verga3]

yeah, he's on the hot seat......by that i mean, NO he's DEFINITELY NOT on the hot seat...


bad thread....can we lock?

Completely agree. Mods? Why are we doing this to ourselves? No good comes of this...the initial premise was bogus. Shut 'er down, please.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Completely agree. Mods? Why are we doing this to ourselves? No good comes of this...the initial premise was bogus. Shut 'er down, please.
Jeesh, it's a thread full of opinions based on an opinion piece. There is nothing wrong with a healthy debate, and it's enjoyable to read some of the history that others such as OF has posted about. It's one thing to kill a thread because it's full of rumors and falsehoods, but this one is neither. If you disagree with the premise, post why. If you agree with the premise (as at least one has done), then post why. If you don't enjoy it, then ignore it. But don't ask for it to be shut down. It's not like we have a basketball game to watch.

[Verga3]

Jeesh, it's a thread full of opinions based on an opinion piece. There is nothing wrong with a healthy debate, and it's enjoyable to read some of the history that others such as OF has posted about. It's one thing to kill a thread because it's full of rumors and falsehoods, but this one is neither. If you disagree with the premise, post why. If you agree with the premise (as at least one has done), then post why. If you don't enjoy it, then ignore it. But don't ask for it to be shut down. It's not like we have a basketball game to watch.

Not going to dignify this thread with another post. Ignoring, per your suggestion. Thanks.

[duke09hms]

That unfortunately is a huge IF for Duke Football. I would say our ceiling is accomplishing that "IF" and getting into a bowl at 6 wins. I put the most-likely win count at 3 with a range of 2-6.

We will probably drop 1 of the must-wins (most likely FIU, Mario Cristobal is a great coach and will be looking for revenge) and pick up a rivalry win (most likely Wake Forest, although they've won something like 11 straight against us). Wake is possibly the only team in the ACC that might have less talent than us. We've had success against UVA in the past, but their new coach has been bringing in some monster recruiting classes, and UNC really outclasses us talent-wise.

So Duke Football 2012 - most likely 3 wins, at most 6 if we're extremely lucky, and I'm hoping for 4. We really get screwed by not playing any of BC, MD, or NC State this year, and there is a decent chance we go winless in the ACC.

In conclusion, no Cutcliffe is not in any danger. Let's be serious, we're Duke Football, who else could we get? He is definitely turning the program around slowly but surely, but he aint no Jim Harbaugh. I think Coach Cut is a great person, a great man, a decent recruiter but average in-game strategist and game-planner. Almost loyal to a fault - OC Kurt Roper, I'm looking at you. Our Coach Cutcliffe is a good coach.

Good but not great. A great coach would not allow his team to come out flat and lose to a much less talented team in Richmond (finished 3-9 in 1AA) in the most important game of the season, the season opener, or make as many mental mistakes as we do on a regular basis. But this is Duke football, and a good coach is the best we can hope for.

Even with the extremely difficult schedule, this year might be the best chance we have of making a bowl since we have a senior QB in Sean Renfree. Although Cutcliffe isn't on the hot seat, one has to wonder how many wins the average college football coach could have won given the huge increases in money/facilities/institutional commitment Duke has put into football.

What proportion of the increase in wins can be explained by Cutcliffe's coaching, and what proportion by Duke's increased commitment?

[chrishoke]

Don't forget, Cut and his assistants are getting paid much, much more than previous staffs and have the benefit of a finally supportive administration, new facilities and planned upgrades, etc. His seat is getting warm. Expectations at Duke have rightfully been raised. Cut is the right man for the job. I firmly believe he will continue to move the program to respectibility. He needs to.

[gep]

Anyone on this board who thinks he has done a good job is completely biased. Take of the duke goggles, in 4 years at Duke he has 6 conference wins and the acc is a horrible football conference. His should be extremely hot.

As I continually hear one local sports radio talk show guy... if you get rid of the coach, are you sure that you can get someone "better"... :confused: Just changing, for changing sake, and just hoping that the "new" coach will be "better", is not any better than keeping a coach that has shown a dedication to Duke, and to improving the football culture.

I, for one, support Coach Cut without reservations. He has made (and hopefully continues to make) Duke football something that I anticipate all week for. Fortunately for me, a lot of the games are on ESPN3. I gotta admit, many games have been... like... oh well, just wait till next week. :cool:

I'm also hopeful that not only does progress continue, but Coach Cut makes Duke his "last stop" in his coaching career... after bring Duke football back to respectability. And I'm hoping he has the chance to leave on his own terms, when he is ready.

[dukebballcamper90-91]

Cut can manage but at some point you have to gamble and take chances which I have yet to see him do. He should look at Grobe over at Wake for coaching with little to no talent.

[jv001]

Cut can manage but at some point you have to gamble and take chances which I have yet to see him do. He should look at Grobe over at Wake for coaching with little to no talent.

I can't agree with all of this^. We recruit some of the same high school players as Wake Forest. The difference is Grobe has been going the red-shirt route longer than Coach Cut. As for opening things up, you could be right. I think we've been a little conservative on offense at times. I look for that to change this year. GoDuke!

[dukebballcamper90-91]

With no talent you have to run things like half back passes and flea flickers, (as I've seen Wake do)

[OldPhiKap]

With no talent you have to run things like half back passes and flea flickers, (as I've seen Wake do)

I remember when we were the best quick-kick team in the country. Multiple years, actually.

[killerleft]

I remember when we were the best quick-kick team in the country. Multiple years, actually.

Well, it helps if your quarterback is a good kicker. Spurrier had that weapon available.

[OldPhiKap]

Well, it helps if your quarterback is a good kicker. Spurrier had that weapon available.

I remember being at a Duke game @ GT during the Goldsmith years. We quick-kicked, and the Tech guy next to me said he'd never seen one. "Dude," I replied, "I've seen a lifetime's worth."

(Although we won that game and went to a bowl, so there you go).

Third and a mile is bad under any circumstances.

[jv001]

With no talent you have to run things like half back passes and flea flickers, (as I've seen Wake do)

I think we should go the single wing offense and mix in the veer, :cool:GoDuke

[killerleft]

I think we should go the single wing offense and mix in the veer, :cool:GoDuke

Elon College (now University) ran the single wing offense well into the 70s. And who brought this offense to Elon? Red Wilson. My high school team ran the single wing all the way to a state title in the late 60s. I was a wingback for the jv team. I feel even older than I am right now:p. And no, our helmets were not leather, at least on the outside.

[johnb]

Cut's teams aren't winning many games, Cut's recruiting seems about where it was before he got here, and Cut's in-game play calling regularly makes me cringe (yes, there's on OC who calls the plays, but Cut's the head coach and is responsible). Nevertheless, he seems like just the guy for the Duke job, and I don't think he'll be fired anytime soon--but it's not like college coaching is a safe job. I'd guess that no coach can win 3 or 4 games a season indefinitely.

To confirm that, I looked for a website that offered up the 20 college football coaches with the most losses. All of the coaches are fairly old, of course, and Paterno is still listed as "active," but it's useful to note that 18 of the 20 also had overall winning records; i.e., the coaches with losing records didn't get to stay in coaching for more than a handful of seasons. http://college-football-coaches.findthedata.org/saved_search/College-Football-Coaches-Most-Career-Losses

Oh, and I agree that this thread is pointless, but I'd rather talk about this than Lehigh.

[SmartDevil]

I think we were fortunate to get and keep Cut, and I look for a lot more victories to celebrate in the coming years.

Unfortunately, though I used to be very involved in the program and even after that kept up closely with it, those days are past and I don't get to see many Duke football games currently. So a few questions for those who are currently more familiar with the program than I am.

1. I think Cut had a reputation for offensive prowess. How can that be better fulfilled than it has so far at Duke?

2. Could the pros Cut is close to (Mannings, etc.) and some of their colleagues be utilized to play more of a role in drawing attentinon to Duke football and thus helping recruiting?

3. Does anyone have any solid thoughts on how recruiting can be stepped up? Seems like Stanford and Duke have higher (if not identical to one another's) admissions standards than other schools. But Stanford has met with a lot more success in recruting (and on the field) than we have.

[ThePublisher]

This thread is jibberish. No way he's anywhere close to being fired. Duke has won more games in the last few years under him than in what seems like a decade before.

[formerdukeathlete]

In conclusion, no Cutcliffe is not in any danger. Let's be serious, we're Duke Football, who else could we get? He is definitely turning the program around slowly but surely, but he aint no Jim Harbaugh. I think Coach Cut is a great person, a great man, a decent recruiter but average in-game strategist and game-planner. Almost loyal to a fault - OC Kurt Roper, I'm looking at you. Our Coach Cutcliffe is a good coach.

Good but not great. A great coach would not allow his team to come out flat and lose to a much less talented team in Richmond (finished 3-9 in 1AA) in the most important game of the season, the season opener, or make as many mental mistakes as we do on a regular basis. But this is Duke football, and a good coach is the best we can hope for.

Even with the extremely difficult schedule, this year might be the best chance we have of making a bowl since we have a senior QB in Sean Renfree. Although Cutcliffe isn't on the hot seat, one has to wonder how many wins the average college football coach could have won given the huge increases in money/facilities/institutional commitment Duke has put into football.

What proportion of the increase in wins can be explained by Cutcliffe's coaching, and what proportion by Duke's increased commitment?

I agree with your post, but the question you have asked must have been a bit rhetorical. I think good coaches can and would be interestged in the Duke job. Cut's pay with fairly easily met incentives is about 2 mill. The staff have a nice salary budget. Admissions curtails recruiting more at Stanford, Northwestern, Rice, the service academies, than it does at Duke.

Ultimately, if Cut does not make it, it will be because of recruiting. He wasted a lot of effort and time early on pushing the Admissions office to admit marginal students, some of whom who were not NCAA qualified at the time, while not offering elite prospects who were better students. In other words, he started out recruiting much differently than Spurrier, Goldsmith, Wilson, even Roof, and differently than James Franklin in his first year at Vandy. Vandy's big uptick in recruting with first year coach James Franklin is worth noting when considering what might have been possible recruiting wise with Cut had he employed a different approach at first, when it can be the best, most opportune time to sell the turnaround.

I think Cut is under very little pressure right now. But, if we were to lose to FIU and Memphis this season, I think that would change pretty quickly.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

One observation about the recruits brought in by Coach Cutcliffe and what sort of academic qualifications they may have: it's easy to note the high graduation rate for the football team, but it's also noteworthy that the team as a whole maintains a B average. This statistic is mentioned in various news releases and at functions like the football banquet.

It's rather interesting that such an average is possible despite seemingly low performing student athletes being admitted to play football.

[Newton_14]

One observation about the recruits brought in by Coach Cutcliffe and what sort of academic qualifications they may have: it's easy to note the high graduation rate for the football team, but it's also noteworthy that the team as a whole maintains a B average. This statistic is mentioned in various news releases and at functions like the football banquet.

It's rather interesting that such an average is possible despite seemingly low performing student athletes being admitted to play football.

Thanks for the info D. Seems odd that all these supposedly poor acadamic recruits that Cutcliffe somehow coerced the admissions office into accepting are all graduating on time while maintaining B averages, no? If that was actually happening, one would think the actual academic performance once they got in would be poor. Year after year Duke graduates football players at a high rate, so whatever approach Cut is taking with recruiting, it certainly has not negatively impacted academics.

[formerdukeathlete]

Thanks for the info D. Seems odd that all these supposedly poor acadamic recruits that Cutcliffe somehow coerced the admissions office into accepting are all graduating on time while maintaining B averages, no? If that was actually happening, one would think the actual academic performance once they got in would be poor. Year after year Duke graduates football players at a high rate, so whatever approach Cut is taking with recruiting, it certainly has not negatively impacted academics.

I would get back to my original premise, and that is, Cut did not recruit as effectively as he might have when beginning at Duke.

Look at Cut's first year, his first full year, where he had already had an opertunity to recruit half a class in the prior year,

http://rivals.yahoo.com/duke/football/recruiting/commitments/2009/duke-2

Compare the academic profiles and rivals ratings with James Franklin's first year at Vanderbilt

http://rivals.yahoo.com/duke/football/recruiting/commitments/2012/vanderbilt-72

What you will find is that Franklin recruited better talent with better appearing academic profiles on average.

In 2009, according to the rivals database , Cut offered just 11 rivals 4 star rated recruits. We did not offer a number of higher-rated prospects whose academic profiles appeared to be quite strong, and who received offers from the academic schools: Stanford, Northwestern, Vandy, Rice. Cut did not quite get the academic, interest in Duke correlation. We also had no business offering football players who were not projected to be NCAA eligible at the time, and certainly no business taking verbal commitments from them.

In terms of GPAs and graduation rates, if you added back players dismissed from the Football Program and pulled out walkons it would look a bit different. Recent graduation rates reflect Roof's recruiting, which was at a higher academic level among scholarship players. I also would assert we learn not much in terms of what is possible in recrutiing scholarship players in making observations of a B average for the Football Team. 20% of the team are 20 plus invited walkons with math verbal SATs pushing 1400, which is great btw, and which Cuts predecessors did not have.

I think the point is to look back and learn from what was done and to understand what might be possible in the future. Because, if Cut gets on the hot seat, and we then have to make a change, we should be better prepared for the next hiring decision and have a better understanding of what is possible. Our goal is to have the most competitive Football Program as possible. The question is, what is possible in recruiting scholarship players. I think you can look to Stanford and Vandy for the answers there.

[CameronBornAndBred]

What you will find is that Franklin recruited better talent with better appearing academic profiles on average.


You will also find that Franklin coaches for a team that plays in the SEC, which is huge advantage when it comes to recruiting. I also submit that using Franklin as an example is a lousy idea since he hasn't coached his first class in a game yet. Let's look back and see how he's doing in 4 years. I'm sure you will point out that he went bowling in his first year (and ended still with a losing record) but I'll point out that Fred Goldsmith did the same thing with the class that he inherited. Then the bottom fell out.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

One thing I learned in my statistics classes at Duke is that one can make any assertion appear true by selective use of data.

As one who has been around the football program for decades, I would observe that the climate is so much more positive and vital these days. The last time there was a such strikingly positive climate was when Steve Spurrier was at Duke. To borrow from Coach K who's spoken of this concept in terms of individual players, every team has its own race to run, its own path of development. While some comparisons to others may be helpful, such comparisons can be limiting in appreciating the progress made.

[OldPhiKap]

One thing I learned in my statistics classes at Duke is that one can make any assertion appear true by selective use of data.


Did you know that 24.6% of all statistics are made up on the spot?

[formerdukeathlete]

Did you know that 24.6% of all statistics are made up on the spot?

If you go onto the rivals recruit search database, select 2009, select 4 star rated, select Duke and then select only recruits with offers. 11 names come up whom we offered in the 2009 class. We landed 2 of the 11 (18.2%). In the same recruiting class, according to rivals, Stanford offered 45 four star recruits and landed 8 (17.8%). And, that is with higher academic cutoffs than we have. How many more elite players might we have landed had we simply offered? I think the answer to that is more, and just one more might have made the difference in winning or losing games. Land 4 times as many as in Stanford and we could be in the hunt for an ACC championship.

[CameronBornAndBred]

If you go onto the rivals recruit search database, select 2009, select 4 star rated, select Duke and then select only recruits with offers. 11 names come up whom we offered in the 2009 class. We landed 2 of the 11 (18.2%). In the same recruiting class, according to rivals, Stanford offered 45 four star recruits and landed 8 (17.8%).
I don't know the answer, so this is an honest question. How many scholarships can we (or any school) give per year? I would guess far less than 45. SO if we offer 45 to the same athletes that Stanford offered, without having Stanford's record and reputation in football, do you honestly expect us to land the same number they did? And we'll end up with less overall folks in uniform since we offered to folks we didn't have a chance with.
Also, why select 2009? Once again, I don't know the answer to this question, but was that the most 4 stars we had offered in Cut's tenure so far? If not, that's the year you need to look at. Hell, even if we offered 20 last year, I would be surprised that if we got 2. I'm surprised we got 2 in 2009.
Thirdly, if you know anything about Cut's recruiting, you know that he doesn't go by what others say..and I'm thankful for that. Yes..there are obviously some that earn the stars they have, but Cut has found plenty that have proved their doubters wrong. Want an example? Conner Vernon. Rated squat. 3 stars. 148th in his position, Cutcliffe brought him into Duke. I don't think there is much else that needs to be said about Conner to prove that point.

[OldPhiKap]

If you go onto the rivals recruit search database, select 2009, select 4 star rated, select Duke and then select only recruits with offers. 11 names come up whom we offered in the 2009 class. We landed 2 of the 11 (18.2%). In the same recruiting class, according to rivals, Stanford offered 45 four star recruits and landed 8 (17.8%). And, that is with higher academic cutoffs than we have. How many more elite players might we have landed had we simply offered? I think the answer to that is more, and just one more might have made the difference in winning or losing games. Land 4 times as many as in Stanford and we could be in the hunt for an ACC championship.

I don't follow recruiting of any sport, so take this for what it's worth. I spent four years in Durham and, with all love, it ain't Palo Alto by a long shot. Just sayin' -- not apples and oranges necessarily. Plus, we recruit East Coast against the SEC and other ACC teams. Again, not sure that Stanford is the proper comparison.

[MaxAMillion]

I don't follow recruiting of any sport, so take this for what it's worth. I spent four years in Durham and, with all love, it ain't Palo Alto by a long shot. Just sayin' -- not apples and oranges necessarily. Plus, we recruit East Coast against the SEC and other ACC teams. Again, not sure that Stanford is the proper comparison.

I think Stanford is a good comparison only in the fact that they were 16-40 in the five seasons prior to Harbaugh showing up. That was two different coaches. I think Duke has to get lucky in finding a great coach (like they did with Spurrier once upon a time). Great coaches can recruit the players they need to work in their system. Anything less than a great coach will probably just result in Duke getting results like we are seeing now. I am not suggesting that Cutcliffe is a poor coach. I am also not suggesting that it is easy to find a great coach. I just think Duke will spin its wheels in football (and recruiting) until they are fortunate enough to hire a great coach again.

[formerdukeathlete]

I don't follow recruiting of any sport, so take this for what it's worth. I spent four years in Durham and, with all love, it ain't Palo Alto by a long shot. Just sayin' -- not apples and oranges necessarily. Plus, we recruit East Coast against the SEC and other ACC teams. Again, not sure that Stanford is the proper comparison.

I agree with you re Durham versus Palo Alto, but....

Durham actually has a highly attractive location with respect to recruiting. It is roughly half-way between Boston and Miami; it is not rough to get to from anywhere along the Eastern Seaboard. The town itself is no Palo Alto, but as a college area it rivals Palo Alto, at least, if not surpases Palo Alto, that is, when adding in Chapel Hill and Raleigh.

Why the comparisons with Stanford? Well, they are among the Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT Stanford most difficult major universities to get into. But, we are next to Stanford in selectictivity among FBS schools, and our 25th to 75th percentile, mid-range standardized test scores are virtually the same. Our next in line competitor is Northwestern, and I believe it is still the case that where Northwestern and Duke are the choices, 80% of entering freshman still choose Duke over Northwestern. We have a lot of appeal academically and this extends to and among football recruiting prospects.

The nature of the appeal of Duke and Stanford for football recruits over large FBS program schools would be much the same. What would cause a top recruit to pick Duke over an SEC school, for example, as in what Matt Daniels decided to do when recruited by Ted Roof? It would be an interest in attending an elite university. In most all cases a kid making such a choice would be a better student (Matt Daniels was a very good student in high school).

When Cutcliffe started at Duke, rather than making sure he went after all the Matt Daniels's in recruiting classes, he focused more locally and pushed the Admissions Office and admin at Duke for no limits on the lower end academically in recruiting, no limits on exceptions. If fact he pushed them further by obtaining commitments of prospects who were not NCAA qualified. Several of these kids were not able to attend any FBS school on scholarship. One ended up going to East Carolina. Cutcliffe also spent a lot of time recruiting regionally kids who were just above the lowered cutoffs, who had other FBS offers, including UNC offers. These efforts were futile for the most part.

What do we learn from Stanford's success and how much of this transfers to Duke? Stanford has a 1000 math verbal cutoff for Football in admissions. There may be some, very slight flexibility if the GPA is high enough, but not much. The team I have read averages into the 1200s math verbal, into the 80s percentiles. Faced with higher cutoffs than Duke's, they go out and identifly firstly among elite recruits who among them may meet their academic criteria. It just so happens that this identification process also indentifies recruits who may be receptive to the notion of attending an elite school, which is more work, than spending 4 years in say Columbus Ohio before going or planning to go pro.

I think a lot of what works at Stanford recruiting wise will work at Duke. I think most of it is transferable. I think Cut is employing more of the Stanford approach today, which is helpful. Stanford's tremendous success, because much of their recruiting approach transfers to Duke, dispels notions that successful Football at Duke requires admitting very marginal students. To the contrary, and we, I think, should be aware of this, what will work at Duke when, if we go looking for another coach.

The impediment to success at Duke in Football has not been academics. Its been level of commitment. We are paying very competitively for coaching. We were able to fundraise for a new fieldhouse. Now I would look to the stadium as a problem. What the administration and faculty may choke on is why would we want to spend 100 million on a stadium for a sport which may be incompatible with the academic mission and adverse to the prestige of the University? I think the answer is, based on Stanford's success, that we can be competitive and profitable in Football with a team which averages 1100 plus math verbal. I think all it takes is fixing Wallace Wade and having the right approach to recruiting.

[davekay1971]

I think Stanford is a good comparison only in the fact that they were 16-40 in the five seasons prior to Harbaugh showing up. That was two different coaches. I think Duke has to get lucky in finding a great coach (like they did with Spurrier once upon a time). Great coaches can recruit the players they need to work in their system. Anything less than a great coach will probably just result in Duke getting results like we are seeing now. I am not suggesting that Cutcliffe is a poor coach. I am also not suggesting that it is easy to find a great coach. I just think Duke will spin its wheels in football (and recruiting) until they are fortunate enough to hire a great coach again.

Of course, Harbaugh is now the coach of the 49ers after a short stay in Palo Alto. Spurrier was at Duke for 3 years before making the leap to Florida. It remains to be seen how Stanford holds up now that Harbaugh and Luck are gone. 20 years after Spurrier, Duke has finally started to show signs of life in Cutcliffe.

Finding a "great coach", for a program like Duke (and, I'd submit, like Stanford) frequently means losing the great coach shortly thereafter. I'm not suggesting that Duke should aim for mediocre...but it's not a bad idea to do what Duke did - hire a guy with some street cred who is already at a point in his career that he is more likely to stay and build a program that can be sustained, rather than putting together a couple really impressive teams and then bolting for greener pastures.

Cutcliffe has put some life in Duke's program. There are better success stories out there, faster upward arcs...but Cutcliffe has certainly taken Duke out of perennial inclusion in ESPN's Bottom 10 and made our program competitive in most games we play. This is the same Duke program that threatened records for most consecutive losses and was an annual possibility for a winless season before Cut arrived. No idea if that means we'll see a bowl bid next season or the season after, but there certainly appears to be a foundation of athleticism and competitiveness in the program that I haven't seen since Spurrier left town.

[Bob Green]

It remains to be seen how Stanford holds up now that Harbaugh and Luck are gone.

I agree with you but Stanford is ranked #13 in ESPN's preseason poll:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7537531/usc-trojans-earn-top-spot-latest-2012-look

Perhaps it will be unlucky 13 for The Cardinal. September 8th will provide the answer to how Duke and Luckless Stanford match-up against each other in the here and now.

[davekay1971]

I agree with you but Stanford is ranked #13 in ESPN's preseason poll:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7537531/usc-trojans-earn-top-spot-latest-2012-look

Perhaps it will be unlucky 13 for The Cardinal. September 8th will provide the answer to how Duke and Luckless Stanford match-up against each other in the here and now.

I wasn't so much thinking of this year, when much of that Harbaugh recruited is still there. I was thinking more of 3-4 years down the road...and whether Stanford can continue to maintain top 20 talent and performance without Harbaugh. They may very well do it, of course, and Duke may want to, as FDA suggests, pay close attention to Stanford's example.

Hopefully September 8 will show that Duke's way is working better than Stanford's.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Of course, Harbaugh is now the coach of the 49ers after a short stay in Palo Alto. Spurrier was at Duke for 3 years before making the leap to Florida. It remains to be seen how Stanford holds up now that Harbaugh and Luck are gone. 20 years after Spurrier, Duke has finally started to show signs of life in Cutcliffe.

Finding a "great coach", for a program like Duke (and, I'd submit, like Stanford) frequently means losing the great coach shortly thereafter. I'm not suggesting that Duke should aim for mediocre...but it's not a bad idea to do what Duke did - hire a guy with some street cred who is already at a point in his career that he is more likely to stay and build a program that can be sustained, rather than putting together a couple really impressive teams and then bolting for greener pastures.

Cutcliffe has put some life in Duke's program. There are better success stories out there, faster upward arcs...but Cutcliffe has certainly taken Duke out of perennial inclusion in ESPN's Bottom 10 and made our program competitive in most games we play. This is the same Duke program that threatened records for most consecutive losses and was an annual possibility for a winless season before Cut arrived. No idea if that means we'll see a bowl bid next season or the season after, but there certainly appears to be a foundation of athleticism and competitiveness in the program that I haven't seen since Spurrier left town.

The ongoing compilation of loss after loss was a true low point for Duke. Most of the sports programs reporting on college football each Saturday back then seem to begin or conclude by pointing out that Duke had lost again. It was a staple to report the number of losses and how it was something of a national phenomenon. It wasn't just threatening records, the losses did result in some records.

It was extremely embarrassing, but never appeared to embarrass anyone in charge at Duke. I attended some functions at which Duke administrators without being asked about football, poked fun at the Duke football losses as if they were talking about somebody else's team on the other side of the world. Thank goodness the recent upswing of the program seems to have overshadowed that dark time when Duke was a national joke. Progress is being made incrementally. Having a break even season and then a winning season are the next major goals for the program's records.

[uh_no]

Cutcliffe has put some life in Duke's program. There are better success stories out there, faster upward arcs...but Cutcliffe has certainly taken Duke out of perennial inclusion in ESPN's Bottom 10 and made our program competitive in most games we play. This is the same Duke program that threatened records for most consecutive losses and was an annual possibility for a winless season before Cut arrived. No idea if that means we'll see a bowl bid next season or the season after, but there certainly appears to be a foundation of athleticism and competitiveness in the program that I haven't seen since Spurrier left town.

The complaints aren't that we aren't better now than we were under roof and predecessors....nobody is questioning that we are...

the complaints are that since the initial bump from cutcliffe, the progress has seemed to have stalled...is last years team better than the year before? 2 years before? 3 years before? parts of me say yes, and parts of me say no.....

the question becomes...when are we going to break out of the ennui of 3-5 win seasons....get more than 1 or 2 ACC wins....MAKE A BOWL!

IDK...but if we don't get there in say, 3 more seasons, then perhaps then we can ask the question of whether cutcliffe has maxed out what he can do.....I don't think it will come to that, but you always need to have goals...and I think after 7 years here, if we can't get a bowl...maybe its time for a change again.

[OldPhiKap]

The ongoing compilation of loss after loss was a true low point for Duke. Most of the sports programs reporting on college football each Saturday back then seem to begin or conclude by pointing out that Duke had lost again. It was a staple to report the number of losses and how it was something of a national phenomenon. It wasn't just threatening records, the losses did result in some records.

It was extremely embarrassing, but never appeared to embarrass anyone in charge at Duke. I attended some functions at which Duke administrators without being asked about football, poked fun at the Duke football losses as if they were talking about somebody else's team on the other side of the world. Thank goodness the recent upswing of the program seems to have overshadowed that dark time when Duke was a national joke. Progress is being made incrementally. Having a break even season and then a winning season are the next major goals for the program's records.

Excellent as always, DiBD.


The main drift of what I get from some is that Cut has raised expectations but has not delivered yet. Breaking that down, first recognize how difficult it is to even get Duke fans to give a damn about our football team -- let alone "raise expecations" amongst a large group of folks. that in itself is a great effort. Second, as far as whether Cut has delivered -- there are many of us who see vast improvement in our team and think that we are on a reasonable time frame. i understand those who disagree with me on that point. Cut himself would agree, I think, that at some point soon the "better effort" needs to convert to "more wins." It seems to me that Cut and Co. are on the right path and are on the upswing. Basketball takes a few studs, football takes three-deep at each position with redshirts galore. You can turn a basketball team around with one great recruiting class, immediately -- look at Calipari's current plan -- but football takes several years.

I am happy with the progress we made, hope we make a bowl this year, and understand that the schedule is very difficult for us this year. Gotta keep plugging along.

[Bay Area Duke Fan]

Stanford has another huge advantage over Duke ..... it's located in the SF Bay Area.

[-bdbd]

Stanford has another huge advantage over Duke ..... it's located in the SF Bay Area.

Having lived in both, and spent much time on both campuses, this reasoning is hard to argue with. BUT, I suspect that Duke is going to succeed more east of the Mississippi (figuratively) and Stanford will do better west of the Miss. Along these lines, relatively there is a lot more competition out east for us, such as the SEC and quite a few other ACC and Big East (and other non-BCS conferences) schools within a few hundred miles of Duke. Conversely, among "major D1 schools" Stanford must only deal with Cal-Berkeley within the Pac-12 for serious D1 competition within the northern 2/3 of the state of California. If a kid grows up among that fairly sizeable population base and wants to play big-time D1 football, and stay near home, well he doesn't have a whole lot of choices there. (Sorry San Jose State fans - just not the same league... and Fesno State seems far away and targeting different sort of kids.) That's a huge "natural base" drawing area that Duke doesn't have anything resembling, unfortunately. This also helps Stanford attract much larger fan followings and attendance for FB games.

Also, while Stanford hasn't always been a major player among the Pac-10 elite, its FB success (i.e. "winning tradition") is nowhere near as sad as Duke's over the last 30 years. So there's a huge difference in terms of what Cut has faced culturally in coming into Duke versus what the last two Stanford coaches have dealt with.

This whole string seems kinda silly, though, as there's just no way in hell that anyone in the Duke AD's office is going to threaten Cut's job (with a "hot seat") in the next year...

[budwom]

The complaints aren't that we aren't better now than we were under roof and predecessors....nobody is questioning that we are...

the complaints are that since the initial bump from cutcliffe, the progress has seemed to have stalled...is last years team better than the year before? 2 years before? 3 years before? parts of me say yes, and parts of me say no.....

the question becomes...when are we going to break out of the ennui of 3-5 win seasons....get more than 1 or 2 ACC wins....MAKE A BOWL!

IDK...but if we don't get there in say, 3 more seasons, then perhaps then we can ask the question of whether cutcliffe has maxed out what he can do.....I don't think it will come to that, but you always need to have goals...and I think after 7 years here, if we can't get a bowl...maybe its time for a change again.

Precisely right. It's no longer sufficient to say "look how much better we are than we were under Roof and Franks." Those guys got Zero support from the administration. Pitiful head coach salary, pitiful assistant coach salaries (with an occasional exception)...lousy facilities.

Cut has been given highly competitive salaries (including his own) and vastly improved facilities (check out the new indoor practice facility. His accomplishments the first two years (four and five wins) were fabulous, no doubt about it.
But two three win seasons DOES constitute a stall....let's hope it's temporary...but if it isn't, we're going to see Cut's seat warm up in the next two years. There's no way Duke can continue its football progress, and raising the money required to further improve facilities, with three win seasons.

And by the way, I wish people would say there's no way in the world we can attract a decent coach if Cut fails (which, again, I fervently hope he doesn't)...our salaries are very competitive, and if the job opens up again, it's going to
be reasonably attractive.