Mark Titus Rips Crazies

[mkline09]

Okay didn't see a thread on this but to me Titus' whole rant on Cameron and the Crazies smells of sour grapes. And knowing he is an OSU guy makes it worse than if some other commentator made the same statements. I don't feel the Crazies are above reproach but to me harping on their behavior or perceived misbehavior was worth the time it took him to write about it. I personally didn't see anything or hear about anything that was so bad that it was worth going on and on about. Then he took offense to the signs about the football team. Sorry you break the rules you face the consequences and good for the Crazies for poking fun.Suck it up Mark and your shot at Duke Football was a great example of taking the low road. He essentially took a column on ranking the top 10 teams to vent his displeasure on how his team was treated when it came to talking about Duke. He ranks Duke No. 2 and says that the OSU game was more of a challenge for Duke than UNC was for Indiana, but then turns around and suggests that Duke should have beaten the Buckeyes by more. confused: Perhaps I'm in the minority here in my thoughts but color me unimpressed with his take.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I didn't mind the article or the write up about it. Both were honest criticisms. He wasn't complaining about the Crazies being "crazie", he was complaining about them not being crazie enough. And he has good points, all of which the write up on the front page makes note of. I thought his shots at Duke football and calling us out for picking on OSU football were pretty funny.

[CDu]

Okay didn't see a thread on this but to me Titus' whole rant on Cameron and the Crazies smells of sour grapes. And knowing he is an OSU guy makes it worse than if some other commentator made the same statements. I don't feel the Crazies are above reproach but to me harping on their behavior or perceived misbehavior was worth the time it took him to write about it. I personally didn't see anything or hear about anything that was so bad that it was worth going on and on about. Then he took offense to the signs about the football team. Sorry you break the rules you face the consequences and good for the Crazies for poking fun.Suck it up Mark and your shot at Duke Football was a great example of taking the low road. He essentially took a column on ranking the top 10 teams to vent his displeasure on how his team was treated when it came to talking about Duke. He ranks Duke No. 2 and says that the OSU game was more of a challenge for Duke than UNC was for Indiana, but then turns around and suggests that Duke should have beaten the Buckeyes by more. confused: Perhaps I'm in the minority here in my thoughts but color me unimpressed with his take.

I didn't have the same feeling you got. He wasn't complaining about the way the Crazies acted. He was saying that the Crazies should have been MORE of an influence (more creative, more aggressive, more like their reputation). He said the Crazies against OSU weren't very clever, and that he would have expected more from them. I tend to agree with the examples he provided: making fun of the football team at a basketball game is kind of dumb, and "The Bucks stop here" isn't very clever. Now, that may have been cherry-picking on his part, of course. But this isn't the first time someone has questioned the creativity of the Crazies (heck, it even happens among Duke fans), so it's not that outlandish and not necessarily sour grapes.

As for his comments about OSU vs Duke in relation to Indiana vs UNC, I think his comments are fair. OSU is tougher than UNC. But Duke (in his eyes) struggled more than they should have against OSU. OSU can be tougher than UNC and still not be up to Duke's class. You can argue on the margins if you want, but it's not really an inconsistent statement.

[mkline09]

I didn't mind the article or the write up about it. Both were honest criticisms. He wasn't complaining about the Crazies being "crazie", he was complaining about them not being crazie enough. And he has good points, all of which the write up on the front page makes note of. I thought his shots at Duke football and calling us out for picking on OSU football were pretty funny.

Fair enough.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Comments regarding creativity, scripted breaks and today's regulations imposed during the games have been discussed many times on this board. This article just bring many such points back to discuss.

The game of basketball continues to evolve and so do the cheers and student participation.

[mkline09]

I didn't have the same feeling you got. He wasn't complaining about the way the Crazies acted. He was saying that the Crazies should have been MORE of an influence (more creative, more aggressive, more like their reputation). He said the Crazies against OSU weren't very clever, and that he would have expected more from them. I tend to agree with the examples he provided: making fun of the football team at a basketball game is kind of dumb, and "The Bucks stop here" isn't very clever. Now, that may have been cherry-picking on his part, of course. But this isn't the first time someone has questioned the creativity of the Crazies (heck, it even happens among Duke fans), so it's not that outlandish and not necessarily sour grapes.

As for his comments about OSU vs Duke in relation to Indiana vs UNC, I think his comments are fair. OSU is tougher than UNC. But Duke (in his eyes) struggled more than they should have against OSU. OSU can be tougher than UNC and still not be up to Duke's class. You can argue on the margins if you want, but it's not really an inconsistent statement.

Oh, I can agree about the cleverness, or lack there of, is fair game. As I said in my original post I don't think the Crazies are above reproach. Perhaps making fun of the football team is dumb but you could argue many of the things the Crazies have done in the past that many of us secretly laugh about but publicly may criticize as off color were inspired by non basketball related things. Yes they don't do those things anymore because it doesn't look good and it doesn't tend to go over well with the school or K. That said, the best thing about Cameron is that it gets loud and when it stays loud that is when it is at its best. Clever signs or not. His comments weren't outlandish. I've reread it and perhaps my initial response was more of an over reaction and I was too sensitive, still I think it is a bit of sour grapes on his part to harp on it in a Top 10 piece but it again could just be me being uber sensitive. I'm not above reproach either so I understand if most disagree with me. My wife does all the time. :D

[English]

As for his comments about OSU vs Duke in relation to Indiana vs UNC, I think his comments are fair. OSU is tougher than UNC. But Duke (in his eyes) struggled more than they should have against OSU. OSU can be tougher than UNC and still not be up to Duke's class. You can argue on the margins if you want, but it's not really an inconsistent statement.

A couple of things--first, I think you're absolutely right, the observation was a valid one that IU made quicker work of UNC than Duke did of OSU. However, I think he completely glosses over the fact that OSU is, to this point in the season, an objectively better team than UNC. I guess he can pull the whole 'I'm an OSU guy so I can totally dismiss them and people will think nothing of it' gimmick, but when Duke faced them, OSU was a top-5 team and expected to be a national contender. UNC, on the other hand, has shown themselves to be overrated as a top-15 (and maybe top-20) team. A basic apples-to-oranges argument. Further, one (although, certainly not Mark Titus) could make the argument that Duke--coming off a murderer's row of competition to that point--was more fatigued than IU going into the Challenge and IU was coming off an exhibition-quality schedule.

And to add a bit more Titus-apologist lean, in his write-up of OSU earlier in the piece, he did laud Kelly being the perfect foil to DeShaun Thomas as a factor for OSU's loss. He may not have explicitly contributed Kelly's stifling defense for Thomas' cold night, rather citing his length and shotblocking, but many on this board shared the view that Kelly's defense played a large part in Duke's comeback.

[Mike Corey]

3014

[CDu]

A couple of things--first, I think you're absolutely right, the observation was a valid one that IU made quicker work of UNC than Duke did of OSU. However, I think he completely glosses over the fact that OSU is, to this point in the season, an objectively better team than UNC. I guess he can pull the whole 'I'm an OSU guy so I can totally dismiss them and people will think nothing of it' gimmick, but when Duke faced them, OSU was a top-5 team and expected to be a national contender. UNC, on the other hand, has shown themselves to be overrated as a top-15 (and maybe top-20) team. A basic apples-to-oranges argument. Further, one (although, certainly not Mark Titus) could make the argument that Duke--coming off a murder's row of competition to that point--was more fatigued than IU going into the Challenge and IU was coming off an exhibition-quality schedule.

And to add a bit more Titus-apologist lean, in his write-up of OSU earlier in the piece, he did laud Kelly being the perfect foil to DeShaun Thomas as a factor for OSU's loss. He may not have explicitly contributed Kelly's stifling defense for Thomas' cold night, rather citing his length and shotblocking, but many on this board shared the view that Kelly's defense played a large part in Duke's comeback.

To be clear, I'm not saying I agree with Titus re: Duke vs Indiana. In fact, I don't agree. I was merely noting that Titus' comments aren't necessarily in conflict. I think that our win (even with our struggles early) was more impressive than Indiana's win. And I think we've done more to merit the #1 spot than Indiana. I was just acknowledging that (to steal a Bilas quote) reasonable minds can disagree on this issue, and that nothing Titus said is inconsistent logic.

[Duvall]

I didn't mind the article or the write up about it. Both were honest criticisms. He wasn't complaining about the Crazies being "crazie", he was complaining about them not being crazie enough. And he has good points, all of which the write up on the front page makes note of. I thought his shots at Duke football and calling us out for picking on OSU football were pretty funny.

Except that was the joke - that Ohio State, with all of its tradition, resources and talent, wasn't going to a bowl while lowly Duke was.

Anyway, I'll take a loud non-snarky crowd over a clever and passive one any day of the week.

[CDu]

Anyway, I'll take a loud non-snarky crowd over a clever and passive one any day of the week.

I don't think "clever" and "loud" are mutually exclusive. Ideally, they'd be BOTH loud and clever.

[English]

To be clear, I'm not saying I agree with Titus re: Duke vs Indiana. In fact, I don't agree. I was merely noting that Titus' comments aren't necessarily in conflict. I think that our win (even with our struggles early) was more impressive than Indiana's win. And I think we've done more to merit the #1 spot than Indiana. I was just acknowledging that (to steal a Bilas quote) reasonable minds can disagree on this issue, and that nothing Titus said is inconsistent logic.

You're right, it's not logically flawed to make that argument. I'm glad you didn't, though, because it's not any good.

I thought, in general, despite completely avoiding any positive talk about the actual Duke basketball team in his Duke write-up, Titus was about as complimentary of the Crazies as he's ever going to be. He actually acknowledged the appeal of the Crazies, even if he did it in the most absolutely underhanded way possible. It's tough to find anyone anywhere (and in many cases, even on Duke's campus) to acknowledge affection or respect for the Crazies and what they represent. As an openly anti-Duke guy, Titus shows them love "in his way."

And as a Duke guy, I cringe anytime another Duke alum or fan mentions another school's (excluding UNC) football program for anything negative. Making a sign pointing out that even though OSU football is undefeated and would likely be playing for a natty champs this year, they have a bowl ban draws some unnecessary attention to Duke football. We're trending upward and we have a high graduation rate and no violations (and a bowl bid!), but to everyone else we're still a ridiculous laughingstock in a weak football conference. Rant over.

[Duvall]

I don't think "clever" and "loud" are mutually exclusive. Ideally, they'd be BOTH loud and clever.

Is that ideal? The Crazies' "wit" has often been more trouble than it was worth.

[Dev11]

The thing that stuck out to me about his criticism is that he collectively said the students were lame because he noticed two lame signs. If you've ever stood in Section 17, you know that the absolute worst people are the people who bring signs into that crowded space that's already hard to see basketball from. I don't think that any student who brings a sign can be said to represent the group at all.

In summary, signs are dumb and the point of Grantland is to have outward fanboys express their fanboy opinions. It is what it is.

[AZLA]

It was a tepid criticism with an attempt of wit per the Wunderwall playing guitarist. The subtext was that it's hard to be critical of Duke's team. And for a moment, OSU looked like they might win at Cameron. Without much critique on the actual game, it appears the author, went after the fans instead based on a couple signs. Yes, some of those signs WERE lame. I happen to be thrilled OSU righted its ship and played to an undefeated season. That's huge in light of the scandals and DI needs OSU football, the dotting of the eye, the marching band, and the fan base. It's a great program and tradition. Now if the sign read, "Craigslist: Tattoos for Trophies," no wait, that's kinda lame too. The bowl game question (sign) was immature and not creative. But they're kids, right? Kind of reminded me a time years ago when at an area restaurant I was with close friends from FSU visiting for a football against NC. Some dweeb underclassman from Duke interrupted us and the friendly NC table next to us when we were making nice conversation and he wrote on the paper table cloth the score of the basketball game from the previous year when Duke beat FSU -- then pointed to the table and said, "scoreboard." Seriously? It went over about as well as a pregnant woman pole vaulting. Everyone just shrugged their shoulders and he snickered off back to his table. Only, the Duke friends at his table thought he was obnoxious too and pretended not to have noticed. Maybe that Duke kid WAS the Wunderwall guitarist? Anyhow, like at any school, so a few Duke fans put up dorky signs. Big deal. Shrug, OSU dude. I'm not sure how it defines an entire fan base. What it does even more is shows that the author had little insight or assessment ability to discuss the game at hand and why his team lost. The message lost wasn't the Duke fans and their behavior, but rather, the glaring holes in the authors ability to provide an unbiased assessment of the game. Hey, fans are an easy target...

[Billy Dat]

I thought, in general, despite completely avoiding any positive talk about the actual Duke basketball team in his Duke write-up....

This is what I noticed more than anything. I have followed Titus since Bill Simmons put his Club Trillion blog on blast a few years back. Like many, he tends to heap praise on Coach K while either trashing, or backhand complimenting, the Duke team and program. Since no one can really argue the success of K or the program, they fall back on many of the old saws - the Crazies aren't what they used to be, certain players are annoying (Titus used to only refer to Austin Rivers as "Austin Rivers Punchable Face"), we get favorable treatment from refs/polls/NCAA/insert here, etc. Rather than discuss the Duke team, Titus pivoted to the Crazies.

There are a few key things about the Crazies evolution that never seem to get mentioned:
-Tolerance for fan boorishness has waned over time. There are still some outliers, but throwing condoms and women's panties at accused sex offenders, or pizza boxes at an accused thief, wouldn't go over too well today.
-Getting into Duke is a lot harder now then it was 25 years ago. The student body, on the whole, is a little less unhinged then it used to be and certainly spends more time on their schoolwork - that is a big generalization but I think it's true. There used to be sanctioned keg parties every night of the week until 1991. BOG was also sadly put out to pasture.
-Once Duke started winning titles, K started asking the Crazies to tone their act down. I recall an interview where he said something like (paraphrase), "I don't know why the Crazies cheers have to be so negative. Maybe they can simply praise our players like 'Way to go Jeff!' and 'Good one, Chris!'. To the Crazies credit, the next game featured loud and robotic chants word for word as K had requested - but done with a smirk and it was funny. Still, the maestro persisted and began sometimes walking around pre game and talking to the crowd in specific situations like "Don't make fun of St. Johns Erick Barkley today". What are the Crazies supposed to do, spit in the face of the big man?

With all of the above, it's hard to maintain that edge. Everyone now lauds "The Show" at San Diego State as the best, most passionate and creative college basketball home crowd, in terms of undergraduates. OK, maybe. But if they Crazies were viewed in a vacuum, without anyone knowing the history, would The Show really seem that cool? I think the Crazies are doing just fine. As long as the section is full and they yell really loud and keep their head in the game and provide the adrenaline rush the team needs to achieve peak intensity, then Mark Titus can say whatever he wants and no one should care.

[toooskies]

The entire point of talking about the football team when OSU plays basketball is to remind them that they are, in fact, not the focus or primary concern of their University. If their player is asking themself, "Why are they talking about football?", then the sign has already worked. We're telling them they're second-rate.

That explanation, of course, might be a bit of a stretch.

[Channing]

I think its undeniable that some of the creativity has waned ... even if the passion has not. My primary reference are the 2000 - 2004 years when I was a student, but there were creative chants for a lot of players during that time:

(a) Whose your daddy ... BATTIER
(b) Well Dun-leavy
(c) J-Wil, J-Wil Rock You ...
(d) Everybody's Doing It ... C-DU / even Du-Du-Du - Duhon
(e) Horvath ... Of The Hill People
(f) Nate's a Bad@ss ...

and of course ...

(g) The Monster's Out Of The Cage

I'm not sure I hear anything like that anymore. It just seems to be a player's name and then some clapping.

[lumberbaron]

This is what I noticed more than anything. I have followed Titus since Bill Simmons put his Club Trillion blog on blast a few years back. Like many, he tends to heap praise on Coach K while either trashing, or backhand complimenting, the Duke team and program. Since no one can really argue the success of K or the program, they fall back on many of the old saws - the Crazies aren't what they used to be, certain players are annoying (Titus used to only refer to Austin Rivers as "Austin Rivers Punchable Face"), we get favorable treatment from refs/polls/NCAA/insert here, etc. Rather than discuss the Duke team, Titus pivoted to the Crazies.

There are a few key things about the Crazies evolution that never seem to get mentioned:
-Tolerance for fan boorishness has waned over time. There are still some outliers, but throwing condoms and women's panties at accused sex offenders, or pizza boxes at an accused thief, wouldn't go over too well today.
-Getting into Duke is a lot harder now then it was 25 years ago. The student body, on the whole, is a little less unhinged then it used to be and certainly spends more time on their schoolwork - that is a big generalization but I think it's true. There used to be sanctioned keg parties every night of the week until 1991. BOG was also sadly put out to pasture.
-Once Duke started winning titles, K started asking the Crazies to tone their act down. I recall an interview where he said something like (paraphrase), "I don't know why the Crazies cheers have to be so negative. Maybe they can simply praise our players like 'Way to go Jeff!' and 'Good one, Chris!'. To the Crazies credit, the next game featured loud and robotic chants word for word as K had requested - but done with a smirk and it was funny. Still, the maestro persisted and began sometimes walking around pre game and talking to the crowd in specific situations like "Don't make fun of St. Johns Erick Barkley today". What are the Crazies supposed to do, spit in the face of the big man?

With all of the above, it's hard to maintain that edge. Everyone now lauds "The Show" at San Diego State as the best, most passionate and creative college basketball home crowd, in terms of undergraduates. OK, maybe. But if they Crazies were viewed in a vacuum, without anyone knowing the history, would The Show really seem that cool? I think the Crazies are doing just fine. As long as the section is full and they yell really loud and keep their head in the game and provide the adrenaline rush the team needs to achieve peak intensity, then Mark Titus can say whatever he wants and no one should care.

This is spot on. The average student that attends a game at Cameron has changed, not only because the student body itself has changed, but because it's become so dang difficult to go to a game. Camping for six weeks or whatever?! I camped once for a week as a freshman and did not do it again, because I had a social life. The crazies have largely been made up freshman for that reason, or at least they were by my senior year (which was awhile ago...).

It's also true that Coach K was probably the biggest killer of creative/mean chants--I remember him grabbing the announcer's Mike in game and telling the fans to stop a certain chant.

Forgive me if I agree a little bit with Titus and the DBR article, but I'm a fan of creativity in the fan base and being a little bit mean. Not Maryland "F you JJ" or throwing batteries at Boozer's mom mean, but the condoms, "J R can't Reid", donuts at Tractor Traylor, funny mean. Political correctness sucks. Chanting "S-A-T" at partial qualifiers is our right as the most hated fan base in college sports. We might as well earn that title.

[lumberbaron]

I think its undeniable that some of the creativity has waned ... even if the passion has not. My primary reference are the 2000 - 2004 years when I was a student, but there were creative chants for a lot of players during that time:

(a) Whose your daddy ... BATTIER
(b) Well Dun-leavy
(c) J-Wil, J-Wil Rock You ...
(d) Everybody's Doing It ... C-DU / even Du-Du-Du - Duhon
(e) Horvath ... Of The Hill People
(f) Nate's a Bad@ss ...

and of course ...

(g) The Monster's Out Of The Cage

I'm not sure I hear anything like that anymore. It just seems to be a player's name and then some clapping.

Our times in college overlapped (briefly), and no offense, those were most of the chants I thought were kinda brutal and uncreative. You can throw in, "You've been Branded" and "Stormin' Mormon" (perhaps the worst of that group...chanted during the shortlived Chris Burgess era). The only one of those I ever really liked and thought was funny or cool was one that happened after my tenure--"To the window, to Luol". That was solid.

Creative funny cheers are chanted at specific opponents, they're made up on the spot and not done with cheer sheets, and generally they're not repeated. At least that's my opinion.

[Dev11]

Creative funny cheers are chanted at specific opponents, they're made up on the spot and not done with cheer sheets, and generally they're not repeated. At least that's my opinion.

Wait, how many times did these sorts of cheers happen in your time? Those cheers are basically impossible to start because if they're creative enough, they're really hard to understand, not to mention the fact that the freshmen (who make up 75%+ of the crowd) only listen to the line monitors for suggestions, so if they come from somebody outside that group of 30 or so (we can have a separate discussion as to why there need to be so many line monitors taking up space for their friends) they never really get started. It would be awesome if stuff like that happened, but it just doesn't.

The fans are loud, they push the envelope as much as the current atmosphere and the all-powerful coach will let them, and people still talk about us all over the place and are jealous. Overall, I'm satisfied.

[lumberbaron]

Wait, how many times did these sorts of cheers happen in your time? Those cheers are basically impossible to start because if they're creative enough, they're really hard to understand, not to mention the fact that the freshmen (who make up 75%+ of the crowd) only listen to the line monitors for suggestions, so if they come from somebody outside that group of 30 or so (we can have a separate discussion as to why there need to be so many line monitors taking up space for their friends) they never really get started. It would be awesome if stuff like that happened, but it just doesn't.

The fans are loud, they push the envelope as much as the current atmosphere and the all-powerful coach will let them, and people still talk about us all over the place and are jealous. Overall, I'm satisfied.

Back in my day...

Really, those did happen. It's mostly dictated by something that happens in the game. Lest we forget, Duke invented the airball chant and chanted it in German against Detlef Schrempf. You're right, it's hard to think of that happening a ton, and I wish I could think of more examples, but I definitely remember laughing at games at some fo the really good chants...before K started shutting down the mean ones.

[TruBlu]

Some of these were rehearsed:

"Have a drink, Norm Sloan, have a drink" - while waving/pointing large inflated whiskey bottles in his direction. This was after he made a public comment about Duke students getting drunk before games. I have never seen anyone angrier, nor anyone's face turn redder than Norm's.

"Please don't eat me" directed at a chubby player (FSU, I think).

"SIT, SIT, SIT" directed at Jimmy V on the court. Jimmy (good sport that he was) promptly sat on the court, at which point the Crazies started "ROLL OVER, ROLL OVER".

Skull caps on students' heads (seated directly behind Maryland bench) for Lefty.

Jingling car keys at Clyde the Glide Austin, while he was being investigated for having two brand new cars, supposedly given to him by his girlfriend, who was employed a bank teller.

[sagegrouse]

Skull caps on students' heads (seated directly behind Maryland bench) for Lefty.



Some of the skull caps had a gas gauge on them -- pointed at 'E.'

[devil84]

Eh, Titus needs to write an article. Doesn't want to say anything nice about Duke, but he can't really slam the team's performance. So...what to write about? Hmm......

If he was actually AT the game, I'd give him a little more credibility. But I'm guessing he wasn't actually there, or he would have had different examples, like how to get the blue paint off of him from the students leaning over press row, or when his hearing would return from the roar of the crowd. Lacking examples like these, I'm inclined to think that he watched it from his sofa. Even with a really nice home theater system, you just can't replicate Cameron. The microphones don't pick up ALL of the cheers that the players hear -- heck, even those of us above the rail miss a number of them. Many (most?) of the creative ones take place pre-game or just after the broadcast cuts to commercial, so the viewers watching on TV will never hear them. Even the overall noise level is modulated to enable the viewers to hear the mellifluous voices of the announcers as they ramble on about anything other than the game.

Because viewers typically want to see the game, crowd shots are limited to when there's little action on the floor (not often!) and shown at the discretion of the broadcast crew. A cameraman has to see the sign, and then the broadcast crew has to choose to show it. There just aren't a lot of signs held up in Cameron, particularly during play. A few more come out during timeouts (when that commercial is showing for the 3rd time that game), but there just aren't THAT many signs. If you are IN Cameron, you might notice a creative sign or two at the beginning of the game, and then maybe not see it during the rest of the game as the Crazie that brought it pays attention to the game.

So, in my mind, Titus is really complaining that he didn't have ticket. If he was there, he would NOT be complaining about the Crazies, as they brought their A game that night.

And if he was there and wrote that, well, he's just jealous.

[throatybeard]

Is that ideal? The Crazies' "wit" has often been more trouble than it was worth.

Exactly. If throwing condoms at Herman Veal or Twinkies at Dennis Scott is "wit," or if yelling "green shorts" is "wit", count me out for "wit" and count me in for loud, and coordinated, and intelligible, and maybe a little less "witty."

[Native]

Exactly. If throwing condoms at Herman Veal or Twinkies at Dennis Scott is "wit," or if yelling "green shorts" is "wit", count me out for "wit" and count me in for loud, and coordinated, and intelligible, and maybe a little less "witty."

And if "Roy Williams Wears Cargo Pants" is "wit", then God save us all.

[Kedsy]

Lest we forget, Duke invented the airball chant and chanted it in German against Detlef Schrempf.

And you think they came up with the German chant spontaneously?

I'll grant you the original "airball" chant (which I believe originated at the 1979 Duke/UNC game, i.e., the "7-0" game) seemed spontaneous. Former DBR guru James used to credit himself with inventing it, and although he sat half the court away from where I was sitting, within a split second of Chick Yonakor airballing a shot in the first half, the entire stadium was chanting it.


"Please don't eat me" directed at a chubby player (FSU, I think).

Nigel Dixon. I happened to be at that game and the chant was hilarious.


Jingling car keys at Clyde the Glide Austin, while he was being investigated for having two brand new cars, supposedly given to him by his girlfriend, who was employed a bank teller.

I was at this game as well, and the key jangling seemed to rattle Clyde Austin (which is our goal as fans, right?). I even got my key-jingling picture in the local paper; I believe JeffFrosh and BD80 and Nacho were in the picture as well.


Exactly. If throwing condoms at Herman Veal or Twinkies at Dennis Scott is "wit," or if yelling "green shorts" is "wit", count me out for "wit" and count me in for loud, and coordinated, and intelligible, and maybe a little less "witty."

I personally witnessed pretty much all of the things you've panned here. The condoms were thrown when the USC Trojans were in town. And it was pretty clever. Women's panties were thrown at Herman Veal. That was somewhat tasteless. The green shorts thing had to do with an 8-year-old who played a scrimmage during half-time and, in that context, was fairly funny. And to my knowledge nobody threw twinkies at Dennis Scott. Someone bet him a twinkie he couldn't hit a half-court shot (he could).

I will say one thing about the Crazies. I attended the Delaware game a couple weeks ago and I was shocked and quite disappointed that the students are only on one side of the court now (plus the grad students in the end zones). I imagine it's a lot harder to (a) perform coordinated cheers; and (b) be really loud when you're not surrounding the court on all sides.

[oldnavy]

"J.R. Reid got a big ol' butt, oh yeah!" was pretty funny. The Blue Devil had a J.R. Reid headband on and pillows stuffed in his backside...

Coach K has tempered the Crazies. He actually didn't approve of "Speedo Man", which is probably the funniest Cameron/DIS moment of all time.

[Ichabod Drain]

I think Titus would be pleased that his two paragragh blurb about the Crazies in a top 10 list on grantland has garnered a front page article and a two page (so far) thread here.

[throatybeard]

Sorry, I got my condoms and panties mixed up.

My point stands, nonetheless.

[sagegrouse]

[QUOTE=Kedsy;610824]

Nigel Dixon. I happened to be at that game and the chant was hilarious.


The better one IMHO was the chant, "Casey Sanders, Casey Sanders," referring to the rail-thin center. Then, "Colonel Sanders, Colonel Sanders," pointing to Dixon, which caused Nigel to laugh out loud.

sagegrouse

[Kedsy]

The better one IMHO was the chant, "Casey Sanders, Casey Sanders," referring to the rail-thin center. Then, "Colonel Sanders, Colonel Sanders," pointing to Dixon, which caused Nigel to laugh out loud.

sagegrouse

Yeah, that was funny too. The Crazies were in good form that day.

[Kedsy]

Sorry, I got my condoms and panties mixed up.

My point stands, nonetheless.

Lots of places are loud. You need loud and clever if you want to be special.

[blazindw]

Yeah, that was funny too. The Crazies were in good form that day.

I'll always remember the first set of free throws he took, the Crazies got real quiet and then when Dixon received the ball: FE-FI-FO-FUM, FE-FI-FO-FUM, while stomping on the bleachers.

I was behind the FSU bench for that game and could hear one of their coaches go, "Man, these kids are RUTHLESS."

[Billy Dat]

Titus can't fight the tide forever and bounces back with a love letter to Mason this week
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8740097/mark-titus-top-12-ncaa-power-rankings-featuring-mason-plumlee-effect-championship-caliber-3-point-celebrations-more

He can't resist a parting shot at what a Mason-less Duke would look like, but this piece is about as gushing as it gets.

[kmspeaks]

Even if you take away a few points from Titus for ripping the Crazies, he's got to earn some bonus points for the Dick's Degrees of Separation segment. That's pretty funny and I'm glad to see someone outside of DBR notice that Dick Vitale doesn't actually talk about the game he's calling. I hadn't read Titus before but I probably will now, or at least that segment of his Top 12 every week.

[hurleyfor3]

Sorry, I got my condoms and panties mixed up.

No worries, that's just a biological urge.

[mkline09]

My apologies I didn't mean to start or restart rather the whole Cameron then versus now debate. My initial post was simply to debate the Titus article which I again found to be a bit of sour grapes following OSU's loss to Duke. I have since gathered that most don't necessarily feel that way and I can completely understand that. Didn't mean to come across as the thin skinned guy who can't take criticism of Duke, just interpreted things a bit differently. Titus is a fine writer I just disagreed with the premise and focus.

MK

[Dev11]

My apologies I didn't mean to start or restart rather the whole Cameron then versus now debate. My initial post was simply to debate the Titus article which I again found to be a bit of sour grapes following OSU's loss to Duke. I have since gathered that most don't necessarily feel that way and I can completely understand that. Didn't mean to come across as the thin skinned guy who can't take criticism of Duke, just interpreted things a bit differently. Titus is a fine writer I just disagreed with the premise and focus.

MK

Regardless of your intentions, all discussions end up in the same place on this board. Thanks for giving us this week's excuse to act like the DBR readers we are.

Also, regarding Titus's Dick's Degrees bit, that is hilarious, especially because for the two I've read now, it is actually impossible to discern the made-up ones from the real ones.

[luvdahops]

This is what I noticed more than anything. I have followed Titus since Bill Simmons put his Club Trillion blog on blast a few years back. Like many, he tends to heap praise on Coach K while either trashing, or backhand complimenting, the Duke team and program. Since no one can really argue the success of K or the program, they fall back on many of the old saws - the Crazies aren't what they used to be, certain players are annoying (Titus used to only refer to Austin Rivers as "Austin Rivers Punchable Face"), we get favorable treatment from refs/polls/NCAA/insert here, etc. Rather than discuss the Duke team, Titus pivoted to the Crazies.

There are a few key things about the Crazies evolution that never seem to get mentioned:
-Tolerance for fan boorishness has waned over time. There are still some outliers, but throwing condoms and women's panties at accused sex offenders, or pizza boxes at an accused thief, wouldn't go over too well today.
-Getting into Duke is a lot harder now then it was 25 years ago. The student body, on the whole, is a little less unhinged then it used to be and certainly spends more time on their schoolwork - that is a big generalization but I think it's true. There used to be sanctioned keg parties every night of the week until 1991. BOG was also sadly put out to pasture.
-Once Duke started winning titles, K started asking the Crazies to tone their act down. I recall an interview where he said something like (paraphrase), "I don't know why the Crazies cheers have to be so negative. Maybe they can simply praise our players like 'Way to go Jeff!' and 'Good one, Chris!'. To the Crazies credit, the next game featured loud and robotic chants word for word as K had requested - but done with a smirk and it was funny. Still, the maestro persisted and began sometimes walking around pre game and talking to the crowd in specific situations like "Don't make fun of St. Johns Erick Barkley today". What are the Crazies supposed to do, spit in the face of the big man?

With all of the above, it's hard to maintain that edge. Everyone now lauds "The Show" at San Diego State as the best, most passionate and creative college basketball home crowd, in terms of undergraduates. OK, maybe. But if they Crazies were viewed in a vacuum, without anyone knowing the history, would The Show really seem that cool? I think the Crazies are doing just fine. As long as the section is full and they yell really loud and keep their head in the game and provide the adrenaline rush the team needs to achieve peak intensity, then Mark Titus can say whatever he wants and no one should care.

These are all valid points, and I would add a slightly different slant in that through most of the 70s and early/mid 80s - when the rep of the Crazies really took root - the teams generally needed a ferocious crowd simply to be competitive on many nights. K (and Foster and others who followed Bubas) did not have his full coaching chops yet, our recruiting and overall talent levels were significantly lower, and the ACC was a much more competitive conferenece top to bottom in those days. Those factors lent an urgency to crowd engagement that has necessarily diminished as the program has achieved consistent success, not to mention an increasingly dominant stature (along with UNC) within the ACC. Expansion has also diluted the rivalries, and the familiarity with opposing players and coaches, that came from annual home and homes and a relatively tight geographic footprint. It is hardly surprising that many who were there say that the UNC game in 1995, when Duke came in 0-7 in league play, was the loudest they have ever heard Cameron, and not just after Capel's famous 3-point heave.

I agree that the Crazies are doing just fine. I think they bring it most nights, and always when they are needed most. Whether sufficiently "clever" by whoever's standard, they were clearly loud as hell against Ohio State, and helped both rattle the Buckeyes and pump up our guys in the second half. Which is exactly as it should be.

[throatybeard]

Another thought on cleverness.

I think the better time for oral-aural cleverness is during warmups. If job #1 during the game is loudness, that actually inhibits anything improvised from spreading throughout the crowd. While the opponents are warming up is when you can really communicate with the opponents. As such, these things don't make it onto television.

In 2003 or so, the Phalanx upset Clemson's Thomas Nagys so badly that I went over to the bench to console him and apologize. The man had to sit down and take a breather. I forget what we said, but he definitely heard it. And he heard it because he was warming up on the south goal. Maybe Mullet or Viking remembers.

God, I sound like a fogey. "Back in my day, we didn't have smartphones, so we had to entertain ourselves in line and during warmups."

You can do things during the game, but the degree of difficulty is higher. I think, for entertainment potential, my favorite Coach K crackdown on a cheer was when section 17 serenaded that Reid kid with "Burgess got your Dad fired," to the tune of "nanny nanny boo boo." Krzyzewski erupted from the bench, shouting so loud that he could be heard OVER the crowd "That is [expletive]! That is [expletive]! That is is a BAD cheer."

Graphics work better than oral communication, often. You can also quarantine your cleverness on a sign that Coach probably won't see if you're sitting in the right spot. I'd repeat my two favorite insinuations about Vince Carter and Antawn Jamison, but I wouldn't be able to get it around the language filter. I wasn't responsible for said signs, for the record. I may have, however, been involved with a sign directed at Jeff McInnis in the year of our Lord, MCMXCVI. Signs are good. People read signs.

Are the grads and ugrads still using dry erase to communicate with each other? I hope so. That worked well in the Majdi/Roller/Wine/Phalanx era.

Some days I think we should have a tutorial for the Frosh every year. But 90% of the time, I think that anyone who cares about this stuff and is over age 28 is redefining lame.

[Kedsy]

I think the better time for oral-aural cleverness is during warmups. If job #1 during the game is loudness, that actually inhibits anything improvised from spreading throughout the crowd. While the opponents are warming up is when you can really communicate with the opponents. As such, these things don't make it onto television.

I agree with this. During the game the cheers need to be easily and instantly recognizable or they won't work.


Some days I think we should have a tutorial for the Frosh every year. But 90% of the time, I think that anyone who cares about this stuff and is over age 28 is redefining lame.

I agree with this too. Although to the extent that the Crazies' craziness affects the result of the game (debatable but certainly possible in some situations), then maybe it's not as lame as it appears at first blush.

[sagegrouse]

I agree with this. During the game the cheers need to be easily and instantly recognizable or they won't work.



I agree with this too. Although to the extent that the Crazies' craziness affects the result of the game (debatable but certainly possible in some situations), then maybe it's not as lame as it appears at first blush.

More likely to affect the outcomes in the non-conference games. The ACC coaches appear to tell their teams -- (a) it's a unique atmosphere; (b) enjoy yourself; and (c) the crowd, although loud, is less abusive and less obscene than most other college basketball crowds. The opposing players seem to dig playing in Cameron.

sagegrouse

[Mike Corey]

Are the grads and ugrads still using dry erase to communicate with each other? I hope so. That worked well in the Majdi/Roller/Wine/Phalanx era.

Some days I think we should have a tutorial for the Frosh every year. But 90% of the time, I think that anyone who cares about this stuff and is over age 28 is redefining lame.

Those were good days. Also, it did not hurt that Mr. Majdi could put a Bose sound system to shame.

And it's not lame, per se. It's not a bad thing to pass along institutional knowledge. :)

[subzero02]

Another thought on cleverness.

I think the better time for oral-aural cleverness is during warmups. If job #1 during the game is loudness, that actually inhibits anything improvised from spreading throughout the crowd. While the opponents are warming up is when you can really communicate with the opponents. As such, these things don't make it onto television.

In 2003 or so, the Phalanx upset Clemson's Thomas Nagys so badly that I went over to the bench to console him and apologize. The man had to sit down and take a breather. I forget what we said, but he definitely heard it. And he heard it because he was warming up on the south goal. Maybe Mullet or Viking remembers.

God, I sound like a fogey. "Back in my day, we didn't have smartphones, so we had to entertain ourselves in line and during warmups."

You can do things during the game, but the degree of difficulty is higher. I think, for entertainment potential, my favorite Coach K crackdown on a cheer was when section 17 serenaded that Reid kid with "Burgess got your Dad fired," to the tune of "nanny nanny boo boo." Krzyzewski erupted from the bench, shouting so loud that he could be heard OVER the crowd "That is [expletive]! That is [expletive]! That is is a BAD cheer."

Graphics work better than oral communication, often. You can also quarantine your cleverness on a sign that Coach probably won't see if you're sitting in the right spot. I'd repeat my two favorite insinuations about Vince Carter and Antawn Jamison, but I wouldn't be able to get it around the language filter. I wasn't responsible for said signs, for the record. I may have, however, been involved with a sign directed at Jeff McInnis in the year of our Lord, MCMXCVI. Signs are good. People read signs.

Are the grads and ugrads still using dry erase to communicate with each other? I hope so. That worked well in the Majdi/Roller/Wine/Phalanx era.

Some days I think we should have a tutorial for the Frosh every year. But 90% of the time, I think that anyone who cares about this stuff and is over age 28 is redefining lame.

I was at the "Burgess got your daddy fired" game. I believe it was against Michigan... The chant was directed at Robbie Reid and was in reference to the firing of his dad as head coach of BYU I believe. His dad said Burgess had broken the hearts of thousands of Mormons by committing to Duke. K would mention the incident when addressing the students the night before the UNC game... He said something along the lines of " that was a really shotty thing you did to robbie reid" but he didn't use the word shotty. I also remember K flipping out at us crazies over a "hand job" chant directed at Donald Hand of UVA... No one can silence a building like K.

[oldnavy]

His book "Don't Put Me In Coach" is pretty funny.