half serious idea about who to replace ted roof with

[godukecom]

what about chuck amato? true, he was mediocre at nc state, but at duke a 4 win season would be welcomed, not shunned. he has already proved that he can build a program from the ground and is a pretty good recruiter. all plusses for duke.

as for amato, im sure he would like the idea of a new head coaching job and another chance to prove himself. he would be at a place with no expecataions and when the only direction he can go is up. Throw in the renovations to Wallace Wade and duke would be an attractive position for him.

like i said, only half serious.


I was one of the few people at the game yesterday, in fact i am one of the few people with season tickets. I am not sure what, but something needs to change.

[acciconoclast]

IF there is an opening, I think Paul Johnson should receive strong consideration. The word is he really wants to get to a big-name conference. PJ certainly has won big--while fielding explosive offenses--everywhere he has coached the past 20 years (Hawaii as OC, Navy as OC, Georgia Southern HC, Navy as HC). Nothing is ever guaranteed in this world, but given his glittering track record, I believe he would make Duke competitive year in and year out. He just turned 50 so his best years lie ahead.

[JasonEvans]

First of all, Ted Roof is our coach and deserves our support for the time being. I hope he keeps the job for a long time as he will have to turn things around to keep it so having him still as our coach would mean things have turned around.

Secondly, the names you mention, in fact any name that anyone has heard of, will not come to Duke under the current atmosphere. Not a chance in @!^@& that Paul Johnson would take this job. Same with Chuck Amato. right now, we are deservedly seen as one of the worst jobs in all of Division I. We need to back the guy we have at the helm now, because we hav very few options if we cut him loose.

--Jason "Roof has been a good recruiter, and that is a huge part of what needed to be turned around here" Evans

[cspan37421]

You don't get rid of the coach until you have something better ready to go. Duke needs a contingency plan and I'm not sure what that is. Again, to me, the best choices are

a) not to freak out over one loss and see how the next couple weeks go before doing something possibly counter-productive.
b) look to an established turnaround specialist who has nothing more to prove - but would like Duke to be the crowning jewel on his resume of turnaround success. Make sure he brings potential successors to his staff.
c) find a coordinator from a respected program/coaching tree. With contacts!
d) find a I-AA coach who has turned around 2nd tier programs (a la Grobe at WFU) and wants to head to D-IA (or whatever the divisions are now called). BTW, did not Tressel come from Youngstown State?

They should talk to Spurrier, too. Not so much to bring him back, but to get his advice. If Spurrier goes to the trouble to vote for Duke in the first coaches' poll, I would think he cares about the program and would like to see it do well (to justify his vote, even if it is more of a thank-you).

I would hope this recent history of Duke coaches would not hinder our ability to do b) - d) but I'm not sure.

As for cutting our own TV deal a la ND and going independent I think that probably would be a huge, hubris-driven mistake. As others have noted, much of the appeal of Duke basketball on national TV is in the UNC rivalry, the ACC chase, and to a lesser degree the rivalry between Duke and other original ACC schools like Maryland & Ga Tech. Break that link and you've cut off your history and a great part of your appeal. Sure, Duke vs. anyone is appealing to us and a "super bowl" game for the opponent (in most years) but I doubt that it would survive an unmooring from the ACC. Conisider travel costs and not dipping into ACC football revenue - it is a tall order.

I would not like to see us join the big east, primarily because the geography and history does not fit. If we did anything else I'd like to see us form some conference with Vanderbilt and other similar schools (going back to 8 teams would be nice, having home & away with all members, but I know it has a cost). For the other 6, I think WFU would be a nice addition; possibly G'town, and we could have some "public ivies" like UVa and UNC - but UNC would never join a conf. that NCSU isn't in, is my guess).

The football expansion hasn't killed ACC basketball, but IMO it has done significant damage. The gold rush for a conf. championship game has led to ridiculous geographical layouts, unbalanced schedules, travel hassles, and just a big loss of self-identity for the ACC. So I guess I feel that if we're going to just invent conferences out of whole cloth, why not invent one more to our liking and preferences?

[Carlos]

Actually we would have plenty of options, Jason, but would any of them be demonstrably better than Ted?

Years ago I had an old Triumph convertible and, like most British cars it featured Lucas electronics which meant that it would fail to start on a more than infrequent basis. What was frustrating is that no matter how many times I changed the tires I still had the problem with the car not starting.

Maybe the problem with Duke football runs a little deeper than firing another coach.

[devildeac]

Actually we would have plenty of options, Jason, but would any of them be demonstrably better than Ted?

Years ago I had an old Triumph convertible and, like most British cars it featured Lucas electronics which meant that it would fail to start on a more than infrequent basis. What was frustrating is that no matter how many times I changed the tires I still had the problem with the car not starting.

Maybe the problem with Duke football runs a little deeper than firing another coach.
No maybe about it-it does run a lot deeper but how deep do we dig and how far and wide. Our old timers on this board(jimsumner, olympic fan, jarhead, bob green, ozzie, me, and many others who i apologetically failed to name here) have analyzed this many times over the last several years-FAR,FAR better and more often than I have and yet we still have this sad discussion. Does it begin with the AD? Does it begin with the administration? Does it begin with the head coach? How many years will it take to rectify/rebuild the program? What standards do we set? Where in the world/universe would we ever get another coach to accept this monumental challenge? I obviously do not begin to have many answers to these problems but I desperately hope for respectability for our FB program again. I would love to post some more but it's time to head to the Ted with some folks from the off-topic board to see the Bravos lose more ground to the Mutts in the NL pennant race. It is tough being a perpetual half-full fan

[dkbaseball]

I wasn't looking in at DBR during the time Roof was hired, so I don't recall what, if any, mention Dick Biddle got hereabouts as a candidate for the job. He campaigned for a shot at it, but as I recall didn't get much of a look. I, for one, would love to see what he could do with it.

In the late '60s and early '70s there were two people in all of DUAA with intensity that was just off the charts -- Tom Butters and Dick Biddle. Biddle was the campus badass, someone you definitely didn't want to run afoul of on a drunken Saturday night, but the one guy on the defensive side of the football you could count on to really bring it every game.

His winning percentage at Colgate over 12 seasons has been .706; he has the best league record in the Patriot League over that time period. Div. One recruiting is something he would have to get up to speed on, but I think he would find a way to get players. I guarantee he would change the culture on-field and in the locker room. This is one hard-nosed guy, someone who would put real (and useful) fear into the players. And he's one of ours, a guy who did everything he could to keep Duke football from lapsing into mediocrity in the late '60s.

[cspan37421]

I don't know if it starts with the AD. Do we take the bad with the good? Folks seem to be enthralled at the choice of Coach P, but to my knowledge she hasn't coached a game at Duke yet. Several other smaller profile sports (soccer, golf, tennis) have done very well over the years. Is the same person a genius for hiring in these sports while an idiot in hiring for football? His boating problems aside, I'm not sure canning the AD would be constructive overall. With perfect information, we might just find out that we simply could not hire a better coach than Ted Roof. Not to say there wasn't a better coach than Ted Roof available at the time, but that we simply could not hire them. Think about it.

[cspan37421]

BTW, Lloyd Carr may soon be available.

[Bluedawg]

First of all, Ted Roof is our coach and deserves our support for the time being. I hope he keeps the job for a long time as he will have to turn things around to keep it so having him still as our coach would mean things have turned around.

Secondly, the names you mention, in fact any name that anyone has heard of, will not come to Duke under the current atmosphere.

I agree 100%. I've been a Roof fan since day 1 and still am. I would live to see him make a huge mark on Duke football. he has said that he feels the potential for duke is to be as regular bowl team and to occasionally battle for the ACC championship. I agree and i feel we need a coach with that optimistic attitude.

That said you can't overlook cspan's comments.


You don't get rid of the coach until you have something better ready to go. Duke needs a contingency plan and I'm not sure what that is.

I think Roof can turn it around. i don't know if anyone saw the number of recruits in the end zone, but if he can get that many players interested in Duke after a 0-12 season the man has gifts. but I'm drawn back to cspan's comments. Should Duke just sit tight and hope they turn it around? How many years do you wait? How low can you allow the team to get especially looking back at Jason's words:


Secondly, the names you mention, in fact any name that anyone has heard of, will not come to Duke under the current atmosphere. Not a chance in @!^@& that Paul Johnson would take this job. Same with Chuck Amato. right now, we are deservedly seen as one of the worst jobs in all of Division I.

Do we sink so low that no one would even consider Duke as a home? cspan suggested that Duke "find a I-AA coach who has turned around 2nd tier programs" After church today i told my wife that maybe Duke needs to talk to Jerry Moore (http://www.goasu.com/football/coach/24/).

[YmoBeThere]

1) The need to stay in the ACC
2) Stellar graduation rates
3) An overall athletic program that is doing well

I think one of the things that everyone needs to be on board with are what are the real expectations for the football team. No one will ever state it in the Athletic Department, they can only say the expectation is to win....every single time you get on the field. However, my own opinion is that a 3-4 win season (with 1-2 of those being in the ACC) would be enough to keep me satisfied that we are doing the right things. An occasional 5-6 win season with a shot at a low level bowl would be a bonus every 4-5 years, but not expected. My expectations are based on what my other alma mater, Vanderbilt, has achieved. They found a good coach, Bobby Johnson, who had aleady established himself at Furman.

So, I am thinking you need the right man to find the right coach, and right now I am not sure if we have either.

[A-Tex Devil]

d) find a I-AA coach who has turned around 2nd tier programs (a la Grobe at WFU) and wants to head to D-IA (or whatever the divisions are now called). BTW, did not Tressel come from Youngstown State?



This is the way to go if Roof can't get a few wins this year. Yesterday was awful. One of the glaring drawbacks of Roof and Franks has been their lack of "executive" skills needed from a head coach. Unless we get a superstar, this is why we don't want another coordinator.

Another possibility to throw out there, but it has to be someone special, is a highly successful high school coach. This sounds stupid, but the University of Houston did this and it has resulted in bowls and an NFL caliber QB. North Texas just made a hire out of high school as well, so it will be interesting to see how that turns out. There are probably less than 5 viable candidates in all of the nation, but they exist.

One immediate area where this helps is recruiting because you establish a pipeline to a high school football factory and that person will have plenty of connections. Roof had a couple of decent recruiting years. Except for a couple of signings, though, they've been greatly overstated IMHO and the results speak for themselves out on the field.

[coblue]

I vote for this guy:

http://utepathletics.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/price_mike00.html

Yeah, he had a drunken celebratory moment, he is a good man, a great coach, a program builder, and hemight just love getting to a big time conference - albeit the sub-basement of it.

[formerdukeathlete]

Actually we would have plenty of options, Jason, but would any of them be demonstrably better than Ted?

Years ago I had an old Triumph convertible and, like most British cars it featured Lucas electronics which meant that it would fail to start on a more than infrequent basis. What was frustrating is that no matter how many times I changed the tires I still had the problem with the car not starting.

Maybe the problem with Duke football runs a little deeper than firing another coach.

Goldsmith's 1994 team, was about the last year ATO and Phi Delt were side by side on the main quad. These frats were in essence our football dorm. When recruits came in, they attended keg parties and it seemed that we offered ball players a fairly cool place to live. Correct me as to the timing, but did not Nan break up the two frats and then eventually force both off of the main quad.

I simply do not buy that Duke cannot be better than it currently is in Football. Stadium renovations are key. Yoh will be good enough for years. Bring back some student life - this would help. Maybe, de-linking federal highway funds to States' drinking age will gain momentum. It actually seems to be in view of the Iraq and Afganistan wars - our 18 year olds are dying over there, but go off base in the US and they cannot buy a beer.

Back to the game - it seemed clear (early in the 2nd half) that Asack should have gotten more reps. That he did not - well, this suggests a lack of adjusting ones game plan as game conditions and players' performances dictated. I have to think that Spurrier and other head coaches would have been trying a number of things after the first qb fumble, interception, and first couple of sacks. What if, of course, by I say we might have won the game with Asack - short pass routes - taller qb - seeing over the lineman, higher and relatively flat ball trajectory, moving out of the pocket - fewer sacks and fewer, less likely, interceptions - sounds like a winner to me. It seemed incongruous to stick with Lewis.

Then there is the issue of keeping players. Delle Donne is sitting on the bench at Middle Tennessee State (so his move may have ben ill advised from the standpoint of getting pt). He would have been nice to have thrown into the UConn game. The issues Ben Patrick and others raised about Duke's coaching staff upon leaving the program early may be more relevant than Saturday's performance as to whether we need a coaching change.

[hc5duke]

Years ago I had an old Triumph convertible and, like most British cars it featured Lucas electronics which meant that it would fail to start on a more than infrequent basis. What was frustrating is that no matter how many times I changed the tires I still had the problem with the car not starting.

Did you try replacing your Johnson rods and blinker fluids?

[YmoBeThere]

Did you try replacing your Johnson rods and blinker fluids?

His gonkulator? I have had to replace a few of those.

[captmojo]

...it was full.

[NYC Duke Fan]

I am not familiar with the issure that Ben Patrick or others raised about the coaching staff ? Could you tell me and others what they were .

Thank you

[dkbaseball]

Several other smaller profile sports (soccer, golf, tennis) have done very well over the years. Is the same person a genius for hiring in these sports while an idiot in hiring for football? His boating problems aside, I'm not sure canning the AD would be constructive overall.

To the best of my knowledge, Alleva has not hired a coach with a winning record. Only two football coaches and a baseball coach who have been disasters. The last time a baseball coach was hired, they took the decision away from Alleva and made him just one vote on a committee of six. All the successful minor sport coaches you're referring to were, I believe, hired by Tom Butters. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

[YmoBeThere]

...it was full.

I guess it was the Starter the whole time.

[devilirium]

Asack? Are you kidding?

Granted, he was instructed to run to the left and then to the right....and then to the right again. That series was a complete joke. I could buy into the first two plays if he would've run left or right and then dropped back for a pass.

We went from go for broke to the Mike McGee offense after the second offensive series. Steve Spurrier took a slow, mediocre running back and made him an All ACC tight end (Carl Franks). There needs to be some similar imagination to this edition. After the first series, there was very little misdirection and more of the same stretch plays that don't work at Duke because the O line weren't able to hold their blocks. Find a solid O line amidst what we have and a punter. That would've helped us immensely yesterday.

[captmojo]

I guess it was the Starter the whole time.

Gee. That's right. Wow. I've become a starter now.

I'd like to thank my manager, my assistant, my agent, hairdresser, makeup artist and all the other little people.

[bhd28]

You don't get rid of the coach until you have something better ready to go.
Better than Roof? Well, I have never coached football, but I DID stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night... so I hearby throw my name in the pot. Just kidding. The name I will throw into the pot is Gus Malzahn.

[Bluedawg]

I simply do not buy that Duke cannot be better than it currently is in Football.

I agree 110%


The issues Ben Patrick and others raised about Duke's coaching staff upon leaving the program early may be more relevant than Saturday's performance as to whether we need a coaching change

I'm not familiar with the comments....please elaborate.

[Bluedawg]

To the best of my knowledge, Alleva has not hired a coach with a winning record. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/07/images/danowski-john-mug.jpg http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/apmegasports/200608291920229770139-pf.widec.jpg

17-3

[YmoBeThere]

http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/07/images/danowski-john-mug.jpg http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/apmegasports/200608291920229770139-pf.widec.jpg

17-3


To be consistent, the Alleva naysayers(such as myself) will say "Danowski inherited a team put together by Mike Pressler. Give it a couple years."

Not sure if he was a committee hire, but Danowski definitely did a great job last year and with 5 seniors returning for their 5th year, our chances at competing again for a national title are very good.

[YmoBeThere]

Gee. That's right. Wow. I've become a starter now.

I'd like to thank my manager, my assistant, my agent, hairdresser, makeup artist and all the other little people.

YmoBeThere dreams of the day when he can give a similar speech to the adoring masses!

[cspan37421]

Didn't Alleva hire Coach P? Presumably she brought with her a winning record too. Rennie is a long-timer but I'm not so sure about the women's soccer coach. Golf and Tennis - I don't know, they seem to have done very well lately, and if they've really been around that long, Alleva probably extended them, so he should get a bit of credit for that too.

Not to minimize the baseball fiasco, and the long-term football struggles. Certainly you might get a different picture if you only look at the revenue sports, and if you only conisder the non-hoops side of revenue sports, well, it might look like a bleak record indeed. But I'm not sure you should really ignore big chunks of his job - it seems like you're drawing a predetermined conclusion.

[YmoBeThere]

Didn't Alleva hire Coach P?

Coach P hasn't had a game yet, so it may be jumping the gun. Everyone seemed excited by Roof at the time he was hired.

So, I go back to the traditional rant - "Coach P inherited a team put together by Coach G. Give it a couple years."

[Capn Poptart]

They should talk to Spurrier, too. Not so much to bring him back, but to get his advice. If Spurrier goes to the trouble to vote for Duke in the first coaches' poll, I would think he cares about the program and would like to see it do well (to justify his vote, even if it is more of a thank-you).

I love Spurrier, but he strongly recommended Carl Franks to Alleva.

[JBDuke]

Didn't Alleva hire Coach P? Presumably she brought with her a winning record too. Rennie is a long-timer but I'm not so sure about the women's soccer coach. Golf and Tennis - I don't know, they seem to have done very well lately, and if they've really been around that long, Alleva probably extended them, so he should get a bit of credit for that too.

Not to minimize the baseball fiasco, and the long-term football struggles. Certainly you might get a different picture if you only look at the revenue sports, and if you only conisder the non-hoops side of revenue sports, well, it might look like a bleak record indeed. But I'm not sure you should really ignore big chunks of his job - it seems like you're drawing a predetermined conclusion.

Cspan, I was about to post a similar response, but then I reread the original post. I think what dkbaseball was trying to say was that no coach that Alleva has hired has had a winning record after coming to Duke. For whatever reason, as indicated by Bluedawg's post, he forgot about Danowski. I suspect there are others, but I don't know that for sure...

[formerdukeathlete]

I am not familiar with the issure that Ben Patrick or others raised about the coaching staff ? Could you tell me and others what they were .

Thank you

Ben was just cut by the Cardinals

http://mvn.com/nfl-cardinals/2007/09/02/thanks-oakland-cardinals-jump-on-moses-after-raiders-reportedly-cut-him-by-mistake/

But he had a great year at Delaware (the 06 season) - his receiving yards were about double what he had at Duke each of the prior 2 years.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=135925

Ben had such a good final year at Delaware that he was thought to go higher in the draft - about the 3 round - so when he went later, this was a disappointment to him.

Watzone, Train, certainly Bill Brill would have better info. as to the disappointments, disenchantment shared by ball players when leaving early.

Ben probably wanted some assurances as to the type of offense Duke would run in 06. My guess also is that some of the coaching turnover initiated by Roof alienated him.

What if Ben had stayed and we threw to him more often? We might have won a game or two, Ben might have gone higher in the draft, and might have been slightly better prepared for the NFL. It is not just Duke who loses when a key or potentially key player transfers. For example, had Delle Donne stayed, he might have started in 06 - now he sits on the bench, at least for now.

Bill Brill commented about the attrition of players under Roof - as this was concerning.

Getting back to Ben, who was one of the, if not the highest rated recruit brought in by Franks, my sense is that he did not have confidence in the game day coaching, signal calling, and therefore did not have a strong sense that his talents would be used to full potential. He had one more year to perform. And the Delaware staff provided assurances regarding offensive style that Duke, Roof did not.

Players Ben Patrick, Tyler Krieg and others have provided valuable information about whatever disconnects with Roof and his staff. Alleva and others in the AD interviewed these guys before they left and have the info.

An anolgoy from the business world: fairly often an insecure manager will prefer younger, less experienced workers to more experienced workers who may possess greater knowledge and ability, but who also would be more likely to question or disagree with decisions. The company suffers - not utilizing the best talent available.

A head football coach is a manager of coaches and players. He should be able to deal with strong, opinionated players and staff. It should be all about putting the best team, best coached team on the field, of helping players reach their full potential on and off the field. It should be about allowing assistant coaches to work to their potential.

[YmoBeThere]

Alleva and others in the AD interviewed these guys before they left and have the info.

When leaving, a player may or may not give a full accounting of the issues they see with a program. What is the upside? None that I can think of...downside is that they will think you are mean-spirited, disgruntled, etc. Better just to say, "Well I liked this and this, but thought I would have a better opportunity at XXXX University" and be on your merry way. This happens often in exit interviews from first hand experience, why should I give you the whole story again when you wouldn't listen to me when I was your employee and was giving you the whole story?

[throatybeard]

Speaking of Duke NFL cuts, Drew Strojny was cut recently by the Saint Louis Rams.

[cspan37421]

Thanks JBD; you were right, I read it differently.

[MulletMan]

WFU has shown that a school half our size can compete. I don't know when they started, but it seemed that Jim Caldwell was a decent coach, coming in as a Paterno assistant. Jim Grobe has been a great hire for them, but do you think we could snag, as they did, a rising star in the lower ranks? One that thinks their career will be furthered, not hindered, by taking on the challenge of resurrecting the Duke football program? I'm not sure we have the same range of options that most schools do.


A-HEM! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Moore)

I mean not to dump on Roof, but perhpas Duke needs to really go out on a limb IF they want to go after a program changer. I mean heck, it can't get much worse.

[DU82]

Coach P hasn't had a game yet, so it may be jumping the gun. Everyone seemed excited by Roof at the time he was hired.

So, I go back to the traditional rant - "Coach P inherited a team put together by Coach G. Give it a couple years."

To continue the theme, to be fair, "Spurrier inherited a team put together by Coach Sloan. Give it a couple of years." He stayed three, he left the cubbard bare. Barry Wilson suffered a couple of years with minimal talent, then just as the team matured, he was shown the door (or more accurately, went through it before it slammed behind him.) Goldsmith took the players Wilson recruited, had one good season with Wilson's players (with lucky scheduling) and then didn't get any players. Franks came in without much talent, finally recruited a few, but showed he couldn't coach. Roof inherited a team at the middle of a season with some talent, did some good things the rest of the season, then lost most of the talent. The jury is still out as to whether he can recruit AND coach. (I realize most here don't believe in the latter.)

[JDSBlueDevl]

What I think Duke needs is some Cowher Power (or Cahr Pahr, if you speak Pittsburghese).

http://media.newsobserver.com/smedia/2006/02/05/reg-1177016-735362.embedded.prod_affiliate.3.jpg

I mean, just look at that jaw! Doesn't that just exude hard-nosed football?

Of course, this would be contingent on the Redskins and Panthers jobs not becoming open in the offseason.

[dukie8]

What I think Duke needs is some Cowher Power (or Cahr Pahr, if you speak Pittsburghese).

http://media.newsobserver.com/smedia/2006/02/05/reg-1177016-735362.embedded.prod_affiliate.3.jpg

I mean, just look at that jaw! Doesn't that just exude hard-nosed football?

Of course, this would be contingent on the Redskins and Panthers jobs not becoming open in the offseason.

that would be incredible if we could get cowher. there's no way that he would tolerate what has been tolerated for years. is this just a pipedream or is someone really working on him?

[JDSBlueDevl]

that would be incredible if we could get cowher. there's no way that he would tolerate what has been tolerated for years. is this just a pipedream or is someone really working on him?

Somewhat of a pipedream, but some people in TDD are talking of actively recruiting him. Of course, it'll all come down to whether the Redskins or Panthers job opens, because there is no doubt that an open NFL job would be his first preference.

[JBDuke]

FDA, I am disappointed in you. Despite repeated, and I mean REPEATED efforts, you continue your pattern of posting unfounded allegations and then, when asked to provide specifics, sidestepping the issue.

In the latest example, you posted:


The issues Ben Patrick and others raised about Duke's coaching staff upon leaving the program early may be more relevant than Saturday's performance as to whether we need a coaching change.

to which NYC Duke Fan responded:


I am not familiar with the issue that Ben Patrick or others raised about the coaching staff. Could you tell me and others what they were?

This is a simple and direct question about the content of your previous post. Your post sure sounded like you had direct knowledge of the "issues" raised by Patrick and other departing players, and NYC Duke Fan, like others, I'm sure, wanted to know what these issues were. But instead of answering with specifics, you give us speculation:


... Ben probably wanted some assurances as to the type of offense Duke would run in 06. My guess also is that some of the coaching turnover initiated by Roof alienated him.

... my sense is that he did not have confidence in the game day coaching, signal calling, and therefore did not have a strong sense that his talents would be used to full potential. He had one more year to perform. And the Delaware staff provided assurances regarding offensive style that Duke, Roof did not.

Players Ben Patrick, Tyler Krieg and others have provided valuable information about whatever disconnects with Roof and his staff. Alleva and others in the AD interviewed these guys before they left and have the info.


I do not know whether you actually know what issues Ben Patrick raised or not (In fact, I don't know if Ben Patrick actually raised any issues at all upon his departure.), but I do know that your style of posting, intentional or not, leads to obfuscation. The unspecified "issues" now hang out there as indistinct blemishes on the Duke program, but in fact may only be products of your unique imagination.

Put up or shut up. That is, to be clear, please make every effort to avoid this in the future or find yourself another place to post.

[SoCalDukeFan]

To quote Jason Evans:

"First of all, Ted Roof is our coach and deserves our support for the time being. I hope he keeps the job for a long time as he will have to turn things around to keep it so having him still as our coach would mean things have turned around."

This is a very young season. I personally have my doubts about Roof but I will give him the benefit of the doubt as long as he is the coach or until the end is obvious. It is too early for it to be obvious.

SoCal

[cspan37421]

On Cowher:

There was some talk that he might be interested in the NCSU job, when he was moving to the RTP area. What a coup it would be to get him, though.

<enter daydream>

[Bluedawg]

To be consistent, the Alleva naysayers(such as myself) will say "Danowski inherited a team put together by Mike Pressler.

But that wasn't the statement.

[gep]

This is a very young season. I personally have my doubts about Roof but I will give him the benefit of the doubt as long as he is the coach or until the end is obvious. It is too early for it to be obvious.
SoCal

I guess "the end" being "obiuous" is my concern. Some posters who were at the game spoke of the team in the second-half with "no heart"... that they "gave up". My thought is that this kind of display by players is a direct reflection of the coach and his staff. As I've said in other posts, I'm a Coach Roof supporter, as I think he brings the right things to the table. But, if players "give up" with "no heart", I do start to question the coach.

[formerdukeathlete]

The unspecified "issues" now hang out there as indistinct blemishes on the Duke program, but in fact may only be products of your unique imagination.



Ben Patrick almost left duke after the 04 season, according to a post by Watzone on these Boards. Of course, he did leave after the 05 season - after graduating in May 06, I believe.

Ben was featured in an article in March, April 2007, I think in the N&O, regarding his decision to leave Duke and play at Delaware.

Kreig, Bauta (both for other programs) and Benion (chose to grad., rather than come back) left Duke after the 05 season. Each was a likely starter on the O line for the 06 season.

Kreig was featured in an article in the San Jose Mercury News prior to his 06 season at Cal. Kreig was critical of Duke's program, and of all of the coaching changes - something like 3 OCs in 3 years, etc.

I don't know what weight or concern to assign to the player and assistant coaches attrition under Roof. It's been too much. As Du82 said, we still do not know whether Roof can coach. I hope if, as Roof continues to struggle, Duke can intervene and help stave off further attrition among players who will help the program.

[DU82]

Ben Patrick almost left duke after the 04 season, according to a post by Watzone on these Boards. Of course, he did leave after the 05 season - after graduating in May 06, I believe.

Ben was featured in an article in March, April 2007, I think in the N&O, regarding his decision to leave Duke and play at Delaware.

Kreig, Bauta (both for other programs) and Benion (chose to grad., rather than come back) left Duke after the 05 season. Each was a likely starter on the O line for the 06 season.

Kreig was featured in an article in the San Jose Mercury News prior to his 06 season at Cal. Kreig was critical of Duke's program, and of all of the coaching changes - something like 3 OCs in 3 years, etc.

I don't know what weight or concern to assign to the player and assistant coaches attrition under Roof. It's been too much. As Du82 said, we still do not know whether Roof can coach. I hope if, as Roof continues to struggle, Duke can intervene and help stave off further attrition among players who will help the program.



One complaint by Kreig was the constant coaching changes. Not sure how letting Roof go right now would help that.

It would appear that most of the players who left were Franks's recruits. That happens with a lot of head coaching changes, and would likely to happen if Roof were to leave. Even if it theoretically helps the program for Roof to leave, this will be a byproduct of that decision.

Some of the decision making for those red-shirt seniors like PAtrick is that Duke was unlikely to win much last year, even with them. The best thing for Patrick AND the Duke program is for them to move on, to allow younger players who theoretically will be part of a turnaround, to gain experience, and not be blocked by a player in their last semester. (How that is working is obviously a question yet to be answered.)

DelleDonne (hope I'm spelling correctly here) leaving was a different story. He did something wrong that resulted in a one-game suspension, which turned out to be the absolutely wrong game for him to miss, as it gave Azack his opening and blocked DD from his chance. So he decided for a fresh start and a chance in the long run to start, rather than (at the time of the decision) sit behind a classmate for three years. (DD would have been "clear" his red-shirt senior year.)

A question for FDA that I asked on the old board setup, and never got an answer.

This is regarding your constant insistance that removing the track and adding seats is necessary for football to be successful at Duke. HOw many rows do you really think you'll be able to add (assuming, as you point out, that the field is able to be lowered, as any seats right now would be too low to see.) What I see on the sidelines is most of the space, including the track, is used on Football Saturdays for game related things. The benches for the teams (the UCons benches appeared to be back against the wall, at the edge of the track) set up areas, cheerleaders all were on the track. There just isn't that much "free" space, with or without the track. My guess is that maybe three or four rows would fit, meaning about 2000-3000 seats (there's about 45 rows in the stadium, one row has about 700 seats, I estimate.) Is this really that important? Seating close at football games is significantly less important than at other sporting events, as it makes it difficult to see everything that's going on.

[formerdukeathlete]

One complaint by Kreig was the constant coaching changes. Not sure how letting Roof go right now would help that.

It would appear that most of the players who left were Franks's recruits. That happens with a lot of head coaching changes, and would likely to happen if Roof were to leave. Even if it theoretically helps the program for Roof to leave, this will be a byproduct of that decision.

Some of the decision making for those red-shirt seniors like PAtrick is that Duke was unlikely to win much last year, even with them. The best thing for Patrick AND the Duke program is for them to move on, to allow younger players who theoretically will be part of a turnaround, to gain experience, and not be blocked by a player in their last semester. (How that is working is obviously a question yet to be answered.)

DelleDonne (hope I'm spelling correctly here) leaving was a different story. He did something wrong that resulted in a one-game suspension, which turned out to be the absolutely wrong game for him to miss, as it gave Azack his opening and blocked DD from his chance. So he decided for a fresh start and a chance in the long run to start, rather than (at the time of the decision) sit behind a classmate for three years. (DD would have been "clear" his red-shirt senior year.)

A question for FDA that I asked on the old board setup, and never got an answer.

This is regarding your constant insistance that removing the track and adding seats is necessary for football to be successful at Duke. HOw many rows do you really think you'll be able to add (assuming, as you point out, that the field is able to be lowered, as any seats right now would be too low to see.) What I see on the sidelines is most of the space, including the track, is used on Football Saturdays for game related things. The benches for the teams (the UCons benches appeared to be back against the wall, at the edge of the track) set up areas, cheerleaders all were on the track. There just isn't that much "free" space, with or without the track. My guess is that maybe three or four rows would fit, meaning about 2000-3000 seats (there's about 45 rows in the stadium, one row has about 700 seats, I estimate.) Is this really that important? Seating close at football games is significantly less important than at other sporting events, as it makes it difficult to see everything that's going on.

Patrick was a 1-AA All American and the only 1-AA player to play in the North South senior bowl. However, he was poorly utilized in the 04 and 05 seasons. In fact, it was worse in 05 than in 04. Patrick was clearly the exception to the redshirt senior, go, move along little dogy. So were Krieg, Bauta who was an underclassman, and Benior who just graduated. In each specific case, Duke would have been a better team and more likely to win one in the 06 season had they stuck around. If I had been in Roof's shoes, I would have done eveything legitimately possible to have encouraged these guys to stay.

Re the stadium, based on my research, Kansas is the only other Division 1 school in which a track still separates the field from the stands. In most all stadiums - take Notre Dame for instance, the stadium was built through digging a hole in the ground and then building stands on the slope. Duke can lower the field and still leave room for benches. You correctly note that Duke's track may be a little tighter than Kansas' track, for example. Anecdotally, it is my understanding that Duke gets many more seats (than what you estimate) in lowering the field, including endzone seats at the open end of the horseshoe built from the current field level down to the new, lowered field level. Also, if the field is 10 feet lower than newly installed seats (rather than the 6 feet currently, this helps offset what you describe the phenom that one is better able to see more of the action all over the field if one is farther away from the field.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Randall_Stadium

Regarding the 11k seats Wisconsin acquired in removing their running track and lowering the field in 1958. These seats included endzone seats as I have described above. I reviewing a fair number of Division 1 renovations involving removing the running track, the lowest number added was 6k and the highest may have been Wisconsin.

[Bluedawg]

Re the stadium, based on my research, Kansas is the only other Division 1 school in which a track still separates the field from the stands.

http://www.suprocreations.com/images/unc_stadium450.jpgIt is difficult to see from this view, but there is a walk-way between the stands and field at Keenan. Granted it's not a track, but the walkway is between the field and the stands with a fence separating the walk-way from the field.

[captmojo]

OOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHH. Don't you think an image of Sanford Stadium in Athens would leave a nicer picture in the reader's mind?:eek:

[TillyGalore]

Re the stadium, based on my research, Kansas is the only other Division 1 school in which a track still separates the field from the stands. In most all stadiums - take Notre Dame for instance, the stadium was built through digging a hole in the ground and then building stands on the slope. Duke can lower the field and still leave room for benches. You correctly note that Duke's track may be a little tighter than Kansas' track, for example. Anecdotally, it is my understanding that Duke gets many more seats (than what you estimate) in lowering the field, including endzone seats at the open end of the horseshoe built from the current field level down to the new, lowered field level. Also, if the field is 10 feet lower than newly installed seats (rather than the 6 feet currently, this helps offset what you describe the phenom that one is better able to see more of the action all over the field if one is farther away from the field.


Not that I really want to go head to head with FDA, but I'm have a couple of questions I'm dying to ask.

Where would you put the track? Land is a premium here, though I'm sure you know that, so where would you put the track?

Also, why would you want to add more seats when we aren't even filling the ones we have? The only time WW is sold out at this point is for concerts and we don't even average one a year, and perhaps the Va Tech game and I'd venture to guess you'll see more maroon and orange at those games that Duke Blue. I don't see the cost justification to create more seats except to be like everyone else.

[throatybeard]

ATT for the UConn game was a bit over 17K. And it's been clear for years Duke inflates the numbers. And that's the first game of the year when there's still a sliver of hope. I shudder to think what ATT is going to look like later in the year. Why we need to add seats is beyond me.

Now, if the point of adding seats is to get people closer to the action, I could see that, I guess. But 10K in a 45K stadium is going to look even dumber than 10K in a 34K stadium.

[formerdukeathlete]

Not that I really want to go head to head with FDA, but I'm have a couple of questions I'm dying to ask.

Where would you put the track? Land is a premium here, though I'm sure you know that, so where would you put the track?

Also, why would you want to add more seats when we aren't even filling the ones we have? The only time WW is sold out at this point is for concerts and we don't even average one a year, and perhaps the Va Tech game and I'd venture to guess you'll see more maroon and orange at those games that Duke Blue. I don't see the cost justification to create more seats except to be like everyone else.

With what is planned for the concorse, the only stadium expansion which would complement the planned phased renovations, would be removing the track, lowering the field and adding seats in this fashion.

Now, if Duke has a successful Football program, which at this point we need to plan on having or else give up the ACC, 40k + seats at Wade would be filled. A new top flight coach will plan on being successful and filling that many seats. You have to look at what is, needs to be down the road, rather than fixate on the present which reflects the poorest attendance of any BCS school.

With removing the running track, Wade is lounder, a more intimidating place to play, as well as a more impressive venue.

[captmojo]

What comes first? A remodeled Wade to attract more fans and better talent or better talent and more fans in the seats to justify a remodeled stadium?

[Bluedawg]

OOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHH. Don't you think an image of Sanford Stadium in Athens would leave a nicer picture in the reader's mind?:eek:

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/PHO/AAGU121~Sanford-Stadium-Posters.jpg

Sure, why not.

[Duvall]

What comes first? A remodeled Wade to attract more fans and better talent or better talent and more fans in the seats to justify a remodeled stadium?

I don't think anyone is against remodeling Wade to add more amenities and make it more fan-friendly, but expanding a stadium that only sees 10,000 home fans on a good day is ridiculous.

[Bluedawg]

ATT for the UConn game was a bit over 17K. And it's been clear for years Duke inflates the numbers. And that's the first game of the year when there's still a sliver of hope. I shudder to think what ATT is going to look like later in the year. Why we need to add seats is beyond me.

Now, if the point of adding seats is to get people closer to the action, I could see that, I guess. But 10K in a 45K stadium is going to look even dumber than 10K in a 34K stadium.

2006 ATTENDANCE.................... 137061
Games/Avg Per Game.......... 7/19580

[Duvall]

2006 ATTENDANCE.................... 137061
Games/Avg Per Game.......... 7/19580

throatybeard was talking about real attendees, not fictional ones.

[throatybeard]

Exactly. Even if tickets-sold is the number, Duke has long treated student sections as if they're completely full at every game. If you really believe there are exactly 9,314 seats taken at every men's BB home game, I've got a piece of the true cross to sell you.

Then we've got the fact that Virginia, FSU and Carolina all visited us last year. So to get figure Duke bodies, take those folks out too.

And even if the 19K number were accurate, it would still be embarrassing. Wake Forest has been outdrawing us for years, and not just last year when they won the conference. And they're a smaller school.

The facilities need A LOT of work. But capacity expansion is about the very last priority among activities that would fall under "facility improvement." Hey, I've got an idea. Why doesn't NCCU build a 30K seat arena for basketball!

[DU82]

Re the stadium, based on my research, Kansas is the only other Division 1 school in which a track still separates the field from the stands. In most all stadiums - take Notre Dame for instance, the stadium was built through digging a hole in the ground and then building stands on the slope. Duke can lower the field and still leave room for benches. You correctly note that Duke's track may be a little tighter than Kansas' track, for example. Anecdotally, it is my understanding that Duke gets many more seats (than what you estimate) in lowering the field, including endzone seats at the open end of the horseshoe built from the current field level down to the new, lowered field level. Also, if the field is 10 feet lower than newly installed seats (rather than the 6 feet currently, this helps offset what you describe the phenom that one is better able to see more of the action all over the field if one is farther away from the field.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Randall_Stadium

Regarding the 11k seats Wisconsin acquired in removing their running track and lowering the field in 1958. These seats included endzone seats as I have described above. I reviewing a fair number of Division 1 renovations involving removing the running track, the lowest number added was 6k and the highest may have been Wisconsin.

The engineer geek in me questions your numbers. First, I definitely did not include the open end zone, only the current configuration. Closing the end zone would add a lot (the end zone is where most of the seats were added for the Rose Bowl), but would also be the only "structure" in the stadium (ie, steel and superstructure, instead of built into the hill.) That would be even more expensive. I still think about 700 seats per row added is a good estimate. You'd add more if the stands that used to be in the concourse were added back.

Anyway, I have the Durham County 2005 GIS aerial photos on my computer, so I can measure distances in pretty close detail. From the 50 yard line (actually the white "buffer" around the field) there's 73 feet to the stands. That's essentially the furthest separation in the stadium. The closest separation perpendicular to the field is at the corner of the end zone (closed end of horseshoe), at 37 feet.

Over at the evil ones' place 11 miles away, using Google Earth, it appears to be about 62 feet to the stands. As I remember it, those seats are essentially at field level, and hard to see a lot. (There is that walkway, which appears to be about twenty feet wide.) So their seats are eleven feet closer than ours, however ours have much better viewpoints, being around ten feet above the field level (when I sat there in the band, I could see the field over the players' heads.)

Google Earth for UGA is less clear, but it appears to be about 60 feet from edge of field to stands. Wisconsin is about 60 feet to the stands as well, from Google Earth I think you can see the seats added when the track was removed. It appears the track was much further back from the field, and they had a lot more space to work with in 1958. Kansas, whose horseshoe is straight on the sidelines, rather than curved like ours, UW, UGA, is ~45 feet.

Sixty feet seems to be the standard of these stadiums with the curved stands (the curved stands allows the seats to be oriented to the center, with better sight lines.) Carter-Finley is only about 25 feet, but the stands are higher, and from games I've attended there, the room on the sidelines is perhaps too narrow. Giants Stadium is about 45 feet.

So, from all of this, I believe it's clear that you will NOT get a lot of seats from removing the track from Wallace Wade. Certainly not worth the expense of relocating the track facilities elsewhere, and lowering the field (if it can be done, not sure of the water table in that area, but it is one of the lowest points on campus.)

(BTW, you still haven't ID'd a place to relocate the track. Or are you proposing getting rid of the track teams?)

[formerdukeathlete]

The engineer geek in me questions your numbers. First, I definitely did not include the open end zone, only the current configuration. Closing the end zone would add a lot (the end zone is where most of the seats were added for the Rose Bowl), but would also be the only "structure" in the stadium (ie, steel and superstructure, instead of built into the hill.) That would be even more expensive. I still think about 700 seats per row added is a good estimate. You'd add more if the stands that used to be in the concourse were added back.

Anyway, I have the Durham County 2005 GIS aerial photos on my computer, so I can measure distances in pretty close detail. From the 50 yard line (actually the white "buffer" around the field) there's 73 feet to the stands. That's essentially the furthest separation in the stadium. The closest separation perpendicular to the field is at the corner of the end zone (closed end of horseshoe), at 37 feet.

Over at the evil ones' place 11 miles away, using Google Earth, it appears to be about 62 feet to the stands. As I remember it, those seats are essentially at field level, and hard to see a lot. (There is that walkway, which appears to be about twenty feet wide.) So their seats are eleven feet closer than ours, however ours have much better viewpoints, being around ten feet above the field level (when I sat there in the band, I could see the field over the players' heads.)

Google Earth for UGA is less clear, but it appears to be about 60 feet from edge of field to stands. Wisconsin is about 60 feet to the stands as well, from Google Earth I think you can see the seats added when the track was removed. It appears the track was much further back from the field, and they had a lot more space to work with in 1958. Kansas, whose horseshoe is straight on the sidelines, rather than curved like ours, UW, UGA, is ~45 feet.

Sixty feet seems to be the standard of these stadiums with the curved stands (the curved stands allows the seats to be oriented to the center, with better sight lines.) Carter-Finley is only about 25 feet, but the stands are higher, and from games I've attended there, the room on the sidelines is perhaps too narrow. Giants Stadium is about 45 feet.

So, from all of this, I believe it's clear that you will NOT get a lot of seats from removing the track from Wallace Wade. Certainly not worth the expense of relocating the track facilities elsewhere, and lowering the field (if it can be done, not sure of the water table in that area, but it is one of the lowest points on campus.)

(BTW, you still haven't ID'd a place to relocate the track. Or are you proposing getting rid of the track teams?)

Keenan at UNC is unusual. Carter Finley worth a closer look. Take a look at Cal's stadium - a natural bowl type of thing where the seats are right up to the field - where sideline seats are also about 25 feet from the field.

I am not talking necessarily of enclosing the horseshoe, but rather simply adding endzone seats along the downgrade to the field as the field is lowered in connection with removing the track.

At the enclosed oval end, seats can come right up to the endzone. at the open end, which can remain open, seats come right up to the endzone, but the number of rows is probably between 8 and 10, with no "superstructure." This preserves the openess of the stadium. We add up to 6-10 k in capacity in this fashion, and were we to add superstructure to enclose the horseshoe, we add aomething like 15k - but your study may provide better info. that what I have.

as to where to locate the track, Jarhead has posted that there are two locations, with one more interesting because it is adjacent to cross country trails.

It is very helpful that seating capacity may be added at a later date without disturbing the renovations along the concourse. re the water table - certainly we redo the drainage plumbing under the field and have sump pumps like a number of below grade fields. I doubt the water table is that high there - as you point out - this may be an issue.

[merry]

as to where to locate the track, Jarhead has posted that there are two locations, with one more interesting because it is adjacent to cross country trails.



I may have missed another discussion on this, but I think this is what you mean. In another thread Jarhead said:

There are two parcels of land on the south side of Cameron Blvd that might be used, but there would be tons of problems with either. Just to the west of the Golf course and faculty club area close to US 15/501 is a small area in which a stadium of about Wade's size would fit. Not very good choice. On the east side of the golf course between the driving range and 751 is a larger area very close to the existing stadium complex that would be better suited, but if I lived over that way along Pinecrest, I would be demonstrating with all my might against putting a stadium there.

Was there another discussion of relocating the track specifically? I live in this section of Durham and go to the running trail, Faculty Club etc. pretty often. The area between the driving range and 751 is a combination of a pretty decent sized hill and a recently restored wetland. To put anything at all big in that space would require a huge amount of displacement of earth and there would likely be other logistics problems. Not saying it could not be done but it would really problematic.

The other area near 15-501 I am even more puzzled about. The running trail and golf course run VERY close to 15-501 on that side. There is one short piece of the running trail that is not adjacent to the golf course, between the Faculty Club and 15-501. At this point the running trail is less than .2 mile from the 15-501/751 exit ramp. So this is a really quite small area.

[Bluedawg]

Tom Knotts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_High_School_(Charlotte,_North_Carolin a)). over the past 7 years he is 109-1

[cspan37421]

I'm tellin' ya, Lloyd Carr will soon be available.

[TheTrain]

Big deal if Lloyd Carr leaves Michigan....he is 62, trust me he will retire from Ann Arbor and never look back

[Bluedawg]

My first vote is Jerry Moore (http://www.goasu.com/football/coach/24/)

Second vote is Rod Broadway (http://www.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stories/011807aaz.html)

Don't really have a third.

[Indoor66]

My first vote is Jerry Moore (http://www.goasu.com/football/coach/24/)

Second vote is Rod Broadway (http://www.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stories/011807aaz.html)

Don't really have a third.

NEVER a tar hole! :mad:

[Bluedawg]

NEVER a tar hole! :mad:

Rod Broadway wins ballgames.

[formerdukeathlete]

Du82,

I watched a number of games over the weekend, including the Wake, BC, Va Tech, and Penn State games.

Atmosphere and fan support were outstanding, with the fans very loudly into the games. It looked to me that sideline seats at Wake, LSU and BC were very close - within 20 feet of the field. Penn State might have been 25 feet away. The week before I watched Cal beat Tennessee - sideline was right up to the field. Enzone seats in all were right up to the field.

Game day at Wade would be terrifically enhanced with students sitting right up to the field. When Wade is renovated, forward thinking would make allowance for greater bathroom, concessions capacity - to overbuild in this regard. Were we to remove the track, lower the field, and bring seats right down to it, we would have the issue covered.

UVa attracted 58k for the Duke game. I have to think with a good product we can draw over 40k.

Speaking of Central Florida - their trustees approved a new stadium after a winless season. Now they are filling their new digs of 45k, with expansion eventually to 65k.

So we are on the right track renovating Wade - I say, we need to be bold, visionary and "Just Do It" And, find a new place for the track. We have the land.

[newbdisapain]

NEVER a tar hole! :mad:

Coach Broadway also was an assistant at Duke for a number of years and was very popular. With his ties to the area, he would have a headstart on local recruiting, which would be a big help.

[JBDuke]

... Penn State might have been 25 feet away. ...

UVa attracted 58k for the Duke game. I have to think with a good product we can draw over 40k.

...

A couple of comments...

Having seen several games in Penn State's Beaver Stadium, I can say with some certainty that the closest seats are nowhere near 25 feet from the sideline. Thirty-five, maybe, but maybe further than that.

Second, I was at the Duke-UVA game in Charlottesville on Saturday, and there's no way they had 58,000 in the seats. They may have sold that many tickets, but between my brother and I, we figured that the crowd was at most 55,000 and was probably closer to 50,000. There were a LOT of empty seats.

As for drawing 40K fans, I think that's a real long shot. You seem to be comparing us to UVA, but the Cavs have almost 3 times our undergrad population, so there are a lot more alumni out there, and while they don't stay in C'ville, there are hordes of UVA grads within two hours of campus, mostly in Northern Virginia and Richmond. Duke's alumni tend to venture further from campus when they graduate. Combined with our smaller size, it results in a very small local alumni base from which to draw the most loyal of fans.

Where Duke does have an advantage over UVA is in its proximity to a large population. The Triangle holds a lot of folks, and there are a significant number of casual Duke fans. If Duke football became a quality product and won games with some frequency, I have no doubt we could draw from this fan base to our advantage. But still, I think we don't even consider expanding Wally Wade capacity until we see the need. There are a lot better things to be spending money on right now...

[Bluedawg]

A couple of comments...

Having seen several games in Penn State's Beaver Stadium, I can say with some certainty that the closest seats are nowhere near 25 feet from the sideline. Thirty-five, maybe, but maybe further than that.

Second, I was at the Duke-UVA game in Charlottesville on Saturday, and there's no way they had 58,000 in the seats. They may have sold that many tickets, but between my brother and I, we figured that the crowd was at most 55,000 and was probably closer to 50,000. There were a LOT of empty seats.

As for drawing 40K fans, I think that's a real long shot. You seem to be comparing us to UVA, but the Cavs have almost 3 times our undergrad population, so there are a lot more alumni out there, and while they don't stay in C'ville, there are hordes of UVA grads within two hours of campus, mostly in Northern Virginia and Richmond. Duke's alumni tend to venture further from campus when they graduate. Combined with our smaller size, it results in a very small local alumni base from which to draw the most loyal of fans.

Where Duke does have an advantage over UVA is in its proximity to a large population. The Triangle holds a lot of folks, and there are a significant number of casual Duke fans. If Duke football became a quality product and won games with some frequency, I have no doubt we could draw from this fan base to our advantage. But still, I think we don't even consider expanding Wally Wade capacity until we see the need. There are a lot better things to be spending money on right now...

Agreed.

Although I vastly prefer seats closer to the field that can always be done later. now I feel the important upgrades are everywhere else. the only change I'd make to the seating now is to take out the bench seats and putting in actual stadium seats.

[formerdukeathlete]

http://www.scoreboard.msnbc.com/msnbc/main.asp?frames=0&cat=box&box=200709080008&sport=ncaafb1a

certainly, no shows may have not shown.

[mapei]

certainly, no shows may have not shown.

That reads like a zen koan.

[JBDuke]

http://www.scoreboard.msnbc.com/msnbc/main.asp?frames=0&cat=box&box=200709080008&sport=ncaafb1a

certainly, no shows may have not shown.

Yep - it was the announcement of the crowd of 58,000+ that had my brother and I both saying "No way". There were way too many empty seats for that big a crowd. There were certainly several thousand no shows.