PDA

View Full Version : Slate's Annual "Bash Duke" Article is Up-- and Backfires



Mudge
03-27-2013, 08:15 PM
I've got to figure that Alan Siegel is Maryland alum who wasn't admitted to Duke, as he annually has at least one article on Slate, re-enumerating all the reasons why (he thinks) all right-thinking people should hate Duke-- but this year's version (which I haven't seen discussed here, and which I won't link to, to obviate hits to his article) kind of backfired on him-- he puts up a piece interviewing eight different players/coaches on what if felt like to knock Duke out the NCAA tournament... but almost invariably, the players end up saying that they don't really hate Duke-- in fact, they have the utmost respect for them, because Duke is so good, and because they play the right way, play so hard, and have such consistently good results-- they just want to beat Duke to validate that they too are a good program. My favorite quote was from Joe Mazzulla (he of WVU's 2008 and 2010 teams):

"As a player I didn’t like [the Blue Devils] very much, and now I’ve been coaching for two years and I love everything about what they do and what they stand for. When you’re a competitor you almost hate them for how good they are."

That about says it all.

Acymetric
03-27-2013, 09:59 PM
I've got to figure that Alan Siegel is Maryland alum who wasn't admitted to Duke, as he annually has at least one article on Slate, re-enumerating all the reasons why (he thinks) all right-thinking people should hate Duke-- but this year's version (which I haven't seen discussed here, and which I won't link to, to obviate hits to his article) kind of backfired on him-- he puts up a piece interviewing eight different players/coaches on what if felt like to knock Duke out the NCAA tournament... but almost invariably, the players end up saying that they don't really hate Duke-- in fact, they have the utmost respect for them, because Duke is so good, and because they play the right way, play so hard, and have such consistently good results-- they just want to beat Duke to validate that they too are a good program. My favorite quote was from Joe Mazzulla (he of WVU's 2008 and 2010 teams):

"As a player I didn’t like [the Blue Devils] very much, and now I’ve been coaching for two years and I love everything about what they do and what they stand for. When you’re a competitor you almost hate them for how good they are."

That about says it all.

I remember him...great quote there. Looks like he's an assistant at Glennville State now.

weezie
03-27-2013, 10:06 PM
It's when "they" stop hating Duke that we'll all have something to be concerned about. :cool:

SupaDave
03-28-2013, 09:27 AM
It's when "they" stop hating Duke that we'll all have something to be concerned about. :cool:

You got that right brother cause right down the road they are hoping and praying for a savior (Wiggins).

Billy Dat
03-28-2013, 10:23 AM
Thanks for bringing the article to my attention. I just read it and it made me, as a Duke fanatic, swell with pride.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2013/03/duke_ncaa_tournament_what_it_s_like_to_beat_colleg e_basketball_s_most_hated.single.html#pagebreak_an chor_4

It is further proof how "up" for playing Duke teams get. Obviously, teams in the one-and-done NCAA tourny need no motivation, but this article makes it clear just how big a game a Duke game is for the opposition.

Li_Duke
03-28-2013, 11:39 AM
Wow, that's hardly a bash article. That's the kind of article I wouldn't mind showing to a prospective recruit -- look, this is what it means to play at Duke: if a team actually beats you, it's the memory of a lifetime for those players. It was also nice to read how much it meant to the opposing players for Coach K to praise their play, either individually or in the media.

CDu
03-28-2013, 11:47 AM
I did find it odd that they included Eastern Michigan in the list of players referenced that upset Duke. In that game, we were the #9 seed to their #8 seed, so it was in fact not an upset (at least not that year).

Duvall
03-28-2013, 11:52 AM
I did find it odd that they included Eastern Michigan in the list of players referenced that upset Duke. In that game, we were the #9 seed to their #8 seed, so it was in fact not an upset (at least not that year).

Duke was the #8 seed, Eastern Michigan the #9. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_NCAA_Men's_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament)

No idea what the line was, but given Duke's injuries Eastern Michigan *should* have been favored.

CDu
03-28-2013, 12:03 PM
Duke was the #8 seed, Eastern Michigan the #9. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_NCAA_Men's_Division_I_Basketball_Tournament)

No idea what the line was, but given Duke's injuries Eastern Michigan *should* have been favored.

Whoops, had that flipped. But Eastern Michigan had clearly the two best players in that game (Boykins and Dial) and should have been the favorite. That Duke team (which started Capel, Collins, Price, Newton, Capel, and Domzalski in the NCAA tourney and only used Brunson off the bench) was pretty weak.

Danke Shane
03-28-2013, 12:27 PM
I've got to figure that Alan Siegel is Maryland alum who wasn't admitted to Duke, as he annually has at least one article on Slate,

It looks like he's either a Georgetown alum or a Georgetown honk (http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/articles/43995/hoya-euphoria-georgetown-basketball-the-big-east-syracuse-john-thompson/), which makes sense since he's based out of D.C.

I wonder when he'll be interviewing members of the FGCU squad asking them what it was like to beat Georgetown this year?

jimsumner
03-28-2013, 01:47 PM
Whoops, had that flipped. But Eastern Michigan had clearly the two best players in that game (Boykins and Dial) and should have been the favorite. That Duke team (which started Capel, Collins, Price, Newton, Capel, and Domzalski in the NCAA tourney and only used Brunson off the bench) was pretty weak.

Probably because Duke started Capel twice. :)

Seriously, that team had been eviscerated by injuries. Langdon missed the entire season, Carmen Wallace the last third. Wojo sprained an ankle in the ACCT and didn't suit up for the NCAAs. Collins had a badly sprained ankle and was barely ambulatory. Any chance of Christensen developing ended when he broke a wrist and missed a sizeable chunk of the season.

Believe it or not, only two players in that game ever played a second in the NBA and they both played for EMU, Boykins and Dial.

So, it really wasn't much of an upset.

Tripping William
03-28-2013, 02:01 PM
Probably because Duke started Capel twice. :)

Seriously, that team had been eviscerated by injuries. Langdon missed the entire season, Carmen Wallace the last third. Wojo sprained an ankle in the ACCT and didn't suit up for the NCAAs. Collins had a badly sprained ankle and was barely ambulatory. Any chance of Christensen developing ended when he broke a wrist and missed a sizeable chunk of the season.

Believe it or not, only two players in that game ever played a second in the NBA and they both played for EMU, Boykins and Dial.

So, it really wasn't much of an upset.

That was my 3rd year of law school. The late-season win over UCLA at home to punch-their-ticket was as excited as I have ever been about a mediocre basketball team. Between the uncertainty following the Back Surgery Season in '95 (and all the close losses under Pete Gaudet) & the poor start to ACC play, just getting back to the Tourney almost seemed like a Final Four run in-and-of itself, walking wounded notwithstanding.

CDu
03-28-2013, 02:18 PM
Probably because Duke started Capel twice. :)

Seriously, that team had been eviscerated by injuries. Langdon missed the entire season, Carmen Wallace the last third. Wojo sprained an ankle in the ACCT and didn't suit up for the NCAAs. Collins had a badly sprained ankle and was barely ambulatory. Any chance of Christensen developing ended when he broke a wrist and missed a sizeable chunk of the season.

Believe it or not, only two players in that game ever played a second in the NBA and they both played for EMU, Boykins and Dial.

So, it really wasn't much of an upset.

Well, Wojo did play in the NCAAs (3 minutes though). But yeah, Duke had literally no backups at guard and only a walk-on former soccer player (Brunson) as a backup in the frontcourt. It was clearly the lesser team. The only reason they got a higher seed was because of the name on the jersey.

jimsumner
03-28-2013, 02:32 PM
Well, Wojo did play in the NCAAs (3 minutes though). But yeah, Duke had literally no backups at guard and only a walk-on former soccer player (Brunson) as a backup in the frontcourt. It was clearly the lesser team. The only reason they got a higher seed was because of the name on the jersey.

Wojo did indeed play three minutes. Thanks for noting that.

In addition to Langdon, Duke also had Roshown McLeod sitting out that season, as a transfer. So, two future NBA players in the program but neither of them played a second that season.

In fact, this is the only Duke team since 1958 that didn't have at least one future NBA player suit up. Some of these pros had cup-of-coffee careers. Still, that's a pretty neat factoid.

CDu
03-28-2013, 04:24 PM
Wojo did indeed play three minutes. Thanks for noting that.

In addition to Langdon, Duke also had Roshown McLeod sitting out that season, as a transfer. So, two future NBA players in the program but neither of them played a second that season.

In fact, this is the only Duke team since 1958 that didn't have at least one future NBA player suit up. Some of these pros had cup-of-coffee careers. Still, that's a pretty neat factoid.

Wow, that is a crazy fact.

The impressive thing is that this team, in spite of clearly inferior talent (as much as I love Collins and Capel as coaches, they were best served as complementary players rather than stars; and Price was simply too inconsistent/inefficient), managed to win 18 games in a very difficult ACC. I guess it helped that FSU, Clemson, Maryland, and UVa weren't as strong as usual that year. But still - UNC, Georgia Tech, and Wake Forest were still loaded. So finishing 4th was not bad at all for a team so bereft of talent.

Tripping William
03-28-2013, 04:32 PM
Wow, that is a crazy fact.

The impressive thing is that this team, in spite of clearly inferior talent (as much as I love Collins and Capel as coaches, they were best served as complementary players rather than stars; and Price was simply too inconsistent/inefficient), managed to win 18 games in a very difficult ACC. I guess it helped that FSU, Clemson, Maryland, and UVa weren't as strong as usual that year. But still - UNC, Georgia Tech, and Wake Forest were still loaded. So finishing 4th was not bad at all for a team so bereft of talent.

And Tony Moore was a senior on that team, but only played seven games that year & then was lost to academic ineligibility. That five-game winning streak in February (snapped in the Jay Heaps/Jeff McInnis game in Cameron) was SO much fun.

Duvall
03-28-2013, 04:42 PM
Wow, that is a crazy fact.

The impressive thing is that this team, in spite of clearly inferior talent (as much as I love Collins and Capel as coaches, they were best served as complementary players rather than stars; and Price was simply too inconsistent/inefficient), managed to win 18 games in a very difficult ACC. I guess it helped that FSU, Clemson, Maryland, and UVa weren't as strong as usual that year. But still - UNC, Georgia Tech, and Wake Forest were still loaded. So finishing 4th was not bad at all for a team so bereft of talent.

With nonconference wins over UCLA (4-seed), Indiana (6-seed) and Iowa (6-seed).

I don't know if anyone has mentioned it before, but that Krzyzewski is pretty good.

weezie
03-28-2013, 05:13 PM
I don't know if anyone has mentioned it before, but that Krzyzewski is pretty good.

I hear he's the Krzyzt!

BD80
03-28-2013, 06:26 PM
Probably because Duke started Capel twice. :) ...

We did recruit two different Capels in that time frame ...

Mudge
03-28-2013, 06:27 PM
Wojo did indeed play three minutes. Thanks for noting that.

In addition to Langdon, Duke also had Roshown McLeod sitting out that season, as a transfer. So, two future NBA players in the program but neither of them played a second that season.

In fact, this is the only Duke team since 1958 that didn't have at least one future NBA player suit up. Some of these pros had cup-of-coffee careers. Still, that's a pretty neat factoid.

Here's another neat factoid for Duke fans-- I've been watching a number of TV programs over the last two weeks about the NCAA tournament (most of them centered around this being the 75th anniversary of the tournament-- they like to say 75 years of March Madness-- but it wouldn't surprise me if some of those tourneys were actually played partially in February, given the once much-smaller size [16 teams] of the tournament, the absence of conference tournaments in those days, and then fewer games on the regular season schedule [sometimes under 20]), and I have noticed the following:

1) CBS Sports had a countdown show of the (75?) most memorable moments in the NCAA tournament's history-- and guess what was the #1 most memorable moment: Laettner's shot to beat Kentucky in 1992.

2) CBS Sports had countdown show of the 10 greatest teams that didn't win the NCAA title (A.K.A.- the biggest upset in the history of the tournament)-- and guess which team was the #1 greatest team that did not win the championship: UNLV losing to Duke in 1991.

3) ESPN had a bracket championship for readers to vote the most hated player in the history of the NCAA tournament-- and of course, the #1 most hated player in the history of the tournament (by a landslide): Laettner of Duke.

4) ESPN has a comprehensive data analysis designed to "impartially" (as if that were ever possible) name the greatest college basketball program of the last 50 years; this was done by assigning ranks for each of the five decades involved, and while that school from Chapel Hill was named #1 overall, guess which school was named #1 over the last 30 years (i.e.- basically since the tournament went to its current larger format, with multiple bids available to the schools from a single league): Duke. (According to the article, Duke was only prevented from being #1 overall by a weak 10-year period from the late '60's to the late '70's-- though I have to admit, it's hard to not see UCLA as #1 overall, in a 50-year period when they won 11 titles, and no one else had more than four.)

5) And, as noted above, Slate did an survey article on what it feels like to knock Duke out of the tournament, and pretty much everybody quoted in it uses the forum to say how much it meant to them to beat what they considered to be the benchmark, the gold standard, for college basketball in the modern era, because they had/have such high regard for Duke-- not hate-- HIGH REGARD.

jimsumner
03-28-2013, 06:33 PM
Here's another neat factoid for Duke fans-- I've been watching a number of TV programs over the last two weeks about the NCAA tournament (most of them centered around this being the 75th anniversary of the tournament-- they like to say 75 years of March Madness-- but it wouldn't surprise me if some of those tourneys were actually played partially in February, given the once much-smaller size [16 teams] of the tournament, the absence of conference tournaments in those days, and then fewer games on the regular season schedule [sometimes under 20]), and I have noticed the following:

1) CBS Sports had a countdown show of the (75?) most memorable moments in the NCAA tournament's history-- and guess what was the #1 most memorable moment: Laettner's shot to beat Kentucky in 1992.

2) CBS Sports had countdown show of the 10 greatest teams that didn't win the NCAA title (A.K.A.- the biggest upset in the history of the tournament)-- and guess which team was the #1 greatest team that did not win the championship: UNLV losing to Duke in 1991.

3) ESPN had a bracket championship for readers to vote the most hated player in the history of the NCAA tournament-- and of course, the #1 most hated player in the history of the tournament (by a landslide): Laettner of Duke.

4) ESPN has a comprehensive data analysis designed to "impartially" (as if that were ever possible) name the greatest college basketball program of the last 50 years; this was done by assigning ranks for each of the five decades involved, and while that school from Chapel Hill was named #1 overall, guess which school was named #1 over the last 30 years (i.e.- basically since the tournament went to its current larger format, with multiple bids available to the schools from a single league): Duke. (According to the article, Duke was only prevented from being #1 overall by a weak 10-year period from the late '60's to the late '70's-- though I have to admit, it's hard to not see UCLA as #1 overall, in a 50-year period when they won 11 titles, and no one else had more than four.)

5) And, as noted above, Slate did an survey article on what it feels like to knock Duke out of the tournament, and pretty much everybody quoted in it uses the forum to say how much it meant to them to beat what they considered to be the benchmark, the gold standard, for college basketball in the modern era, because they had/have such high regard for Duke-- not hate-- HIGH REGARD.



FWIW. There were eight teams in the NCAA Tournament from 1939 through 1950. It wasn't until the tournament expanded to 16 teams in 1951 that it began to distance itself from the NIT in prestige.

It's always started in March.

throatybeard
03-29-2013, 12:36 AM
FWIW. There were eight teams in the NCAA Tournament from 1939 through 1950. It wasn't until the tournament expanded to 16 teams in 1951 that it began to distance itself from the NIT in prestige.

It's always started in March.

It's a little-known fact that Bill Brill's mom put him to bed during the halftime of the 1939 Final.

hurleyfor3
03-29-2013, 12:42 AM
It's a little-known fact that Bill Brill's mom put him to bed during the halftime of the 1939 Final.

Yeah, but they showed the game on tape delay, thereby invalidating his entire childhood.