PDA

View Full Version : Dan Patrick this morning



tommy
05-14-2012, 11:56 AM
I'm bouncing around between stations on the way into work and stop on Dan Patrick. He's interviewing Steph Curry, he asks about some time when Steph got caught on a switch and Kobe had him pinned down in the post. Steph said basically that all he could do was flop. That caused Patrick to ask a follow up about flopping generally, which Curry answered.

So the issue of flopping is now on the table and the next words out of Patrick's mouth are "I blame Duke."

Steph tried to defend Duke a little, the way we play defense, take charges, etc., but then Patrick followed up with (maybe not an exact quote, but close) "Your brother plays for Duke. Do they have a special room, or a film room, where they specifically teach them how to flop?"

This was tongue in cheek, I get it, but the "I blame Duke" wasn't.

What a douche.

theAlaskanBear
05-14-2012, 12:19 PM
Did anyone catch the David Stern comments during Heat-Indiana game?

The question was about Vogel calling the Heat the floppingest team in the NBA and was like, "we will see how it gets called" in advance of series. Stern was very frank and said, "He was trying to manipulate the refereeing of the series, and if I was in charge of the fine amount it would have been more than 15k."

But he acknowledged that flopping is an issue the league will try to address eventually because its not a basketball play and is meant to manipulate the refs, who have a hard enough job as it is.

(more OT: he also had some great comments about injuries and reporting -- I will post in the NBA playoff thread)

sagegrouse
05-14-2012, 12:28 PM
Did anyone catch the David Stern comments during Heat-Indiana game?

The question was about Vogel calling the Heat the floppingest team in the NBA and was like, "we will see how it gets called" in advance of series. Stern was very frank and said, "He was trying to manipulate the refereeing of the series, and if I was in charge of the fine amount it would have been more than 15k."

But he acknowledged that flopping is an issue the league will try to address eventually because its not a basketball play and is meant to manipulate the refs, who have a hard enough job as it is.

(more OT: he also had some great comments about injuries and reporting -- I will post in the NBA playoff thread)

I don't see why "flopping" isn't controllable at the pro and college level. Game tapes are already monitored by the league or conference. Give the floppers suspensions and repeat offenders even longer suspensions. I believe soccer does something like this.

One can also handle the problem where a player falls because he truly anticipates a blow or charge and that doesn't happen -- "an accidental flop," if you wish. Nothing prevents the player from telling the ref, "he didn't hit me -- there should be no foul."

sagegrouse

DeBlueDevil
05-14-2012, 12:30 PM
I'm bouncing around between stations on the way into work and stop on Dan Patrick. He's interviewing Steph Curry, he asks about some time when Steph got caught on a switch and Kobe had him pinned down in the post. Steph said basically that all he could do was flop. That caused Patrick to ask a follow up about flopping generally, which Curry answered.

So the issue of flopping is now on the table and the next words out of Patrick's mouth are "I blame Duke."

Steph tried to defend Duke a little, the way we play defense, take charges, etc., but then Patrick followed up with (maybe not an exact quote, but close) "Your brother plays for Duke. Do they have a special room, or a film room, where they specifically teach them how to flop?"

This was tongue in cheek, I get it, but the "I blame Duke" wasn't.

What a douche.

This is a prime example of taking something someone says out of context. Not to jump on you about this but I listen to his program and listened to the full program today. Every comment about Duke was sarcastic and tounge in cheek. There was no seriousness behind the comments at all. I think the reason you thought it might have been serious is because as you stated you were "jumping around from station to station" and just so happened to tune in in the middle of the conversation.

Dan made this joke a few times throughout the show and he even stopped to say "because you always have to blame duke for flopping" at one point in the show as to poke fun at the fact that this is one of the many whining and crying points of Duke's opposing fans saying "they get all the calls" or "they flop for offensive fouls" etc. Nothing new to a Duke fan.

Sorry to call you out but you definitely took his words out of context.

Steven43
05-14-2012, 12:37 PM
I'm bouncing around between stations on the way into work and stop on Dan Patrick. He's interviewing Steph Curry, he asks about some time when Steph got caught on a switch and Kobe had him pinned down in the post. Steph said basically that all he could do was flop. That caused Patrick to ask a follow up about flopping generally, which Curry answered.

So the issue of flopping is now on the table and the next words out of Patrick's mouth are "I blame Duke."

Steph tried to defend Duke a little, the way we play defense, take charges, etc., but then Patrick followed up with (maybe not an exact quote, but close) "Your brother plays for Duke. Do they have a special room, or a film room, where they specifically teach them how to flop?"

This was tongue in cheek, I get it, but the "I blame Duke" wasn't.

What a douche.

I am just so tired of this stuff. While there clearly seems to be truth to the idea that for the past couple of decades or so Coach K and staff have taught defensive players to draw a charge by anticipating when an opposing offensive player is going to make an aggressive move and either beat them to a spot and wait to be run into or hold their ground and wait to be run into, that is not what I think of as flopping. I understand flopping to be when the defensive player makes it look as if he has been violently run into when he really hasn't. In other words, exaggerating for effect. Duke players don't seem to fake this move very often at all. Certainly not anywhere close to as often as I have seen many others do. And while I personally am not really sold on Coach K's idea of simply allowing oneself to be run into in an attempt to draw a charge, even though it is legal, that is not the same thing as pretending something happened that did not. It's irksome that commentators--like Dan Patrick--don't draw a distinction between the two.

MarkD83
05-14-2012, 12:51 PM
1. If the officials start penalizing flopping on block/charge calls they should also consider calling flopping on a shooter who keeps his arm in the air after a shot for a defender to run into. There are many times I have seen a shot go up and a defender run into the extended arm of the shooter AFTER the shot. There is no way the shot was affected by the defender yet that is called a foul every time.

2. It is good that the charge block flop is affiliated with Duke. If it makes a player think twice about driving the lane because Duke might attempt to draw a charge than go ahead and let the media get in other folks heads.

rthomas
05-14-2012, 01:00 PM
To give credit (or blame) where credit is due, it was actually Bill Laimbeer who played for Detroit Pistons from 1982-1993 who invented "flopping".

tommy
05-14-2012, 01:06 PM
This is a prime example of taking something someone says out of context. Not to jump on you about this but I listen to his program and listened to the full program today. Every comment about Duke was sarcastic and tounge in cheek. There was no seriousness behind the comments at all. I think the reason you thought it might have been serious is because as you stated you were "jumping around from station to station" and just so happened to tune in in the middle of the conversation.

Dan made this joke a few times throughout the show and he even stopped to say "because you always have to blame duke for flopping" at one point in the show as to poke fun at the fact that this is one of the many whining and crying points of Duke's opposing fans saying "they get all the calls" or "they flop for offensive fouls" etc. Nothing new to a Duke fan.

Sorry to call you out but you definitely took his words out of context.

I really don't think I did. While I was bouncing around stations, I stopped and was listening to the Curry interview for a full 3-4 minutes before the flopping thing came up, so I heard the entire context. And I did detect seriousness in the "blame Duke" comment, if not the "Duke has their own film room to teach this specifically" follow-up question by Patrick.

This did not sound to me like Patrick poking fun at the whining of anti-Duke fans on this issue. To the contrary, it sounded to me like he was stoking the anti-Duke fires, which is always good for ratings.


I am just so tired of this stuff. While there clearly seems to be truth to the idea that for the past couple of decades or so Coach K and staff have taught defensive players to draw a charge by anticipating when an opposing offensive player is going to make an aggressive move and either beat them to a spot and wait to be run into or hold their ground and wait to be run into, that is not what I think of as flopping. I understand flopping to be when the defensive player makes it look as if he has been violently run into when he really hasn't. In other words, exaggerating for effect. Duke players don't seem to fake this move very often at all. Certainly not anywhere close to as often as I have seen many others do. And while I personally am not really sold on Coach K's idea of simply allowing oneself to be run into in an attempt to draw a charge, even though it is legal, that is not the same thing as pretending something happened that did not. It's irksome that commentators--like Dan Patrick--don't draw a distinction between the two.

Totally agree with you. It's guys like Patrick being too lazy, or too ignorant, to draw that distinction, so he repeats his uninformed statements every chance he gets, and the result is that other lazy and/or ignorant people adopt these memes and repeat them, and on and on, until it becomes conventional wisdom in the largely brainless media and then parroted by fans everywhere.

OldPhiKap
05-14-2012, 01:12 PM
Let the haters hate.

We play a brand of defense that forces the action. (When we are playing it well, that is). The refs call it like they see it. Sometimes it's a charge, sometimes it's a block. But it's contact.

If the fans are so out of whack that they think the refs are all throwing games in our favor, they should start watching world futbol and see what corrupt refs really look like. If they adjust the tin foil on their hats, they can probably get good reception without waking up in a roadside ditch too.



Edit to add: Not aimed at Dan Patrick, who was probably going for laughs and filling time than anything else. But did not see/hear it so I'm passing on the OP.

moonpie23
05-14-2012, 01:24 PM
they would have to start with some OBVIOUS flops, (bynum acting like steve nash posted him up enough to knock him down) kind of thing, but, regardless, it's not going to be easy to separate the real ones from the flop....

Jarhead
05-14-2012, 01:25 PM
Now just what is a defender supposed to do? Bow and welcome the shooter to the lane.? Maybe even clear a lane for him? What are we watching? The Harlem Globe Trotters? What is wrong with a defender standing his ground? t is not against the rules. It is well nigh impossible for a person standing in place to not react to the collision by falling away, flopping, if you will. It is up to the ref to determine if fake flopping is taking place. Let's leave it that way, and leave the rules as they are.

luvdahops
05-14-2012, 01:28 PM
To give credit (or blame) where credit is due, it was actually Bill Laimbeer who played for Detroit Pistons from 1982-1993 who invented "flopping".

I'd put Jeff Lebo, who played for Carolina 1986-1989 and was the son of a HS coach, right up there. He would regularly try to draw charges on players trying to pass out of a trap at midcourt. To this day, that remains one of the most ridiculous plays I have ever seen. And I watch a lot of basketball.

Separately, Lebron pulled a super lame flop in Game 1 of the Knicks-Heat Series. He was legitimately fouled by Tyson Chandler on a blind pick, but a good five seconds passed between contact and LBJ flopping and then writhing on the floor. He later claimed to have hurt his neck on the play. Sure.

OldPhiKap
05-14-2012, 01:38 PM
Bill Laimbeer and Jeff Lebo in one thread. Must be Monday. ;>)

DukieInBrasil
05-14-2012, 02:47 PM
I am just so tired of this stuff. While there clearly seems to be truth to the idea that for the past couple of decades or so Coach K and staff have taught defensive players to draw a charge by anticipating when an opposing offensive player is going to make an aggressive move and either beat them to a spot and wait to be run into or hold their ground and wait to be run into, that is not what I think of as flopping. I understand flopping to be when the defensive player makes it look as if he has been violently run into when he really hasn't. In other words, exaggerating for effect. Duke players don't seem to fake this move very often at all. Certainly not anywhere close to as often as I have seen many others do. And while I personally am not really sold on Coach K's idea of simply allowing oneself to be run into in an attempt to draw a charge, even though it is legal, that is not the same thing as pretending something happened that did not. It's irksome that commentators--like Dan Patrick--don't draw a distinction between the two.

Ryan Kelly flops alot. I agree with you that K and the staff teach proper defense and to not shy away from taking contact to draw a charging call, anticipation and etc., like you said. However, Duke has some floppers, like Kelly. However, Duke also had the King of Charges-taken, Battier, whose anticipation and positioning led to charges other floppers only dream of getting.

BlueDevilCorvette!
05-14-2012, 03:02 PM
Duke didn't invent the technique of flopping but unfortunately the flopping stigma is Duke's burden to bear due to "everybody hates a winner syndrome".

roywhite
05-14-2012, 03:06 PM
Ryan Kelly flops alot. I agree with you that K and the staff teach proper defense and to not shy away from taking contact to draw a charging call, anticipation and etc., like you said. However, Duke has some floppers, like Kelly. However, Duke also had the King of Charges-taken, Battier, whose anticipation and positioning led to charges other floppers only dream of getting.

Before Battier, before Wojo, before even K at Duke, guess who loved and taught flopping or taking the charge?

El-Deano himself.

muzikfrk75
05-14-2012, 03:23 PM
I didn't know that Vlade Divac went to Duke...

DeBlueDevil
05-14-2012, 03:39 PM
I really don't think I did. While I was bouncing around stations, I stopped and was listening to the Curry interview for a full 3-4 minutes before the flopping thing came up, so I heard the entire context. And I did detect seriousness in the "blame Duke" comment, if not the "Duke has their own film room to teach this specifically" follow-up question by Patrick.

This did not sound to me like Patrick poking fun at the whining of anti-Duke fans on this issue. To the contrary, it sounded to me like he was stoking the anti-Duke fires, which is always good for ratings.



Totally agree with you. It's guys like Patrick being too lazy, or too ignorant, to draw that distinction, so he repeats his uninformed statements every chance he gets, and the result is that other lazy and/or ignorant people adopt these memes and repeat them, and on and on, until it becomes conventional wisdom in the largely brainless media and then parroted by fans everywhere.


You just made my point for me. You hadn't been listening the whole show. You came in on the conversation with Steph. You are correct in your analyzation of the Curry interview but if you would have been listening the whole show you would have noticed that the comment was made jokingly earlier in the show to poke fun at the "Duke flops" idea before he had Steph on. He only brought it up in the interview as a talking point and a way to get Steph Curry to loosen up and bring a humorous vibe to the conversation, as he does with many of his interviews. I'm even willing to bet you he probably only mentioned Duke merely because he knows Steph's brother plays for Duke. Anyways, I could see how you would take the comment that way but again I really didn't see the seriousness that you do.

However, I do realize you are entitled to your opinion so be it but I would encourage you to listen to the podcast of the show and perhaps you would realize the comment wasn't serious at all.

lotusland
05-14-2012, 03:45 PM
Ryan Kelly flops alot. I agree with you that K and the staff teach proper defense and to not shy away from taking contact to draw a charging call, anticipation and etc., like you said. However, Duke has some floppers, like Kelly. However, Duke also had the King of Charges-taken, Battier, whose anticipation and positioning led to charges other floppers only dream of getting.

What I've seen Ryan do is not actually a flop but it is bad defense. Occasionally he will setup in the lane to take a charge too soon allowing the dribbler to adjust. Instead of moving his feet in this situation he will lean/slide over while the offensive player is in the air. He's correctly been called for a block for doing that several times.

I don't think flop is the right term most of the time. When players try to draw a charge they usually keep their feet set after the contact. It doesn't take much contact to knock you down if you don't step back after the contact. I don't think you are required to keep your feet set after the contact to draw a charge but I guess that sells it better. The result is that players fall down after moderate contact and appear to be "acting". Actually they just stop their bodies from making its natural adjustment to stay on their feet. Sometimes players will also anticipate the contact and begin leaning back beforehand, bend their knees, hit the ground with their posterior and roll back for a soft landing which can appear as choreographed as gymnast's dismount because it is.

I'd rather the officials call it the same if they just step back after the contact. I also don't have a problem with a no call if the player has position but there is only a little contact but normally if there is contact outside the circle the officials are going to call something.

BD80
05-14-2012, 03:57 PM
I didn't know that Vlade Divac went to Duke...

Poor Vlade crashed onto his butt at the mere mention of his name in your post

elvis14
05-14-2012, 05:42 PM
Poor Vlade crashed onto his butt at the mere mention of his name in your post

Bad thing is that when Vlade fell, they gave Shavlik and Miles personal fouls and called a T on Daniel Ewing!

Billy Dat
05-14-2012, 07:32 PM
K and Patrick are friends and always busting each others chops.

Newton_14
05-14-2012, 08:33 PM
Ryan Kelly flops alot. I agree with you that K and the staff teach proper defense and to not shy away from taking contact to draw a charging call, anticipation and etc., like you said. However, Duke has some floppers, like Kelly. However, Duke also had the King of Charges-taken, Battier, whose anticipation and positioning led to charges other floppers only dream of getting.

Have to agree here. The worst Kelly flop of the year by far was in the State game when Lorenzo Brown dunked on him. Ryan needs to get better at actually drawing the contact. He bails a split second too soon which will lead to a blocking call or no call almost every time. On the Brown play he got hit with the blocking call.

I have seen Coach K teach the bigs in practice on getting to the spot and bracing for the charge vs initiating the contact reaching in/over to block the shot. He stated that the latter would be a foul call on the defender 99% of the time. I agree with the philosophy, but my only issue is when the offensive player is a smallish guard. Going for the block on the smallish player is the better play IMO, at least in certain situations. If a 6'11 guy cannot block the shot of a 5'11-6'1/6'2 guard without fouling, then shame on him.

As for penalty for flopping, I would be ok for it to be an automatic foul on the defender and in cases of a blatantly obvious flop where the whole world clearly sees there was no contact, then hit the defender with a Technical. That would go a long way to stopping it.

oldnavy
05-15-2012, 05:16 AM
Have to agree here. The worst Kelly flop of the year by far was in the State game when Lorenzo Brown dunked on him. Ryan needs to get better at actually drawing the contact. He bails a split second too soon which will lead to a blocking call or no call almost every time. On the Brown play he got hit with the blocking call.

I have seen Coach K teach the bigs in practice on getting to the spot and bracing for the charge vs initiating the contact reaching in/over to block the shot. He stated that the latter would be a foul call on the defender 99% of the time. I agree with the philosophy, but my only issue is when the offensive player is a smallish guard. Going for the block on the smallish player is the better play IMO, at least in certain situations. If a 6'11 guy cannot block the shot of a 5'11-6'1/6'2 guard without fouling, then shame on him.

As for penalty for flopping, I would be ok for it to be an automatic foul on the defender and in cases of a blatantly obvious flop where the whole world clearly sees there was no contact, then hit the defender with a Technical. That would go a long way to stopping it.

Funny thing about this post. I watched about ten seconds of a Pacers game a day or so ago and guess who flopped and got the call...... come, his name begins with Tyler and his last name begins with Hansbrough. I just laughed out loud and flopped, I mean flipped the channel.

Jarhead
05-15-2012, 11:13 AM
Have to agree here. The worst Kelly flop of the year by far was in the State game when Lorenzo Brown dunked on him. Ryan needs to get better at actually drawing the contact. He bails a split second too soon which will lead to a blocking call or no call almost every time. On the Brown play he got hit with the blocking call.

I have seen Coach K teach the bigs in practice on getting to the spot and bracing for the charge vs initiating the contact reaching in/over to block the shot. He stated that the latter would be a foul call on the defender 99% of the time. I agree with the philosophy, but my only issue is when the offensive player is a smallish guard. Going for the block on the smallish player is the better play IMO, at least in certain situations. If a 6'11 guy cannot block the shot of a 5'11-6'1/6'2 guard without fouling, then shame on him.

As for penalty for flopping, I would be ok for it to be an automatic foul on the defender and in cases of a blatantly obvious flop where the whole world clearly sees there was no contact, then hit the defender with a Technical. That would go a long way to stopping it.

How do the refs make the flopping call, blocking, if you prefer, on a defensive player? What about the charging call on an offensive player? We seem to be concentrating on the defense here, but the refs make as many errors on the block as they do on the charge. Let's not mess with playing rules. Train the refs better is my answer. The block call is the refs responsibility, as is the charge. If they make either call play stops, anyhow, so why not allow the refs to review the play, if requested by a head coach of either team. Let's get it right. Scores over 125 would become common if we take away the defense's right to stand their ground. Oops, Florida has a law on that.

J4Kop99
05-15-2012, 06:44 PM
K and Patrick are friends and always busting each others chops.

I can't believe this hadn't been said until the 22nd post...

I listen to Patrick all the time. He loves Coach K. Whenever coach is on, the two of them go at it (in a brotherly or friendly type of way)...

There is not a single doubt in my mind that Patrick was just trying to have some fun.

-As for the topic of flopping in general, I agree something needs to be done. It would be great to have some sort of in-game penalty but the plays are so subjective that it would only bring on more controversy IMO. I like the idea of having the league review questionable plays after the game and giving out suspensions or something like that though. It would definitely make guys think twice.

I have heard the idea of fining the players but I am completely against that. You would have to fine them absurd amounts to actually effect them. I think that when a professional sports league fines their millionaire players amounts of money that some people don't even make in a year, they make themselves look very bad.

sagegrouse
05-15-2012, 08:33 PM
How do the refs make the flopping call, blocking, if you prefer, on a defensive player? What about the charging call on an offensive player? We seem to be concentrating on the defense here, but the refs make as many errors on the block as they do on the charge. Let's not mess with playing rules. Train the refs better is my answer. The block call is the refs responsibility, as is the charge. If they make either call play stops, anyhow, so why not allow the refs to review the play, if requested by a head coach of either team. Let's get it right. Scores over 125 would become common if we take away the defense's right to stand their ground. Oops, Florida has a law on that.


-As for the topic of flopping in general, I agree something needs to be done. It would be great to have some sort of in-game penalty but the plays are so subjective that it would only bring on more controversy IMO. I like the idea of having the league review questionable plays after the game and giving out suspensions or something like that though. It would definitely make guys think twice.

I have heard the idea of fining the players but I am completely against that. You would have to fine them absurd amounts to actually effect them. I think that when a professional sports league fines their millionaire players amounts of money that some people don't even make in a year, they make themselves look very bad.

I started this sub-thread on the topic of review and punishment for players who flop. Let me modify and extend my remarks, as the good Congressmen and Congresswomen say. Remember when Miles Plumlee was called for an elbow against Scott Wood of NC State? In the process of reviewing whether it was a first or second degree technical, it became clear that Miles never touched Wood and that Wood faked the entire thing. There was no contact whatsoever. It was clear as a bell to the referees who reviewed the play, but they had no recourse. That is the definition of a flop that I would sanction: a player falls to the court without getting touched.

On the spot, give the offending player a technical foul. After the fact, in the post-game review by the league, give him a warning. The second offense gets a one-game suspension.

No, I wouldn't try to unravel the block-charge conundrum. I would go after the total fakers. And the refs can do it during the game or the league can do it afterwards. And if a player falls down in anticipation of contact that never occurred, he can avoid sanctions by fessing up to the refs on the spot.

Simple enough? And there is no reason it wouldn't work in college or the NBA.

sagegrouse

Newton_14
05-15-2012, 09:06 PM
I started this sub-thread on the topic of review and punishment for players who flop. Let me modify and extend my remarks, as the good Congressmen and Congresswomen say. Remember when Miles Plumlee was called for an elbow against Scott Wood of NC State? In the process of reviewing whether it was a first or second degree technical, it became clear that Miles never touched Wood and that Wood faked the entire thing. There was no contact whatsoever. It was clear as a bell to the referees who reviewed the play, but they had no recourse. That is the definition of a flop that I would sanction: a player falls to the court without getting touched.

On the spot, give the offending player a technical foul. After the fact, in the post-game review by the league, give him a warning. The second offense gets a one-game suspension.

No, I wouldn't try to unravel the block-charge conundrum. I would go after the total fakers. And the refs can do it during the game or the league can do it afterwards. And if a player falls down in anticipation of contact that never occurred, he can avoid sanctions by fessing up to the refs on the spot.

Simple enough? And there is no reason it wouldn't work in college or the NBA.

sagegrouse

It was actually Tanner Smith in the Clemson game on that play, but that's exactly the type play I had in mind when suggesting a technical foul. That was not a block/charge play either. Smith flopped when it appeared Miles hit him in the face with an elbow, when actually as you point out, Miles never touched him.

FellowTraveler
05-15-2012, 09:11 PM
Remember when Miles Plumlee was called for an elbow against Scott Wood of NC State? In the process of reviewing whether it was a first or second degree technical, it became clear that Miles never touched Wood and that Wood faked the entire thing. There was no contact whatsoever. It was clear as a bell to the referees who reviewed the play, but they had no recourse. That is the definition of a flop that I would sanction: a player falls to the court without getting touched.

That call was a travesty, and I favor a rule change to keep anything like it from happening again. But my remedy would be narrower and simpler: Officials should be empowered in such a situation to reverse their call.

I do not, however, favor sanctioning players for flopping, and have never seen rationale for doing so that I find compelling. Shall we sanction, via technical fouls and suspensions, other acts of subterfuge and deception as well? How about an offensive player who yells "and one" upon shooting in hopes of drawing a foul call and/or continuation? If he wasn't fouled, or was clearly fouled before the act of shooting, should that result in a technical? How about an offensive player who attempts to trick an official into calling a shooting foul by flinging the ball at the basket when fouled in the backcourt? All of those are attempts to win undeserved favorable calls. How are they qualitatively different from flopping? What is it about flopping that necessitates technical fouls and suspensions?

sagegrouse
05-15-2012, 09:22 PM
It was actually Tanner Smith in the Clemson game on that play, but that's exactly the type play I had in mind when suggesting a technical foul. That was not a block/charge play either. Smith flopped when it appeared Miles hit him in the face with an elbow, when actually as you point out, Miles never touched him.

You are right. It was Tanner Smith.

sagegrouse

-jk
05-15-2012, 10:45 PM
The refs already have a rule to cite: unsportsmanlike conduct (rule 2, sec 8). A nice catch-all for anything that goes over the line.

-jk

tommy
05-16-2012, 12:53 AM
I can't believe this hadn't been said until the 22nd post...

I listen to Patrick all the time. He loves Coach K. Whenever coach is on, the two of them go at it (in a brotherly or friendly type of way)...

There is not a single doubt in my mind that Patrick was just trying to have some fun.

But you're missing the point. Or maybe I didn't state it clearly enough.

Even if Patrick was tongue in cheek, having fun, or whatever, the fact that the "joke" is made, the meme is repeated, or however you want to term it, is what causes damage. Even if done in fun. If something is said, even in jest, often enough, people start to believe there is a kernel of truth, at least, in it. And this particular accusation, whether made seriously or in jest, has been repeated over and over and over again, over a period of many years, and the result has been its acceptance and repetition by many members of the media and lots and lots of anti-Duke fans. While it can be debated, I suppose, as to how much the adoption of this into the conventional wisdom actually hurts Duke, I know one thing: it don't help.

DeBlueDevil
05-16-2012, 09:21 AM
But you're missing the point. Or maybe I didn't state it clearly enough.

Even if Patrick was tongue in cheek, having fun, or whatever, the fact that the "joke" is made, the meme is repeated, or however you want to term it, is what causes damage. Even if done in fun. If something is said, even in jest, often enough, people start to believe there is a kernel of truth, at least, in it. And this particular accusation, whether made seriously or in jest, has been repeated over and over and over again, over a period of many years, and the result has been its acceptance and repetition by many members of the media and lots and lots of anti-Duke fans. While it can be debated, I suppose, as to how much the adoption of this into the conventional wisdom actually hurts Duke, I know one thing: it don't help.

Two words...

Lighten Up :D

tommy
05-16-2012, 12:07 PM
Two words...

Lighten Up :D

Suggestion:

You be concerned about what you want to be concerned about, and I'll be concerned about what I want to be concerned about, and neither of us will judge the other for it.

I feel the issue being discussed is something that hurts Duke. I care about that. You don't have to agree, or you don't have to care about it, and that's fine. But I'm not the only one who believes the insertion of this meme into the conventional wisdom out there is something that is a big picture negative for the Duke program. Nobody's jumping off a bridge about it, but it's an appropriate issue for discussion and for concern.

Chicago 1995
05-16-2012, 12:16 PM
Suggestion:

You be concerned about what you want to be concerned about, and I'll be concerned about what I want to be concerned about, and neither of us will judge the other for it.

I feel the issue being discussed is something that hurts Duke. I care about that. You don't have to agree, or you don't have to care about it, and that's fine. But I'm not the only one who believes the insertion of this meme into the conventional wisdom out there is something that is a big picture negative for the Duke program. Nobody's jumping off a bridge about it, but it's an appropriate issue for discussion and for concern.

The bolded above is how I feel about the hypersensitivity some of our fan base has to any sort of perceived criticism or slight. It makes Duke look bad and it hurts our perception far more than any of the slights people get up in arms about.

sagegrouse
05-16-2012, 01:17 PM
Suggestion:

You be concerned about what you want to be concerned about, and I'll be concerned about what I want to be concerned about, and neither of us will judge the other for it.

I feel the issue being discussed is something that hurts Duke. I care about that. You don't have to agree, or you don't have to care about it, and that's fine. But I'm not the only one who believes the insertion of this meme into the conventional wisdom out there is something that is a big picture negative for the Duke program. Nobody's jumping off a bridge about it, but it's an appropriate issue for discussion and for concern.


The bolded above is how I feel about the hypersensitivity some of our fan base has to any sort of perceived criticism or slight. It makes Duke look bad and it hurts our perception far more than any of the slights people get up in arms about.

As Bobby Kennedy used to say, "If you have a problem, hang a lantern on it." If there is the perception that Duke practices flopping, as opposed to emphasizing taking hard charges, then we should run toward the spotlight and make fun of it. Refer to Chris as the "head coach of phantom charges."

Most of the comments I read about Duke from coaches and players I interpret as "working the refs." I can live with the Dan Patrick comments.

sagegrouse

Jderf
05-16-2012, 01:32 PM
Suggestion:

You be concerned about what you want to be concerned about, and I'll be concerned about what I want to be concerned about, and neither of us will judge the other for it.

I feel the issue being discussed is something that hurts Duke. I care about that. You don't have to agree, or you don't have to care about it, and that's fine. But I'm not the only one who believes the insertion of this meme into the conventional wisdom out there is something that is a big picture negative for the Duke program. Nobody's jumping off a bridge about it, but it's an appropriate issue for discussion and for concern.


As Bobby Kennedy used to say, "If you have a problem, hang a lantern on it." If there is the perception that Duke practices flopping, as opposed to emphasizing taking hard charges, then we should run toward the spotlight and make fun of it. Refer to Chris as the "head coach of phantom charges."

Most of the comments I read about Duke from coaches and players I interpret as "working the refs." I can live with the Dan Patrick comments.

sagegrouse

I'm with Sage on this one. The more serious or offended we are in responding to the meme, the more people will interpret that as confirmation of it. Besides, there really just isn't all that much we can do about it. People are going to go on saying what they want to say, no matter how untrue or irksome it is -- or maybe specifically because of how untrue and irksome it is. And I disagree that it really hurts Duke, except for the uncalculable effect it possibly, potentially, may or may not have on recruiting. Besides, even if this does affect recruiting, the recruits who would buy into that and get scared off by the perception are typically the ones we won't want at Duke anyway.

I see UK as having a similar problem. None of their more respectable fans (if there are any) can shake the perception of the program as rife with cheating and NCAA violations. Likewise for them -- to paraphrase myself from above -- even if that problem does affect recruiting, the recruits that would be scared away by the cheating are the ones they don't want at UK anyway. ;)

Billy Dat
05-17-2012, 11:24 PM
I was thinking that when Jefferson chose Duke the other day and cited the school's academics, that's a perception that works in our favor that other schools must gnash their teeth over. Before anyone jumps on me, I recognize that it's a perception that is also a reality (Duke is a great school), and our players have to perform in the classroom, but they also get tons of help and resources to guide them. Duke is great, but it's not like we have the market cornered on great professors, etc.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-18-2012, 10:03 AM
Geez, look at the legs on this story - must be the dog days of summer. How long until tip off again?

I'd say there's an even split between Duke fans who are appalled that Dan Patrick would piggy-back on decades of stereotypes about Duke flopping, and those Duke fans who feel that this hypersensitivity just piggybacks on the stereotype that Duke fans are elitist and feel their program is above reproach.

Whatever happened to turning the other cheek? I guarantee you that each of us on this thread has spend more time worrying over any aspect of this than K has.

Next play please?