WBB: (2) Notre Dame 88, (3) Duke 67

[wandalee]

#2 vs #3 at Cameron on Sunday (2/2) at 2:00. Tickets are still available. A big Duke crowd would be great to support the ladies. Let's send Muffet packing!

[-bdbd]

Apparently Duke coming in with a couple of key injuries. But after a big scare Thursday in Miami, I see Duke coming ready for this one. Sure would be helpful if we can get healthy quick. Need a good turnout folks! This one will go a long way to determining who's in the ACC driver's seat at mid-season...

Apparently Jones' eye was injured by a fingernail in the Miami game. Coach P said Alexis was out Friday during practice, and right now has to keep that eye closed.
It remains uncertain as to whether she will be available for the Notre Dame game on Sunday afternoon.

[Gargoyle]

Apparently Duke coming in with a couple of key injuries. But after a big scare Thursday in Miami, I see Duke coming ready for this one. Sure would be helpful if we can get healthy quick. Need a good turnout folks! This one will go a long way to determining who's in the ACC driver's seat at mid-season...

Apparently Jones' eye was injured by a fingernail in the Miami game. Coach P said Alexis was out Friday during practice, and right now has to keep that eye closed.
It remains uncertain as to whether she will be available for the Notre Dame game on Sunday afternoon.

If Jones doesn't play or is at much less than full strength, then Duke has little chance to win this game.

[BD80]

... Apparently Jones' eye was injured by a fingernail in the Miami game. Coach P said Alexis was out Friday during practice, and right now has to keep that eye closed.
It remains uncertain as to whether she will be available for the Notre Dame game on Sunday afternoon.

Come on, Dickie V performs at a high level with one eye.

Wait, check that, performs LIKE he is high.

[ricks68]

Come on, Dickie V performs at a high level with one eye.

Wait, check that, performs LIKE he is high.

Wish I could spork you for that one.:)

ricks

[Gargoyle]

Alexis practiced this morning wearing goggles.

https://twitter.com/Duke_WBB/status/429661562237108225/photo/1

[Dukehky]

Come on girls, I need this one. You need this one.

[DU82]

Bumping this up. There's still tickets available. Number 2 vs. number 3 in the country, for the conference lead and likely number one seed in the ACC tournament.

[Indoor66]

Just a bump: The game is at 2:00 P.M., Today - Sunday - February 2 - on ESPN.

[Gargoyle]

Lauren Cox, who many think is the best player in the class of 2016, will be at the game today (according to her tweet). She also attended the Duke basketball camp this summer. Hopefully, the team will play well and there will be a large and enthusiastic crowd.

[DevilWearsPrada]

Alexis practiced this morning wearing goggles.

https://twitter.com/Duke_WBB/status/429661562237108225/photo/1

Great to see Alexis practice!!!! Eye injuries are so serious! ie (Jon Scheyer)

Let's Go Duke!!!

[nyesq83]

Let's Go Duke!

[DU82]

Frantic early pace, which helps ND, I think. Other than Tricia, the rest of the team needs layup drills. Calm down and play your game, ladies.

[Duvall]

Too many injuries. Just don't have enough.

[Dukehky]

Yeah, so if we don't make lay-ups this os going to be a long afternoon. Can't rebound either. Not a good look. E got two garbage foul calls on her. So i guess ACC officials got some kind of memo to give a kind welcome to the Big East newbies. F off Swofford, you jerk.

[dukelifer]

Too many injuries. Just don't have enough.

ND hitting everything they throw up. Duke 10 down. Need to hope they cool down

[killerleft]

Gosh a'mighty, women's refs are horrible. Haley got a phantom foul at a pivotal point in the game, and the traveling call against Jones was as bad a call as I have ever seen. She caught the ball and started dribbling in the same motion. Notre Dame may have reason to I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this., too, but I don't remember their bad luck as much.:o

[Duvall]

Well, I guess we should get used to this.

[dukelifer]

Well, I guess we should get used to this.

Duke will gut out the season but it is tough with all the adversity.

[Duvall]

Duke will gut out the season but it is tough with all the adversity.

I'm not just talking about this season.

[Dukehky]

I'm not just talking about this season.

I understand and unfortunately agree. We have done well to hold off Maryland and UNC in the P regime, but ND is a different beast currently.

That zone that we play just gets picked apart by good teams. That was tough to watch. We couldn't make a lay-up, Alexis' injury clearly affected her, but she had to play so many minutes bc Chloe is hurt. It is just brutal to see Chelsea on the sidelines cheering so hard and not really being able to do anything about it.

[buddy]

Right now this is not a good team. Notre Dame was quicker, shot better, and had more poise. If we have an offensive pattern, it is difficult to discern. I know we are short handed but it seems we played better than this without Chelsea last year. Other than BC, we have not had a good game since Chelsea was hurt. The team needs to come together.

[GGLC]

Same old same old against top teams.

[miramar]

Same old same old against top teams.

Another blowout against a sure #1 seed.

At least Miami beat UNC.

[uh_no]

Same old same old against top teams.

lets be honest...this result was heavily affected by duke's injury troubles....couldn't have happened in a worse year for duke, as I thought this was a year they'd hit the final 4...

ND is a really good team, and you can't go into them not being close to full strength and hope to win...even uconn, last year's national champion, only beat them once in four tries last year.


without injuries, this is a close game, so we can only lament what could have been. THis team might get a favorable draw and luck into a final four....but with key pieces riding the bench due to bad luck, I think we all know it's probably not going to happen....and that sucks for the guys on the team....since they deserve better....

it's just unfortunate that the year that duke finally has the depth and talent (IMO) they bet burned by injuries and end up not having the depth.....sigh.

[Duvall]

It's almost incomprehensible that this Sr. Class may close out their college careers w/o a regional championship to their credit. But before the criticism begins to cascade down on P we should remember the Beard-Tillis-Kraypohl class departed similarly unsung, no final four to their credit.

Well, aside from the two. Then again, two is similar to zero, in that they are both single-digit numbers.

[CameronBlue]

Yikes....I stand corrected (a low bow to your pedanticism). My apologies to the class of 2004 (hopefully I got that right.)

[Kfanarmy]

These games just serve to remind about a couple of things in WBB.

1) parity just doesn't seem to be coming. Each year there are two or three teams at the top and no one else with a significant likelihood of beating them. At the moment that's seems to be rotating around UCONN, Stanford, and a few others in and out depending on the year...Notre Dame will be in it for a couple of years it appears. It's mostly about talent, it seems to me. For whatever reason, WBB seems to be where the men's game was in the 60's, one or two teams getting the bulk of the talent each year, and trending at the top of the rankings for long periods.
2) as bad as some MBB games are officiated, they are light years ahead of the officials in the women's game. Good gracious, inconsistency is the only thing the womens officials are consistent at: calls in-game, calls across the ACC, and in interpreting the rules. I've always thought the women's rules were similar to the mens, but I guess I need to read them because what is/isn't a foul in WBB seems to be purely in the eye of the beholder.

The Duke WBB team certainly didn't give up, but they weren't much of a Defensive challenge to Notre Dame, who scored essentially their season average. On the other side of the ball, Notre Dame seemed to cause a lot of rushed shots. Duke seemed to be doing an awful lot of missing. On multiple posessions they pounded the boards, got a couple of offensive rebounds, but simply couldn't put the ball in the hoop. Notre Dame simply wasn't challenged in the second half of the game.

[MCFinARL]

lets be honest...this result was heavily affected by duke's injury troubles....couldn't have happened in a worse year for duke, as I thought this was a year they'd hit the final 4...

ND is a really good team, and you can't go into them not being close to full strength and hope to win...even uconn, last year's national champion, only beat them once in four tries last year.


without injuries, this is a close game, so we can only lament what could have been. THis team might get a favorable draw and luck into a final four....but with key pieces riding the bench due to bad luck, I think we all know it's probably not going to happen....and that sucks for the guys on the team....since they deserve better....

it's just unfortunate that the year that duke finally has the depth and talent (IMO) they bet burned by injuries and end up not having the depth.....sigh.

Couldn't agree more with this post--it is a shame. While UConn was clearly still a level ahead when Duke was at full strength, this looked like a year when Duke would most likely take that next step (in the Coach P years) of getting to the Final Four--and maybe even the final game. Now they may struggle to get to the regional final, given the injury challenges. Here is hoping they can rally to do the very best they can with what they have.

[burnspbesq]

Pretty simple, actually. ND really is that good. Their offensive efficiency is off the charts (51 percent from the field and 1.14 PPP).

[throatybeard]

You know how you can sometimes tell that one team simply is not going to win even though the score is reasonably close at the moment? From momentum, intangibles, your gall bladder, something.

Duke trailed 49-39, cut it to 49-44, and got a defensive stop. Liston (I think) fed Williams (I'm sure) under the hoop and Williams gakked up an open layup. Notre Dame came back down and got three the old fashioned way to push the lead back to eight. I turned to my wife and said "Duke won't win this game, and I bet you it gets messy after this."

After that came the deluge.

It's important to win out and secure a 1-seed. You don't want a scenario as UConn's #2 or Notre Dame's #2.

[burnspbesq]

As long as we win our other five remaining games against ranked teams (two vs. Carolina, Maryland, State, and one of those teams in the ACC semifinals), we can get squashed three times by ND and still get a number one seed.

At this point, it's five into four. Louisville is going to get squashed at least twice, and probably three times, by UConn, and those three games aren't going to help the Cardinals' SOS (currently 45) very much. Stanford's SOS, currently 7, is going to continue to slide as they continue to play Pac-12 opponents, and their RPI (currently 1) will suffer as a result. The lousy hand we were dealt by the ACC schedule-makers ensures we will have the highest SOS in the conference (we're currently three, vs. 16 for ND, 42 for MD, 43 for NC, and 70 for State). We're sitting pretty as long as we take care of business.

[Gargoyle]

You know how you can sometimes tell that one team simply is not going to win even though the score is reasonably close at the moment? From momentum, intangibles, your gall bladder, something.

Duke trailed 49-39, cut it to 49-44, and got a defensive stop. Liston (I think) fed Williams (I'm sure) under the hoop and Williams gakked up an open layup. Notre Dame came back down and got three the old fashioned way to push the lead back to eight. I turned to my wife and said "Duke won't win this game, and I bet you it gets messy after this."

After that came the deluge.

It's important to win out and secure a 1-seed. You don't want a scenario as UConn's #2 or Notre Dame's #2.

Definitely do not want CT or ND (at home) and I would also prefer no Stan but we may not need a one-seed to accomplish that. Here is Charlie Creme's latest "bracketology". I could certainly live with this result.

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/bracketology

[brevity]

Definitely do not want CT or ND (at home) and I would also prefer no Stan but we may not need a one-seed to accomplish that. Here is Charlie Creme's latest "bracketology". I could certainly live with this result.

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/bracketology

Wow. I did not know that the regional sites (for the second weekend) would be home courts for Louisville, Stanford, and Notre Dame (and Nebraska). I understand the motivation, but this sport has taken a serious step back.

[Mike Corey]

Coach P is fired up about something and has taken to Twitter:

Joanne P. McCallie ‏@CoachPDuke 54m
Parents at any level can be inspiring or completely foolish in support of their child. What kind of parent are you? Inspiring? Or a fool?

[Duvall]

Coach P is fired up about something and has taken to Twitter:

Joanne P. McCallie ‏@CoachPDuke 54m
Parents at any level can be inspiring or completely foolish in support of their child. What kind of parent are you? Inspiring? Or a fool?

That is very odd.

[Lid]

I try hard to support Coach P, but I often find myself wishing that she wouldn't tweet. Just strange.

[miramar]

I try hard to support Coach P, but I often find myself wishing that she wouldn't tweet. Just strange.

I googled her twitter account and did not find that particular tweet, but there was another one that got an interesting response from a Dr. Anthony Smith. I don't know who that is, but the good doctor is in the house and he has certainly provided his diagnosis. Ouch!


Tweets
Joanne P. McCallie ‏@CoachPDuke 20h
"You have to know who you are now to get to where you want to be in the future." #KeepItReal #TeamOwnership
10:22 AM - 4 Feb 2014 · Details

Anthony Smith ‏@DrAnthonySmith 11h
@CoachPDuke maybe you should keep it real & realize you have become a diva & have no idea how to utilize talent and win big games #GoDuke
Reply Retweet Favorite More Collapse
7:13 PM - 4 Feb 2014 · Details

[burnspbesq]

Somebody should send that knucklehead a copy of Feinstein's ACC book (A Season Inside?), with a Post-It flagging the page that talks about Terry Holland's delicious smackdown of a know-it-all fan (ironically, that knucklehead was also a doctor).

[Mike Corey]

She deleted the post at some point yesterday.

[Dukehky]

I think that at this point, with all the injuries certainly not helping, that several of the players have stopped responding to her coaching. And to make matters worse, Coach is being increasingly hard-headed over how she does coach.

That is just what I think that I'm seeing. Coach P isn't a diva. She can be outspoken, and remains so even when she's wrong, but she certainly doesn't feel entitled to things. The seniors are going to have to pull the team together if they want to make the Final Four. Without Chelsea I think a Ship is out of reach, but a Final Four is still an attainable goal.

[Mike Corey]

Agreed with the above. The team has been dealt a tough hand with the injuries. But venting, publicly, on social media is not a proper outlet--especially when it is abundantly clear that the parent of a current student-athlete is the subject of the posts.

Here is the Tweet prior to deletion.

3866

[Kfanarmy]

Coach P is fired up about something and has taken to Twitter:

Joanne P. McCallie ‏@CoachPDuke 54m
Parents at any level can be inspiring or completely foolish in support of their child. What kind of parent are you? Inspiring? Or a fool? Is that her real account? What a terrible decision for a coach to make. Use Twitter for light hearted and informational updates - OK. Use it to try to school parents - not a wise move for a BB Coach!

[MCFinARL]

Agreed with the above. The team has been dealt a tough hand with the injuries. But venting, publicly, on social media is not a proper outlet--especially when it is abundantly clear that the parent of a current student-athlete is the subject of the posts.

Here is the Tweet prior to deletion.

3866

Any chance this could have something to do with her daughter's basketball team and not hers? Admittedly a long shot, but I would like to give Coach P the benefit of the doubt.

Also curious, for the same reason, whether Dukehky has any actual evidence that "some of the players have stopped responding to her coaching."

[Mike Corey]

Any chance this could have something to do with her daughter's basketball team and not hers? Admittedly a long shot, but I would like to give Coach P the benefit of the doubt.

While I would love to join you in giving Coach P the benefit of the doubt, she has a history of venting on Twitter, i.e, when she vents about her former assistant coaches on Twitter (see tweets from Dec. 26, 2013).

Of course, I hope you are correct and her now-deleted tweet had nothing to do with a parent of a current player. But even if it's about her daughter's team, she'd then be calling one of her daughter's teammate's parents a "fool." That's still unacceptable for the head coach of any Duke varsity sport.

[MCFinARL]

While I would love to join you in giving Coach P the benefit of the doubt, she has a history of venting on Twitter, i.e, when she vents about her former assistant coaches on Twitter (see tweets from Dec. 26, 2013).

Of course, I hope you are correct and her now-deleted tweet had nothing to do with a parent of a current player. But even if it's about her daughter's team, she'd then be calling one of her daughter's teammate's parents a "fool." That's still unacceptable for the head coach of any Duke varsity sport.

Yes, I see your point. Twitter generally is a really good opportunity for people to say things they might better have left unsaid.

[Dukehky]

Any chance this could have something to do with her daughter's basketball team and not hers? Admittedly a long shot, but I would like to give Coach P the benefit of the doubt.

Also curious, for the same reason, whether Dukehky has any actual evidence that "some of the players have stopped responding to her coaching."

Just my opinion. I was watching closely the past few games to what she and the players looked like when interacting on the sideline. To my eye, it didn't look great.

[Duvall]

Just my opinion. I was watching closely the past few games to what she and the players looked like when interacting on the sideline. To my eye, it didn't look great.

I don't think it's fair to judge a coach by the body language that we think we can read from sitting in the stands or watching on television. The proof should be in the wins and blowout losses.

[killerleft]

Just my opinion. I was watching closely the past few games to what she and the players looked like when interacting on the sideline. To my eye, it didn't look great.

Throw her into the pond!

[Class of '94]

While I would love to join you in giving Coach P the benefit of the doubt, she has a history of venting on Twitter, i.e, when she vents about her former assistant coaches on Twitter (see tweets from Dec. 26, 2013).

Of course, I hope you are correct and her now-deleted tweet had nothing to do with a parent of a current player. But even if it's about her daughter's team, she'd then be calling one of her daughter's teammate's parents a "fool." That's still unacceptable for the head coach of any Duke varsity sport.

But could her comments be in reference to the kid in Michigan that wanted to go to Mich St to play football but his mom didn't and refused to sign his letter of intent. It appeared to get national coverage yesterday; and maybe she was responding to that. That being said, it's still not a wise decision to call or imply that anyone is a fool.

Question for anyone with insight into the women's program: If this team flames out early (i..e, not make it to the ACC championship game and fail to at least make it pass the sweet 16), could Coach P be on the hot seat; and would Coach G come back to Duke to be the HC again? Now before anyone flames me, I am not calling for Coach P to be fired; I'm just wondering how secure her position is at Duke, especially considering that she has been venting alot about different people on twitter in the last few months; and the team isn't playing well right now. Couple that with the fact that Dukje hasn't beaten an elite team like Uconn, Tenn, or a team of the caliber of a ND and Stanford since Coach G.

To clarify, I wonder if the team has peaked under Coach P's leadership. I hope it's not the case; and Coach has had a lot of success during her time here both in terms of winning ACC championships and recruiting. Yet, she hasn't been able to get the team over the hump of consistently beating elite teams. At this point, I'm just not so sure the team truly believes they can beat those elite teams like they do when it comes to many of the teams in the ACC.

[burnspbesq]

The proof should be in the wins and blowout losses.

Indeed it should.

Consider the following hypothetical statistical profile of a hypothetical D1 women's college basketball team. For ease of reference, call them the Ekud Red Angels.

Season record as of February 5: 21-2. Only losses are to the teams ranked 1 and 2 in the media poll. Record against the RPI Top 50: 9-2.
Rankings: Media poll 5, RPI 3, SOS 2
Ranking in selected statistical categories: Scoring, T-11; Points allowed, outside top 50; Scoring Margin, T-8 (note that the average margin in all 23 games is 1.1 point less than the average margin of defeat in the two losses, and the average margin of victory in the 21 wins is 2.9 points more than the average margin of defeat in the two losses); FG%, 3; Opposing FG %, 47; 3-point FG%, 3; Rebound margin, 14; Offensive efficiency (points per possession), 8; Defensive efficiency (points allowed per possession), T-28.

If you were a fan of the Ekud Red Angels, would you be happy with your team's performance through 23 games? Or would you be gathering pitchforks and torches and calling for your coach to be hanged, drawn, and quartered before sunset?

[Dukehky]

I don't think it's fair to judge a coach by the body language that we think we can read from sitting in the stands or watching on television. The proof should be in the wins and blowout losses.

This was no judgment on the coach, I just think that the season hasn't gone like people thought, mostly because of injuries, and I'm not sure that at this point in the season the players and coaches are on the same page. Doesn't mean they can't get there. Duke eeked out wins against Miami and FSU and got blown out by ND. I know wins are wins, but that isn't exactly a stellar stretch of basketball, on top of losing your leader, could make any team discouraged.

Also, for the list of wins that we've had the last few years, yes it's a very good run of basketball. But because of the lack of parity in women's basketball, if you're in the top 10, you're blowing out anyone not ranked inside the top 20 the vast majority of the time. Winning on the road at Boston College in women's basketball doesn't carry very much cache. Duke had beaten many top 10 teams over the last few years, but rarely have beaten someone ranked above them. It's not anybody's fault I don't think, it's just the way things have been going.

[Tappan Zee Devil]

This was no judgment on the coach, I just think that the season hasn't gone like people thought, mostly because of injuries, and I'm not sure that at this point in the season the players and coaches are on the same page. Doesn't mean they can't get there. Duke eeked out wins against Miami and FSU and got blown out by ND. I know wins are wins, but that isn't exactly a stellar stretch of basketball, on top of losing your leader, could make any team discouraged.

Also, for the list of wins that we've had the last few years, yes it's a very good run of basketball. But because of the lack of parity in women's basketball, if you're in the top 10, you're blowing out anyone not ranked inside the top 20 the vast majority of the time. Winning on the road at Boston College in women's basketball doesn't carry very much cache. Duke had beaten many top 10 teams over the last few years, but rarely have beaten someone ranked above them. It's not anybody's fault I don't think, it's just the way things have been going.

Yes, there was judgment. You are basically saying she has lost the team. I don't understand the massive undertone of resentment toward P. Gail ain't comin' back and P is a very good coach (and opposed to what people were saying a couple of years ago, appears to be a good recruiter). Can she get us over the hump to a final four and championship? I don't know, but there aren't many out there who you could replace her with who could do better. Why the continuing resentment?

[Duvall]

Question for anyone with insight into the women's program: If this team flames out early (i..e, not make it to the ACC championship game and fail to at least make it pass the sweet 16), could Coach P be on the hot seat; and would Coach G come back to Duke to be the HC again?

That seems very unlikely. Well, less the flaming out than the other two parts.


Now before anyone flames me, I am not calling for Coach P to be fired; I'm just wondering how secure her position is at Duke, especially considering that she has been venting alot about different people on twitter in the last few months; and the team isn't playing well right now. Couple that with the fact that Dukje hasn't beaten an elite team like Uconn, Tenn, or a team of the caliber of a ND and Stanford since Coach G.

To be fair, Duke has beaten elite teams like Tennessee and Stanford, in that they have beaten Tennessee and Stanford.

I simply can't see Duke looking to replace a coach in a non-revenue sport - or any sport, really - that consistently produces top-10 teams, graduates players and has no off-court/field issues, simply because the program is not competing for national championships. I'm not sure how many programs would - Kentucky basketball? Alabama football? There aren't many.

[Dukehky]

Yes, there was judgment. You are basically saying she has lost the team. I don't understand the massive undertone of resentment toward P. Gail ain't comin' back and P is a very good coach (and opposed to what people were saying a couple of years ago, appears to be a good recruiter). Can she get us over the hump to a final four and championship? I don't know, but there aren't many out there who you could replace her with who could do better. Why the continuing resentment?

Slow your roll there killer. I understand that I said stopped responding to her coaching, I mean that they clearly aren't doing what she wants on the court. As I also said, that could largely be due to injuries and people playing outside their normal roles. Just because players and coaches may not be on the same page, doesn't mean it's all the coaches fault. Not being on the same page, isn't the same as losing the team. I'm not saying I think that Al Brown is leading a mutiny. Not being on the same page is something that can happen, also doesn't mean it can't get fixed. Winning cures everything, and beating UNC and Maryland I'm sure will go a long way to boosting morale of both fans and players.

I think Coach P is a very good basketball coach. Part of G's 'greatness' was due to the fact that she had the best player in the country for like 6 years in Beard, then arguably Curry, then Harding. Especially in women's basketball, the teams with the best players usually win the National Championship. Not a whole lot of Cinderellas in the women's NCAA tournament. That's why Baylor losing last year was so shocking. Our recruiting has been very good, even with a lot of assistant coaching turnover, which would indicate that Coach P is a big reason that kids come to Duke. We had this discussion of potential replacements for Coach P after the UCONN loss. IMO, there is certainly no reason to fire Coach P, but even if Kevin White wanted to, there isn't a stellar candidate who would leave their current position for Duke.

[Duvall]

Also, for the list of wins that we've had the last few years, yes it's a very good run of basketball. But because of the lack of parity in women's basketball, if you're in the top 10, you're blowing out anyone not ranked inside the top 20 the vast majority of the time. Winning on the road at Boston College in women's basketball doesn't carry very much cache. Duke had beaten many top 10 teams over the last few years, but rarely have beaten someone ranked above them. It's not anybody's fault I don't think, it's just the way things have been going.

Well, part of being consistently ranked in the top 10 over the years is that you don't play too many teams ranked above you, and the ones that you do play tend to be really good. Look, over the last four seasons (counting this year) Duke has been 0-9 against opponents ranked in the top 3 in at least one poll and 113-6 against everyone else. And that includes road and neutral court wins against ranked and highly-ranked opponents. What do you even do with that? What does an athletic director do with that?

[jtelander]

I've noticed that when McCallie refers to players from other teams, she almost always refers to them by number rather than by their name. Most recently in the post game press conference McCallie referred to the Notre Dame players in this manner. Apparently Notre Dame coach Muffet McGraw noticed this and made the following tweet


Muffet McGraw ‏@MuffetMcGraw Feb 3
Darn, knew we forgot something on our trip this past weekend..note to self: remember to pack "Hello, my name is...stickers for #21,11 &15

[Kfanarmy]

Indeed it should.

Consider the following hypothetical statistical profile of a hypothetical D1 women's college basketball team. For ease of reference, call them the Ekud Red Angels.

Season record as of February 5: 21-2. Only losses are to the teams ranked 1 and 2 in the media poll. Record against the RPI Top 50: 9-2.
Rankings: Media poll 5, RPI 3, SOS 2
Ranking in selected statistical categories: Scoring, T-11; Points allowed, outside top 50; Scoring Margin, T-8 (note that the average margin in all 23 games is 1.1 point less than the average margin of defeat in the two losses, and the average margin of victory in the 21 wins is 2.9 points more than the average margin of defeat in the two losses); FG%, 3; Opposing FG %, 47; 3-point FG%, 3; Rebound margin, 14; Offensive efficiency (points per possession), 8; Defensive efficiency (points allowed per possession), T-28.

If you were a fan of the Ekud Red Angels, would you be happy with your team's performance through 23 games? Or would you be gathering pitchforks and torches and calling for your coach to be hanged, drawn, and quartered before sunset? wouldn't that depend on how long it had been since the team truly competed against a team ranked above them and the perceived likelihood of ever being the top dog? To a certain degree isn't the goal to always achieve a bit more, until you win the whole shoot'n match...so that at some point, the statistics you point out may no longer be good enough...not saying that is/has happened, but as long as you are presenting a hypothetical...

[throatybeard]

Well, part of being consistently ranked in the top 10 over the years is that you don't play too many teams ranked above you, and the ones that you do play tend to be really good. Look, over the last four seasons (counting this year) Duke has been 0-9 against opponents ranked in the top 3 in at least one poll and 113-6 against everyone else. And that includes road and neutral court wins against ranked and highly-ranked opponents. What do you even do with that? What does an athletic director do with that?

Yeah.

I've been watching ESPN's old series The Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame lately, which is actually a pretty good series. One was Kournikova (for not winning a singles title--and they ignored the fact that she won a bunch of doubles titles with Hingis). One of the arguments was that Anna was usually ranked in the neighborhood of 15th or something, and she had a killer record against everyone below her, and a so-so one against everyone above her (I forget, But I think it wasn't that terrible--like .333). The thesis was that if she weren't so gorgeous and she were ranked 15th, no one would have noticed that she beat most people she was supposed to and Graf almost never.

McCallie and Goestenkors are both pretty fetching for 50ish people, but I don't think that's why they get the attention and scorn they do. It's doing better than 99.5% of people in your sport and then being compared to the other 0.5%, or less. The funny thing about all this criticism of McCallie is that people were piling on Goestenkors before she left for "always choking in the big one" (2-4 in FFs). You know who was 2-4 in his first four Final Fours? Some Polish guy at Duke. People also ignored the 'big games" that GG won to get to the games she was 2-4 in. McCallie hasn't quite matched Goestenkors here, but I have yet to hear who was available in 2007 and has or would have done a better job. Sometimes people mention Meyer.

Look, I'm frustrated too. I drove 1400 miles one way to the 2002 WFF to see us get smacked in the 2H against Oklahoma, and to the 2004 Region Final in Norfolk where we face-planted against Minnesota in the sad finale for the Bread/Tillis/Krapohl class. (Goestenkors). I was desperate for Duke to make the 2009 WFF at the hockey arean in my new home here, but we got mixed up in that crazy 9-seed hosting mess. (McCallie).

But are we seriously talking about the job security of a woman who has an .815 winning percentage at Duke, and a 86-14 (!!!) record in the ACC (that may be a game or two off). I'd like to win one of these region finals here or there, but let's calm down. Even if you can't keep some sort of perspective about this, you have to think about opportunity cost. In keeping McCallie, who is that costing us? McGraw and Auriemma aren't coming through that door. Nor VanDeveer. Nor Mulkey. So who the heck is going to come here who is so dramatically awesome that replacement will result in a gain?

[burnspbesq]

Yeah.

I've been watching ESPN's old series The Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame lately, which is actually a pretty good series. One was Kournikova (for not winning a singles title--and they ignored the fact that she won a bunch of doubles titles with Hingis). One of the arguments was that Anna was usually ranked in the neighborhood of 15th or something, and she had a killer record against everyone below her, and a so-so one against everyone above her (I forget, But I think it wasn't that terrible--like .333). The thesis was that if she weren't so gorgeous and she were ranked 15th, no one would have noticed that she beat most people she was supposed to and Graf almost never.

McCallie and Goestenkors are both pretty fetching for 50ish people, but I don't think that's why they get the attention and scorn they do. It's doing better than 99.5% of people in your sport and then being compared to the other 0.5%, or less. The funny thing about all this criticism of McCallie is that people were piling on Goestenkors before she left for "always choking in the big one" (2-4 in FFs). You know who was 2-4 in his first four Final Fours? Some Polish guy at Duke. People also ignored the 'big games" that GG won to get to the games she was 2-4 in. McCallie hasn't quite matched Goestenkors here, but I have yet to hear who was available in 2007 and has or would have done a better job. Sometimes people mention Meyer.

Look, I'm frustrated too. I drove 1400 miles one way to the 2002 WFF to see us get smacked in the 2H against Oklahoma, and to the 2004 Region Final in Norfolk where we face-planted against Minnesota in the sad finale for the Bread/Tillis/Krapohl class. (Goestenkors). I was desperate for Duke to make the 2009 WFF at the hockey arean in my new home here, but we got mixed up in that crazy 9-seed hosting mess. (McCallie).

But are we seriously talking about the job security of a woman who has an .815 winning percentage at Duke, and a 86-14 (!!!) record in the ACC (that may be a game or two off). I'd like to win one of these region finals here or there, but let's calm down. Even if you can't keep some sort of perspective about this, you have to think about opportunity cost. In keeping McCallie, who is that costing us? McGraw and Auriemma aren't coming through that door. Nor VanDeveer. Nor Mulkey. So who the heck is going to come here who is so dramatically awesome that replacement will result in a gain?

There you go again, being all reasonable and stuff.

I didn't want McCallie in 2007. I wanted Dawn Staley. I was wrong. McCallie has done everything that could reasonably have been asked of her.

[Class of '94]

That seems very unlikely. Well, less the flaming out than the other two parts.



To be fair, Duke has beaten elite teams like Tennessee and Stanford, in that they have beaten Tennessee and Stanford.

I simply can't see Duke looking to replace a coach in a non-revenue sport - or any sport, really - that consistently produces top-10 teams, graduates players and has no off-court/field issues, simply because the program is not competing for national championships. I'm not sure how many programs would - Kentucky basketball? Alabama football? There aren't many.

Thanks Duvall for the perspective. I forgot that Duke has beaten Tenn and Stanford under Coach P. Coach P has done a fantastic job with the Duke program overall. I just want so badly for the program to get over the hump and beat the elite like Uconn and ND again. I just hate seeing the team get blown out in Cameron by those teams; and I'm not saying it's Coach P's fault. Injuries have played a significant part in this as of late. That said, I hope the team can pull it together and at least make it to the Final 4 this season. The seniors on this team deserve it.

[Mike Corey]

But are we seriously talking about the job security of a woman who has an .815 winning percentage at Duke, and a 86-14 (!!!) record in the ACC (that may be a game or two off).

I concede up front that it is patently absurd to talk about the job security of someone with such a record on paper. Maybe fans/alums like me are what's wrong with college basketball. But I would suggest that there is more to the story here than Coach P's win-loss record at Duke.

Caveats: I have been a Duke women's basketball fan since Georgia Schweitzer left my hometown of Columbus to play for the Blue Devils. I considered it an honor and a privilege to cover the women's basketball team while at the Chronicle, and rallied with many others to convince Coach Goestenkors to remain at Duke. I was upset but understood why she chose to leave. But this isn't about wishing Coach G had stuck around, and isn't about wishing Coach G would come back.

I preferred another candidate to Coach P, but was nevertheless eager for her to step in and succeed in Durham. And I wrote a story about Coach P's arrival for Duke in May 2007 (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=897289). It was in that article that she raised some eyebrows about her approach to recruiting, but any concerns about that have of course been dispelled. She and her staff have brought in talent in droves--certainly better than Coach G did. And I want this team to keep getting better. I want Duke women's basketball to win a title this year, as every year.

But this is about the following: Despite the gaudy win-loss record, we've taken a step back as a program under McCallie in terms of our reputation and in terms of our ability to perform in the postseason. We're not a genuine title contender anymore, and our coach too often does not represent our University well with her public statements.

Consider, first, the numbers: In the ten years prior to McCallie's arrival, Duke women's bball accomplished the following:

87% winning percentage (301-46)
10 consecutive NCAA appearanes
7 consecutive 30-win seasons
7 Elite Eights in 10 years
4 Final Fours
2 National Title game appearances
2 NPOYs (Beard, Harding)


And in the six and a half seasons since:

84% winning percentage (195-37)
6 consecutive NCAA appearances
3 30-win seasons
4 Elite Eights in 6 years
0 Final Fours
0 National Title game appearances
0 NPOYs

The numbers compare favorably until you get to mid-March.

But look at how we did in those Elite Eight games: we scored in the 40s twice, and lost by double digits three times.

And in our matchups with the standard-bearer in women's college basketball, UConn, we've lost all seven matchups under McCallie. The first six losses had an average margin of 30 points. The last game was better--we lost by 21.

But look beyond the on-court stuff. We've lost 4 assistants in 6 years, none of whom left to become head coaches. That happened once in the previous ten years, when we lost an assistant coach to medical school. And we've got Coach McCallie making statements on Twitter that are at least of questionable judgment. These public statements were the last straw for me.

Of course, this is a Coach whose players are all outstanding representatives of the University on the court and off. And a Coach whose behavior hasn't approached anything egregious along the lines of some of her unfortunate peers in the profession.

But it's also ridiculous for a varsity head coach at any University, let alone Duke, to be engaging in some of the stuff she's engaged in on Twitter: for example, in December 2013, Coach P accused a former assistant of alluring a transfer, Kiana Holland, from Duke:


Joanne P. McCallie ‏@CoachPDuke ·Dec 26
It's amazing how some act as if they r bulletproof in the circle of life.Lacking integrity & acting solely to promote themselves.#AllBoutME

Joanne P. McCallie ‏@CoachPDuke ·Dec 26
It's not about "getting there" in this profession. It's about how you choose to "get there". Inspire w/decency or act wo regard to ethics.

Joanne P. McCallie ‏@CoachPDuke ·Dec 26
Loyalty is not a selective concept/When folks care, support, guide, provide opportunity, challenge, heal & grow u. Those actions speak.

Joanne P. McCallie ‏@CoachPDuke ·Dec 26
Selective hearing. Selective work ethic. Selective truth. Selective reasoning. Components of a die hard millenial. #GodHelpUs

Coach P also refuses to call opposing players by their names. In the press conference after the loss to Notre Dame, Coach P called the Irish players by their numbers rather than their names.

It drew what I would consider an inappropriate response from ND's coach on, of course, Twitter:


Muffet McGraw ‏@MuffetMcGraw ·Feb 3
Darn, knew we forgot something on our trip this past weekend..note to self: remember to pack "Hello, my name is...stickers for #21,11 &15

It may not be disrespectful to only refer to opposing players by their number rather than their name. But it certainly isn't professional. If you don't have the courtesy to refer your opponents by name, I have a hard time supporting you as a Duke coach, no matter how good your win-loss record may be.

So perhaps I am overreacting. Perhaps I am being judgmental or unfair. Perhaps my standards are too high. Perhaps there is far more to the above than any of us know.

But the above is my take.

I continue to wish Coach P and especially the Blue Devils well in every game they play. But my support for Coach P is at its end.

[heyman25]

I concede up front that it is patently absurd to talk about the job security of someone with such a record on paper. Maybe fans/alums like me are what's wrong with college basketball. But I would suggest that there is more to the story here than Coach P's win-loss record at Duke.

Caveats: I have been a Duke women's basketball fan since Georgia Schweitzer left my hometown of Columbus to play for the Blue Devils. I considered it an honor and a privilege to cover the women's basketball team while at the Chronicle, and rallied with many others to convince Coach Goestenkors to remain at Duke. I was upset but understood why she chose to leave. But this isn't about wishing Coach G had stuck around, and isn't about wishing Coach G would come back.

I preferred another candidate to Coach P, but was nevertheless eager for her to step in and succeed in Durham. And I wrote a story about Coach P's arrival for Duke in May 2007 (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=897289). It was in that article that she raised some eyebrows about her approach to recruiting, but any concerns about that have of course been dispelled. She and her staff have brought in talent in droves--certainly better than Coach G did. And I want this team to keep getting better. I want Duke women's basketball to win a title this year, as every year.

But this is about the following: Despite the gaudy win-loss record, we've taken a step back as a program under McCallie in terms of our reputation and in terms of our ability to perform in the postseason. We're not a genuine title contender anymore, and our coach too often does not represent our University well with her public statements.

Consider, first, the numbers: In the ten years prior to McCallie's arrival, Duke women's bball accomplished the following:

87% winning percentage (301-46)
10 consecutive NCAA appearanes
7 consecutive 30-win seasons
7 Elite Eights in 10 years
4 Final Fours
2 National Title game appearances
2 NPOYs (Beard, Harding)


And in the six and a half seasons since:

84% winning percentage (195-37)
6 consecutive NCAA appearances
3 30-win seasons
4 Elite Eights in 6 years
0 Final Fours
0 National Title game appearances
0 NPOYs

The numbers compare favorably until you get to mid-March.

But look at how we did in those Elite Eight games: we scored in the 40s twice, and lost by double digits three times.

And in our matchups with the standard-bearer in women's college basketball, UConn, we've lost all seven matchups under McCallie. The first six losses had an average margin of 30 points. The last game was better--we lost by 21.

But look beyond the on-court stuff. We've lost 4 assistants in 6 years, none of whom left to become head coaches. That happened once in the previous ten years, when we lost an assistant coach to medical school. And we've got Coach McCallie making statements on Twitter that are at least of questionable judgment. These public statements were the last straw for me.

Of course, this is a Coach whose players are all outstanding representatives of the University on the court and off. And a Coach whose behavior hasn't approached anything egregious along the lines of some of her unfortunate peers in the profession.

But it's also ridiculous for a varsity head coach at any University, let alone Duke, to be engaging in some of the stuff she's engaged in on Twitter: for example, in December 2013, Coach P accused a former assistant of alluring a transfer, Kiana Holland, from Duke:



Coach P also refuses to call opposing players by their names. In the press conference after the loss to Notre Dame, Coach P called the Irish players by their numbers rather than their names.

It drew what I would consider an inappropriate response from ND's coach on, of course, Twitter:



It may not be disrespectful to only refer to opposing players by their number rather than their name. But it certainly isn't professional. If you don't have the courtesy to refer your opponents by name, I have a hard time supporting you as a Duke coach, no matter how good your win-loss record may be.

So perhaps I am overreacting. Perhaps I am being judgmental or unfair. Perhaps my standards are too high. Perhaps there is far more to the above than any of us know.

But the above is my take.

I continue to wish Coach P and especially the Blue Devils well in every game they play. But my support for Coach P is at its end.
Great recruiter,but awful at diplomacy and PR. I wish we could get Katie Meier or Joanne Boyle when P's contract expires.Our McDonald All Americans improve if they play on summer teams with different coaches like tricia Liston

[killerleft]

I concede up front that it is patently absurd to talk about the job security of someone with such a record on paper. Maybe fans/alums like me are what's wrong with college basketball. But I would suggest that there is more to the story here than Coach P's win-loss record at Duke.

Caveats: I have been a Duke women's basketball fan since Georgia Schweitzer left my hometown of Columbus to play for the Blue Devils. I considered it an honor and a privilege to cover the women's basketball team while at the Chronicle, and rallied with many others to convince Coach Goestenkors to remain at Duke. I was upset but understood why she chose to leave. But this isn't about wishing Coach G had stuck around, and isn't about wishing Coach G would come back.

I preferred another candidate to Coach P, but was nevertheless eager for her to step in and succeed in Durham. And I wrote a story about Coach P's arrival for Duke in May 2007 (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=897289). It was in that article that she raised some eyebrows about her approach to recruiting, but any concerns about that have of course been dispelled. She and her staff have brought in talent in droves--certainly better than Coach G did. And I want this team to keep getting better. I want Duke women's basketball to win a title this year, as every year.

But this is about the following: Despite the gaudy win-loss record, we've taken a step back as a program under McCallie in terms of our reputation and in terms of our ability to perform in the postseason. We're not a genuine title contender anymore, and our coach too often does not represent our University well with her public statements.

Consider, first, the numbers: In the ten years prior to McCallie's arrival, Duke women's bball accomplished the following:

87% winning percentage (301-46)
10 consecutive NCAA appearanes
7 consecutive 30-win seasons
7 Elite Eights in 10 years
4 Final Fours
2 National Title game appearances
2 NPOYs (Beard, Harding)


And in the six and a half seasons since:

84% winning percentage (195-37)
6 consecutive NCAA appearances
3 30-win seasons
4 Elite Eights in 6 years
0 Final Fours
0 National Title game appearances
0 NPOYs

The numbers compare favorably until you get to mid-March.

But look at how we did in those Elite Eight games: we scored in the 40s twice, and lost by double digits three times.

And in our matchups with the standard-bearer in women's college basketball, UConn, we've lost all seven matchups under McCallie. The first six losses had an average margin of 30 points. The last game was better--we lost by 21.

But look beyond the on-court stuff. We've lost 4 assistants in 6 years, none of whom left to become head coaches. That happened once in the previous ten years, when we lost an assistant coach to medical school. And we've got Coach McCallie making statements on Twitter that are at least of questionable judgment. These public statements were the last straw for me.

Of course, this is a Coach whose players are all outstanding representatives of the University on the court and off. And a Coach whose behavior hasn't approached anything egregious along the lines of some of her unfortunate peers in the profession.

But it's also ridiculous for a varsity head coach at any University, let alone Duke, to be engaging in some of the stuff she's engaged in on Twitter: for example, in December 2013, Coach P accused a former assistant of alluring a transfer, Kiana Holland, from Duke:



Coach P also refuses to call opposing players by their names. In the press conference after the loss to Notre Dame, Coach P called the Irish players by their numbers rather than their names.

It drew what I would consider an inappropriate response from ND's coach on, of course, Twitter:



It may not be disrespectful to only refer to opposing players by their number rather than their name. But it certainly isn't professional. If you don't have the courtesy to refer your opponents by name, I have a hard time supporting you as a Duke coach, no matter how good your win-loss record may be.

So perhaps I am overreacting. Perhaps I am being judgmental or unfair. Perhaps my standards are too high. Perhaps there is far more to the above than any of us know.

But the above is my take.

I continue to wish Coach P and especially the Blue Devils well in every game they play. But my support for Coach P is at its end.

The tweets are a little unsettling, but I don't know the jargon of recruits. Maybe fool isn't used exactly taken the same way as it used to be, I just don't know. The Holland tweets, if she had proof, why not? If it was just a guess, not so cool. Easy to say she should just stay off Twitter, but apparently using social media can be a pretty big recruiting aid.

The use of numbers instead of names could be a tool McCallie uses for practice and/or games to simpify (as my middle school coach did) coverages on defense. Hard to mistake a number. It's big and on their backs. Numbers are easier than names to remember from film. And it might make easily recognizable (very good) individual players seem a little less scary. Or perhaps she's found that she mixes the names up sometimes and would rather use the numbers instead. I'm not backing Muffet's comment, either. She's more obnoxious to me than Ms. Freeze or Sylvia ever were, and that's saying something.

Do the numbers G compiled in her first six years make P's look so bad? I don't remember exactly, although I became a Duke women's fan during the time of the glorious Miss Schweitzer also. I'm sad we didn't get a couple of Nattys when G had the horses, too.

Joanne McCallie is certainly more abrasive than Gail Goestenkors could ever be. Coach P was a shock to some of the players early on, I'm sure. A coach with G's halo and McCallie's toughness would be a fine thing. But the same reasons that allow Coach K to keep the top recruits rolling in also keeps UConn supplied with stars. Win some, lose some. Just one of the super-recruits could change everything. I'm still backing Coach P and the whole team, and hoping they find a way to overcome the loss of All-American Chelsea Gray. There's lots of talent on this team, and they can still make a strong run if they figure it out.

[jv001]

I concede up front that it is patently absurd to talk about the job security of someone with such a record on paper. Maybe fans/alums like me are what's wrong with college basketball. But I would suggest that there is more to the story here than Coach P's win-loss record at Duke.

Caveats: I have been a Duke women's basketball fan since Georgia Schweitzer left my hometown of Columbus to play for the Blue Devils. I considered it an honor and a privilege to cover the women's basketball team while at the Chronicle, and rallied with many others to convince Coach Goestenkors to remain at Duke. I was upset but understood why she chose to leave. But this isn't about wishing Coach G had stuck around, and isn't about wishing Coach G would come back.

I preferred another candidate to Coach P, but was nevertheless eager for her to step in and succeed in Durham. And I wrote a story about Coach P's arrival for Duke in May 2007 (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=897289). It was in that article that she raised some eyebrows about her approach to recruiting, but any concerns about that have of course been dispelled. She and her staff have brought in talent in droves--certainly better than Coach G did. And I want this team to keep getting better. I want Duke women's basketball to win a title this year, as every year.

But this is about the following: Despite the gaudy win-loss record, we've taken a step back as a program under McCallie in terms of our reputation and in terms of our ability to perform in the postseason. We're not a genuine title contender anymore, and our coach too often does not represent our University well with her public statements.

Consider, first, the numbers: In the ten years prior to McCallie's arrival, Duke women's bball accomplished the following:

87% winning percentage (301-46)
10 consecutive NCAA appearanes
7 consecutive 30-win seasons
7 Elite Eights in 10 years
4 Final Fours
2 National Title game appearances
2 NPOYs (Beard, Harding)


And in the six and a half seasons since:

84% winning percentage (195-37)
6 consecutive NCAA appearances
3 30-win seasons
4 Elite Eights in 6 years
0 Final Fours
0 National Title game appearances
0 NPOYs

The numbers compare favorably until you get to mid-March.

But look at how we did in those Elite Eight games: we scored in the 40s twice, and lost by double digits three times.

And in our matchups with the standard-bearer in women's college basketball, UConn, we've lost all seven matchups under McCallie. The first six losses had an average margin of 30 points. The last game was better--we lost by 21.

But look beyond the on-court stuff. We've lost 4 assistants in 6 years, none of whom left to become head coaches. That happened once in the previous ten years, when we lost an assistant coach to medical school. And we've got Coach McCallie making statements on Twitter that are at least of questionable judgment. These public statements were the last straw for me.

Of course, this is a Coach whose players are all outstanding representatives of the University on the court and off. And a Coach whose behavior hasn't approached anything egregious along the lines of some of her unfortunate peers in the profession.

But it's also ridiculous for a varsity head coach at any University, let alone Duke, to be engaging in some of the stuff she's engaged in on Twitter: for example, in December 2013, Coach P accused a former assistant of alluring a transfer, Kiana Holland, from Duke:



Coach P also refuses to call opposing players by their names. In the press conference after the loss to Notre Dame, Coach P called the Irish players by their numbers rather than their names.

It drew what I would consider an inappropriate response from ND's coach on, of course, Twitter:



It may not be disrespectful to only refer to opposing players by their number rather than their name. But it certainly isn't professional. If you don't have the courtesy to refer your opponents by name, I have a hard time supporting you as a Duke coach, no matter how good your win-loss record may be.

So perhaps I am overreacting. Perhaps I am being judgmental or unfair. Perhaps my standards are too high. Perhaps there is far more to the above than any of us know.

But the above is my take.

I continue to wish Coach P and especially the Blue Devils well in every game they play. But my support for Coach P is at its end.

I can say that I liked watching Coach G's teams play more so than current coach, Coach P's teams. It just seemed to me that Duke's game under Gail were smoother looking teams. There was a good flow to the action. Maybe it was it was just in my eyes. I do give Coach P credit for bringing in highly rated recruits but I don't know if she's getting as much out of her players as did Gail. That's just my opinion on the matter. GoDuke!

[Kedsy]

Do the numbers G compiled in her first six years make P's look so bad?

Not at all. In G's first six years the team was 119-61 (.661), with three second round exits and one Elite Eight.

That said, it's not exactly apples-to-apples. G inherited a team that went 14-15 and hadn't had an NCAA bid in five years. P inherited a team that went 32-2, just two years removed from an NCAA title game appearance.

Still, count me in as a P supporter. The tweets are a little unsettling, but not anywhere close to a reason to run her out of town, at least to me. And her on-court record is fantastic, despite the Elite Eight losses. Certainly we can't blame her for losing her best player to a catastrophic injury two years in a row.

[Mike Corey]

Do the numbers G compiled in her first six years make P's look so bad?

Of course not. But whereas Coach P inherited one of the elite programs in college basketball, Coach G inherited a team that went 161-118 in the previous decade (and 74-67 in the five seasons before Coach G's arrival).

But for fun: After inheriting a team that had won just 58% of its games in the previous decade, Coach G's first six seasons looked like this:

12-15
16-11
22-9
26-7
19-11
24-8

And in the very next season? We went to the national championship game and compiled a 29-7 record.

So Duke went from five seasons with a 53% winning percentage, to six seasons with a 66% winning percentage, putting us on the verge of a national championship game run. That's progress.

Now, it is of course difficult to improve upon the success that Duke had in the decade prior to Coach P's arrival. The only thing truly missing from the resume was a national title. But to not even return to the Final Four--that's not maintaining the level of success inherited upon arrival.

I join you in hoping we get there--and this March.

[Class of '94]

I can say that I liked watching Coach G's teams play more so than current coach, Coach P's teams. It just seemed to me that Duke's game under Gail were smoother looking teams. There was a good flow to the action. Maybe it was it was just in my eyes. I do give Coach P credit for bringing in highly rated recruits but I don't know if she's getting as much out of her players as did Gail. That's just my opinion on the matter. GoDuke!

I agree with you about the offense although it has improved over the last few years in terms of smoothness and flow imo. My two biggest gripes with Coach P is that I hate that match-up zone and would prefer that we play more man to man defense. I remember reading about her defensive philosophy and that she came from Mich St where she primarily used zone defenses; however, she talked about changing her philosophy because she had more athletes to work with at Duke. That said, it seems like the women play more zone than man to man the last few years.

My other grip echoes what Mike Corey has said in that it appears Duke has regressed in terms of being competitive with the elite teams like Uconn and failing to make it to the final 4 when we had the talent to do so.

I'm not ready to give up on Coach P but again I am frustrated about the team's lack of Final 4s in post season, especially when you consider the amount of success (outside of beating elite teams) she's had in the ACC regular season and ACC tournament.

[Kedsy]

I'm not ready to give up on Coach P but again I am frustrated about the team's lack of Final 4s in post season, especially when you consider the amount of success (outside of beating elite teams) she's had in the ACC regular season and ACC tournament.

DBR has the reputation of being the most reasonable Duke fan site. I can't imagine who would ever want the Duke men's job after Coach K steps down (which hopefully will be awhile off, but it's not forever), if this is how reasonable fans think.

[Duvall]

I didn't want McCallie in 2007. I wanted Dawn Staley. I was wrong.

Don't be so hasty - Staley has taken over a much weaker program and at the moment has them ranked 6th to Duke's 5th.

[GGLC]

DBR has the reputation of being the most reasonable Duke fan site. I can't imagine who would ever want the Duke men's job after Coach K steps down (which hopefully will be awhile off, but it's not forever), if this is how reasonable fans think.

There are some notable differences between the level of competition in the men's and women's game, as elucidated earlier in this thread, that make your comment inapposite, in my opinion.

Different standards for elite programs in men's vs women's.

[Duvall]

But this is about the following: Despite the gaudy win-loss record, we've taken a step back as a program under McCallie in terms of our reputation and in terms of our ability to perform in the postseason. We're not a genuine title contender anymore, and our coach too often does not represent our University well with her public statements.


Well, there are a couple of different issues here. No, three - whether Duke is still a genuine title contender, whether McCallie represents Duke adequate in public, and whether McCallie has been an adequate manager of her assistants and staff. For the first, it's tricky. Athletic directors like to talk about competing for championships in every sport, but the reality is that not only is difficult to win or compete for a national championship, but it's not that easy to be consistently very good. We shouldn't dismiss the regular season success Duke has had in recent years out of hand, especially since there isn't an obvious alternative.

McCallie's habit of posting passive aggressive commentary on Twitter is a problem, and not the way I think we would want a Duke coach to behave. (Though to be fair, she's not the only Duke coach to have done so, either on Twitter (http://tampabay.sbnation.com/florida-state-seminoles-news/2012/11/5/3605386/david-cutcliffe-twitter-vic-viloria) or through more traditional methods. (http://books.google.com/books?id=PmlkVxHLR-gC&pg=PA121&lpg=PA121&dq=double+standard+game+duke&source=bl&ots=Iyf4Xk8RWu&sig=o6KNnkCPKjmEkjIs5HdIcXKvErE&hl=en&ei=tGQbTbC-NYep8AanwMThDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=double%20standard%20game%20duke&f=false) Still, I hope someone in the athletic department is able to sit down with McCallie and explain to her that those kind of action do the program some harm and absolutely no good.

As for McCallie's staff turnover - it's troubling. The problem is that none of the coaches that have left have talked much about why they left, which makes it hard for those of us on the outside to judge whether this is something that indicates that there should be a change in the direction of the program. But there's a difference between being an abrasive boss that goes through a lot of assistants and being an abusive one, and I just hope the athletic department is being proactive about being able to tell the difference.

[Duvall]

There are some notable differences between the level of competition in the men's and women's game, as elucidated earlier in this thread, that make your comment inapposite, in my opinion.

Different standards for elite programs in men's vs women's.

Yes, but...if winning 30 games a year were easy in the women's game, wouldn't more programs do it? I don't think we can just gloss over the fact that a lot of programs are in worse shape than Duke, much worse.

[Tappan Zee Devil]

I concede up front that it is patently absurd to talk about the job security of someone with such a record on paper. Maybe fans/alums like me are what's wrong with college basketball. But I would suggest that there is more to the story here than Coach P's win-loss record at Duke.

Caveats: I have been a Duke women's basketball fan since Georgia Schweitzer left my hometown of Columbus to play for the Blue Devils. I considered it an honor and a privilege to cover the women's basketball team while at the Chronicle, and rallied with many others to convince Coach Goestenkors to remain at Duke. I was upset but understood why she chose to leave. But this isn't about wishing Coach G had stuck around, and isn't about wishing Coach G would come back.

I preferred another candidate to Coach P, but was nevertheless eager for her to step in and succeed in Durham. And I wrote a story about Coach P's arrival for Duke in May 2007 (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=897289). It was in that article that she raised some eyebrows about her approach to recruiting, but any concerns about that have of course been dispelled. She and her staff have brought in talent in droves--certainly better than Coach G did. And I want this team to keep getting better. I want Duke women's basketball to win a title this year, as every year.

But this is about the following: Despite the gaudy win-loss record, we've taken a step back as a program under McCallie in terms of our reputation and in terms of our ability to perform in the postseason. We're not a genuine title contender anymore, and our coach too often does not represent our University well with her public statements.

Consider, first, the numbers: In the ten years prior to McCallie's arrival, Duke women's bball accomplished the following:

87% winning percentage (301-46)
10 consecutive NCAA appearanes
7 consecutive 30-win seasons
7 Elite Eights in 10 years
4 Final Fours
2 National Title game appearances
2 NPOYs (Beard, Harding)


And in the six and a half seasons since:

84% winning percentage (195-37)
6 consecutive NCAA appearances
3 30-win seasons
4 Elite Eights in 6 years
0 Final Fours
0 National Title game appearances
0 NPOYs

The numbers compare favorably until you get to mid-March.

But look at how we did in those Elite Eight games: we scored in the 40s twice, and lost by double digits three times.

And in our matchups with the standard-bearer in women's college basketball, UConn, we've lost all seven matchups under McCallie. The first six losses had an average margin of 30 points. The last game was better--we lost by 21.

But look beyond the on-court stuff. We've lost 4 assistants in 6 years, none of whom left to become head coaches. That happened once in the previous ten years, when we lost an assistant coach to medical school. And we've got Coach McCallie making statements on Twitter that are at least of questionable judgment. These public statements were the last straw for me.

Of course, this is a Coach whose players are all outstanding representatives of the University on the court and off. And a Coach whose behavior hasn't approached anything egregious along the lines of some of her unfortunate peers in the profession.

But it's also ridiculous for a varsity head coach at any University, let alone Duke, to be engaging in some of the stuff she's engaged in on Twitter: for example, in December 2013, Coach P accused a former assistant of alluring a transfer, Kiana Holland, from Duke:



Coach P also refuses to call opposing players by their names. In the press conference after the loss to Notre Dame, Coach P called the Irish players by their numbers rather than their names.

It drew what I would consider an inappropriate response from ND's coach on, of course, Twitter:



It may not be disrespectful to only refer to opposing players by their number rather than their name. But it certainly isn't professional. If you don't have the courtesy to refer your opponents by name, I have a hard time supporting you as a Duke coach, no matter how good your win-loss record may be.

So perhaps I am overreacting. Perhaps I am being judgmental or unfair. Perhaps my standards are too high. Perhaps there is far more to the above than any of us know.

But the above is my take.

I continue to wish Coach P and especially the Blue Devils well in every game they play. But my support for Coach P is at its end.

OK - fire her.

Who do you replace her with?

More to the point
Who would take the job under those circumstances and expectations?

[throatybeard]

DBR has the reputation of being the most reasonable Duke fan site. I can't imagine who would ever want the Duke men's job after Coach K steps down (which hopefully will be awhile off, but it's not forever), if this is how reasonable fans think.

Exactly. Bubba Sparxxx could explain to us out uglaaaaay it's gonna git. Someone wise on the old board software said, and this is close to verbatim, "there's nearly a 100% chance that our next [men's] coach won't be as good as Coach K."

Cowherd has been saying something he likes to say for a while. "You don't want to be the guy who follows The Guy. You want to be the guy who follows the guy who follows The Guy."

McCallie is, for the time being, in the middle of the second sentence.

But, I have full confidence that if Goestenkors hadn't won an NCAAT by now, everyone would be complaining about her, too.

[BlueTeuf]

OK - fire her.

Who do you replace her with?

More to the point
Who would take the job under those circumstances and expectations?

Fair question, but I don't think it will be hard to answer. If a coach is let go for genuine character issues - there will be willing candidates to inherit an otherwise successful program. I, like a few others, am worried that the most obvious explanation for the inappropriate tweets is also the actual reason. If so, then we have a coach who has great difficulty (inability) controlling her emotions - and is sponsored in a position of ultimate power over the lives of some young ladies. That's an unsettling position to be in if I'm a Duke administrator.

I'll exchange a drop in on-court performance for a program run with class.

BlueTeuf

[throatybeard]

By the way, the rout of Clemson tonight was Duke's eighteenth straight over Clemson WBB. Eighteen.

They used to beat us like a drum.

[Mike Corey]

But, I have full confidence that if Goestenkors hadn't won an NCAAT by now, everyone would be complaining about her, too.

Joe Alleva was complaining about this in 2007.

~

But...back to the players. Great win tonight. Glad the string of success over Clemson has continued.

[throatybeard]

Ok, so we've gotten our butt kicked by the #1 and #2 teams in the land, in Cameron.

1) At least we can get them to come to Cameron. There have been years when we can't get a H&H for our football team, like Notre Dame in 2007.

2) We have big games coming up against Maryland and Carolina. They're in the league. (At least half of them are for now). Let's beat them. McCallie usually does that.

[miramar]

We have big games coming up against Maryland and Carolina. They're in the league. (At least half of them are for now). Let's beat them. McCallie usually does that.

The next two Mondays we have UNC and Maryland in Cameron, so there is no question that is where the focus has to be right now. Things won't get any easier because there are still away games at ND and UNC, but we are still the #5 team in the country so we can put the razor blades away.

But I have been wondering how having Notre Dame in the ACC will change the league's competitive dynamics, not to mention Duke in the NCAAs. If Duke can't compete with the Irish, then it's almost impossible to get a #1 seed. Naturally, that means that Duke will usually have to get through a #1 seed to get to Final Four, and that is precisely where they have trouble.

I don't know if that means that I am prescient or that I don't have anything better to worry about in the morning, but I suspect it's the latter.

[Class of '94]

DBR has the reputation of being the most reasonable Duke fan site. I can't imagine who would ever want the Duke men's job after Coach K steps down (which hopefully will be awhile off, but it's not forever), if this is how reasonable fans think.

First of all, just my opinion; and I hope you respect mine just as I respect yours.

Second of all, I appreciate what Coach P has accomplished; but I want (apparently unreasonable from your perspective) the Duke women's team to win a NC (preferably multiple NCs). Coach P simply hasn't put them in a position to win them as of yet. I personally consider putting the team in a position to win NCs is by making to Final 4s and the championship games; and while G didn't win a NC with Duke, she consistently put the team in a position to win towards the end of the tenure that I felt that she was going to win a NC sooner rather than later had she stayed.

It's great that Coach P has had a lot of regular season success and has made to the elite 8 multiple times; but at some point I want to the see the team make it over the hump and get to a final 4 with P (that to me is progress); and eventually win it. Right or wrong, I personally don't see the team trending (in terms of performance) towards making a Final 4 appearance right now. They have the talent but I don't believe they have the belief; and I based this opinion on their results against elite teams. And if they're getting blown out by 20+ to these teams, the chances of making it to the Final 4 is reduced because more than likely they will have to play an elite team and beat an elite team to make to the Final 4, which they haven't done yet and part of the reason they haven't made it there.

Lastly, my expectations is for the Duke women's program to win championships (ACC and NCAA). Coach K has even said recently that goal of Duke varsity sports should be to win championships. Again, I'm not saying Coach P should be fired now; but rather, at some point I believe one has to ask him or herself is winning a bunch of regular season games and consistently falling short of making it to the Final 4 and winning NCs acceptable and good enough. For you, it sounds like it is and that's fine. For me, not so much, especially when this program has the talent to compete for NCs and is capable (or was capable depending on how you look at it) to win NCs. However, it's fine if you or anyone else think I'm being unreasonable. It's jmo; and I'm not going to change my opinion regardless.

That being said, Coach P has done a tremendous job of bringing in talent; talent, I believe, is capable of taking the team to Final 4s and eventually winning it all. I'm just not sure the team i trending in that direction right now; and a lot of that recently has been injury issues. I believe now is not the time to fire Coach; and that she earned that benefit of the double, based on her record; and deserves more time to take the women's program back to the Final 4 and to win NCs. However, if the program goes another six years doing the same things and failing to make a Final 4, I think a change in HC might be needed if the standard is to win championships in addition to winning a bunch of regular season games.

And before you or someone else bring up the football program, I have the "unreasonable" expectation that Duke can and should compete for championships in football. I love what Coach Cut has done; and I believe based on the results on and off the field that he has the team trending in that direction; and that's good enough for me right now. Cut is in the process of building the program whereas P took over a program that's in position to win a championship now; and that's why my patience may appear to be greater for the football team compared to the women's program; however my expectations are still the same for both programs.

[killerleft]

Fair question, but I don't think it will be hard to answer. If a coach is let go for genuine character issues - there will be willing candidates to inherit an otherwise successful program. I, like a few others, am worried that the most obvious explanation for the inappropriate tweets is also the actual reason. If so, then we have a coach who has great difficulty (inability) controlling her emotions - and is sponsored in a position of ultimate power over the lives of some young ladies. That's an unsettling position to be in if I'm a Duke administrator.

I'll exchange a drop in on-court performance for a program run with class.

BlueTeuf

I wonder if you've always held Coach K to the same standard that you expect from Ms. McCallie. I remember that he's said a few things that might have registered on your temper flare-up radar. Unless you shrugged them off and figured that everybody does something now and then that might be considered out of character for them. I recall an incident with a Chronicle writer who had come up with some sort of rating system assessing individual players on our team after they finished a portion of the season. I think Coach K may have been correct in the gist of his grievance, but how he handled it made me cringe a bit. Sorry, but I don't remember the details. Some folks here at DBR do, I'm sure.

If Coach P has 'great difficulty' controlling her emotions, I hope you can make up a list of a fair number of these incidents. She seems to be fairly calm on the court and in press conferences, considering her profession. Shows some class, even.

As I said earlier, the tweets could be easier on the ear. But, number one, they're tweets, and second, we don't always know the context.

[Kedsy]

Lastly, my expectations is for the Duke women's program to win championships (ACC and NCAA). Coach K has even said recently that goal of Duke varsity sports should be to win championships. Again, I'm not saying Coach P should be fired now; but rather, at some point I believe one has to ask him or herself is winning a bunch of regular season games and consistently falling short of making it to the Final 4 and winning NCs acceptable and good enough. For you, it sounds like it is and that's fine. For me, not so much, especially when this program has the talent to compete for NCs and is capable (or was capable depending on how you look at it) to win NCs. However, it's fine if you or anyone else think I'm being unreasonable. It's jmo; and I'm not going to change my opinion regardless.

First of all, Coach P has won 3 of the last 4 ACC tournament championships and has won four regular season championships in her six seasons.

As for your expectations of Duke programs winning national championships, sure you're entitled to your opinion. But it's a crazy way to determine whether or not to fire a coach. Coach K coached 10 years at Duke before he won his first natty (and five years before he made his first Final Four). He had two other streaks of 8 years without a national championship, and he's won national championships more frequently than any other active Division I men's head coach (and is tied for 2nd all-time). Saying that the "goal" should be to win championships is very, very different from saying if you don't do so you're a failure and should be fired.

And I get that the Elite Eight isn't the Final Four, but Coach P has made the Elite Eight four years in a row (and she's only been here six years). As a coach, she made the national championship game with Michigan State the year before she came to Duke. She's clearly one of the best in the business.

Duke under Coach P has been a top five program. I understand your disappointment that we're not a top 1 or 2 program, but (a) until Geno retires, nobody other than UConn is going to be the sport's #1 program; and (b) again, that's a crazy criteria for determining whether or not to fire a coach.

[Mike Corey]

Duke under Coach P has been a top five program. .

For fear of quibbling, and only for consideration, here are the final USA TodayCoaches Poll rankings under Coach McCallie:

'13 - 6th
'12 - 6th
'11 - 7th
'10 - 6th
'09 - 14th
'08 - 9th

[Duvall]

For fear of quibbling, and only for consideration, here are the final USA TodayCoaches Poll rankings under Coach McCallie:

'13 - 6th
'12 - 6th
'11 - 7th
'10 - 6th
'09 - 14th
'08 - 9th

Then again, wouldn't you have to average the final rankings to get an accurate sense of where Duke stands as a program?

[Mike Corey]

Then again, wouldn't you have to average the final rankings to get an accurate sense of where Duke stands as a program?

Absolutely.

I only offered that information to put more facts into play.

[brevity]

What's being described in this thread is a collective frustration with a perceived ceiling of Coach P's abilities and accomplishments. Every sport probably has an example of this. The NBA team that barely makes the playoffs as a 7 or 8 seed every year. The NFL team that keeps hovering at 8-8. The Pittsburgh men's basketball team under Jamie Dixon. Sustained, consistent success, with seemingly no possibility of breakthrough.

I get the feeling that if Coach P were to win a national championship at Duke, it wouldn't be because they kept beating the best, or captured lightning in a bottle. It would be because they backed into it thanks to the misfortunes of better programs in that tournament. This situation is hard to root for.

Mike Corey's amazing summary reaches a personal conclusion, which I support but do not share. My own personal conclusion is to stick with Coach P, partially out of residual optimism, but mostly out of fear of the alternative. I'm not afraid of Duke hiring a new head coach and taking another step back in the postseason. I am afraid of Duke's athletic department losing a lot of national respect by forcing the change. If we're all being honest, most of us would be okay with the hypothetical where Coach P found an amazing opportunity elsewhere that she had to take. Then Duke's change is a reaction rather than an action, and we hit the Refresh button on our fandom.

I realize that, despite significant differences, I've basically described Kansas men's basketball, circa 2003.

[Kedsy]

For fear of quibbling, and only for consideration, here are the final USA TodayCoaches Poll rankings under Coach McCallie:

'13 - 6th
'12 - 6th
'11 - 7th
'10 - 6th
'09 - 14th
'08 - 9th

Well, these are a bit misleading because the Coaches poll takes a final poll after the NCAAT, and some people here are already penalizing Coach P for not getting to the Final Four, so to me that seems like double-counting.

So, looking at the AP final (pre-tournament) poll, here are Duke's ranks:

'13 - 5th
'12 - 6th
'11 - 6th
'10 - 6th
'09 - 6th
'08 - 9th

Here are the number of times in those six years that each team made the final AP top 6:

UConn: 6
Stanford: 6
Duke: 5
Baylor: 4
Tennessee: 3
Maryland: 3
Notre Dame: 2
Xavier: 2
Nebraska, Oklahoma, California, LSU, UNC: 1 each

Similarly, if you give each team points for their place in the top 25, I didn't do the exact math, but Duke will easily be in the top 5, probably coming in at #4 (behind UConn, Stanford, and Baylor).

[Kedsy]

So, looking at the AP final (pre-tournament) poll, here are Duke's ranks:

'13 - 5th
'12 - 6th
'11 - 6th
'10 - 6th
'09 - 6th
'08 - 9th

Looking at my own numbers, which to me clearly show Duke has been a top five program under Coach P, the numbers also suggest something else: with amazing consistency, Duke under Coach P has been the 5th or 6th best team in the country each season. The expected NCAA result in that situation would be to get to the Elite Eight, which she has done four years running. The only year she underachieved was 2009, when as a #1 seed she was forced to play a true road game against the #9 seed, which happened to be the school she coached at two years before. Extraordinary circumstances.

So, the disappointment here is either (a) she has not yet overachieved in the NCAA tournament; or (b) she hasn't been able to break into the top four in the country in any particular year. Possibly a combination of both.

Considering that in the last four years, no other coach in the world would have displaced UConn or Stanford in the top four, and that Baylor and Notre Dame had Brittany Griner and Skylar Diggins all four of those years, it's a little crazy to be talking about Coach P's job essentially just because she couldn't pull off an upset in the NCAA tournament.

[Duvall]

Considering that in the last four years, no other coach in the world would have displaced UConn or Stanford in the top four, and that Baylor and Notre Dame had Brittany Griner and Skylar Diggins all four of those years, it's a little crazy to be talking about Coach P's job essentially just because she couldn't pull off an upset in the NCAA tournament.

Except...haven't several coaches displaced those four teams at one time or another, by beating them in the NCAA Tournament? "No other coach in the world" seems a bit much.

[Mike Corey]

An addendum to my initial post:

I do not take lightly my withdrawal of support, and have only done so--privately and publicly--because of the off-court stuff that I find beneath the position Coach McCallie holds.

The on-court success, recruiting success, and accomplishments of the Blue Devil women in the classroom and upon graduation are all consistent with what I hope, frankly, all of us aspire to: excelleing with the opportunities in front of us.

To me, our teams don't need to win NCAA championships to be successful, not even in men's basketball. Championships should always be the goal; but there is far more in achieving than in reaching a specific and singular end.

I agree with Kedsy that the alternative is an unhealthy approach. And were I to hold myself to such a standard, I'd be a miserable failure all the time, every day. I'm rife with flaws, of course, and make mistakes far more often then I'm willing to admit. But I do demand of myself that I keep getting better, and that I hold myself accountable accordingly. And I do demand of myself a certain level of respect with which I will treat those around me, and particularly of the people or places I might be fortunate enough to represent.

One of the reasons I draw inspiration from Duke--as a University, and from its athletic teams--is that I see the school and all of the amazing people, teams, and institutions therein as constantly striving to get better. That process is of course not linear; there are always setbacks; there are always mistakes; there are always things that don't pan out. I get that in my personal life, and surely I can acknowledge as much in my fandom.

With Coach McCallie, the on-court performance has of course been superlative but for mid-March's results, and in games against truly elite opponents. (We were 2-2 against UConn and 5-4 against Tennessee under G's watch; we are 0-7 against UConn, 1-1 against Tennessee, and 0-7 against Notre Dame.)

My frustrations with the limitations thus far in Coach McCallie's tenure aside, I had no qualms with continuing to support Coach P despite the inability to advance to the Final Four or compete with the elite. But tossing in the other stuff--minor and innocuous though it may be relative to other scandals by other coaches elsewhere in the world of college athletics--I do not see a Coach who sufficiently respects other opponents, former colleagues, parents of players, or the responsibility of representing Duke University well. That's why I can't continue supporting Coach P.

I, of course, hope that my misgivings are hyperbolic and misplaced. I hope the progress is still forthcoming on the court; I hope the reasons that assistant coaches have left for lateral or lesser positions is not indicative of anything other than a coach looking for a better fit or being asked to look for a better fit; I hope what I read as passive aggressive behavior on Twitter is a complete misunderstanding; I hope that Coach P's calling of opponents by number than by name is a sign of respect that I'm too dimwitted to understand; and I hope that all of Coach P's current and past players have read this knowing that I am completely and utterly wrong in my assessment.

But this isn't just about the wins and losses in March. To me, this is about where the program is at compared to where it was when Coach McCallie found it, and this is about how she has gone about steering this sleeping giant in women's college basketball.

[Kedsy]

Except...haven't several coaches displaced those four teams at one time or another, by beating them in the NCAA Tournament? "No other coach in the world" seems a bit much.

I said no other coach could have displaced UConn or Stanford as a top four team, and nobody has done that.

Nobody has displaced UConn in the Final Four either. Stanford was upset last season but made the previous four Final Fours. Notre Dame made the Final Four in Skylar Diggins's last three seasons. It's true that Brittany Griner's Baylor team was upset twice in her four years.

My point was not that it was impossible for Duke to pull off an upset (as four teams have done in the past four seasons), just saying if you're the 5th or 6th best team, the expectation should be the Elite Eight and that's exactly what Coach P has done. In my opinion you don't fire someone for meeting but not exceeding expectations. And you shouldn't fire someone for not becoming the 3rd or 4th best team under the circumstances of the past four years, either.

[Kedsy]

My frustrations with the limitations thus far in Coach McCallie's tenure aside, I had no qualms with continuing to support Coach P despite the inability to advance to the Final Four or compete with the elite. But tossing in the other stuff--minor and innocuous though it may be relative to other scandals by other coaches elsewhere in the world of college athletics--I do not see a Coach who sufficiently respects other opponents, former colleagues, parents of players, or the responsibility of representing Duke University well. That's why I can't continue supporting Coach P.

You're closer to it than I am. From my distant vantage it seems you might be overreacting, which is why I don't share your view. But if you are correct in what you see (and I have no way of knowing if you are or not), I respect your position.

In this case, I hope you're proved wrong, because I think Coach P is a terrific coach.

[Des Esseintes]

My frustrations with the limitations thus far in Coach McCallie's tenure aside, I had no qualms with continuing to support Coach P despite the inability to advance to the Final Four or compete with the elite. But tossing in the other stuff--minor and innocuous though it may be relative to other scandals by other coaches elsewhere in the world of college athletics--I do not see a Coach who sufficiently respects other opponents, former colleagues, parents of players, or the responsibility of representing Duke University well. That's why I can't continue supporting Coach P.

I, of course, hope that my misgivings are hyperbolic and misplaced. I hope the progress is still forthcoming on the court; I hope the reasons that assistant coaches have left for lateral or lesser positions is not indicative of anything other than a coach looking for a better fit or being asked to look for a better fit; I hope what I read as passive aggressive behavior on Twitter is a complete misunderstanding; I hope that Coach P's calling of opponents by number than by name is a sign of respect that I'm too dimwitted to understand; and I hope that all of Coach P's current and past players have read this knowing that I am completely and utterly wrong in my assessment.

But this isn't just about the wins and losses in March. To me, this is about where the program is at compared to where it was when Coach McCallie found it, and this is about how she has gone about steering this sleeping giant in women's college basketball.
All respect, Mike, but I find this pretty unrealistic. I mean, we're talking about women's college basketball. How many coaches at the best programs could pass this test you're putting forward? Not McGraw. Not Geno. Not Plath. I don't follow women's hoops closely enough to be intimate with the entire landscape, but public abrasiveness and success sure seems to be a heavily overlapping Venn diagram in this sport. And consider her "transgressions." P hasn't been say throwing chairs or punching opposing players on the sidelines. She's turned over some assistant coaches and vented questionably a grand total of twice. What sort of angels are we expecting on our sidelines? Is K so utterly stainless that we couldn't put together a writ of indictment similarly long? I would prefer that the staff be more stable and that she had avoided the unfortunate tweets. But that's pretty thin gruel for judging someone's soul.

[Duvall]

All respect, Mike, but I find this pretty unrealistic. I mean, we're talking about women's college basketball. How many coaches at the best programs could pass this test you're putting forward? Not McGraw. Not Geno. Not Plath. I don't follow women's hoops closely enough to be intimate with the entire landscape, but public abrasiveness and success sure seems to be a heavily overlapping Venn diagram in this sport. And consider her "transgressions." P hasn't been say throwing chairs or punching opposing players on the sidelines. She's turned over some assistant coaches and vented questionably a grand total of twice. What sort of angels are we expecting on our sidelines? Is K so utterly stainless that we couldn't put together a writ of indictment similarly long? I would prefer that the staff be more stable and that she had avoided the unfortunate tweets. But that's pretty thin gruel for judging someone's soul.

To be clear, McCallie has vented questionably more than twice. This thread has just focused on this year's missteps.

As I see it, you get away with Bobby Knight's attitude if you produce Bobby Knight's results. And you can get away with Bobby Cremins' results (which were pretty good!) if you have Bobby Cremins' attitude. But if you pair Knight attitude with Cremins results, people will get tired of you after a while.

[Des Esseintes]

What's being described in this thread is a collective frustration with a perceived ceiling of Coach P's abilities and accomplishments. Every sport probably has an example of this. The NBA team that barely makes the playoffs as a 7 or 8 seed every year. The NFL team that keeps hovering at 8-8. The Pittsburgh men's basketball team under Jamie Dixon. Sustained, consistent success, with seemingly no possibility of breakthrough.

I get the feeling that if Coach P were to win a national championship at Duke, it wouldn't be because they kept beating the best, or captured lightning in a bottle. It would be because they backed into it thanks to the misfortunes of better programs in that tournament. This situation is hard to root for.

Mike Corey's amazing summary reaches a personal conclusion, which I support but do not share. My own personal conclusion is to stick with Coach P, partially out of residual optimism, but mostly out of fear of the alternative. I'm not afraid of Duke hiring a new head coach and taking another step back in the postseason. I am afraid of Duke's athletic department losing a lot of national respect by forcing the change. If we're all being honest, most of us would be okay with the hypothetical where Coach P found an amazing opportunity elsewhere that she had to take. Then Duke's change is a reaction rather than an action, and we hit the Refresh button on our fandom.

I realize that, despite significant differences, I've basically described Kansas men's basketball, circa 2003.
An NBA 8-seed is the 16th best team in a 30 team league. An 8-8 NFL team is the same, mediocrity defined. Perennial ACC champion and top-6-ranked Duke women's hoops is not like these things. For that matter, Jamie Dixon at Pitt has had far less success than P at Duke.

The second bolded part just makes no sense to me. Can you give me a list of teams that "backed into titles"? Of the teams on this no doubt very long list, how many were held in contempt by their fanbases and considered "hard to root for"?

[Des Esseintes]

To be clear, McCallie has vented questionably more than twice. This thread has just focused on this year's missteps.

As I see it, you get away with Bobby Knight's attitude if you produce Bobby Knight's results. And you can get away with Bobby Cremins' results (which were pretty good!) if you have Bobby Cremins' attitude. But if you pair Knight attitude with Cremins results, people will get tired of you after a while.

Sure, but even accounting for the lower profile enjoyed by women's hoops, I don't see that P has been anything approaching the problem for Duke that Knight was for Indiana.

[Mike Corey]

I don't see that P has been anything approaching the problem for Duke that Knight was for Indiana.

Very much agreed.

Edited to add: I apologize for writing as if I am judging Coach McCallie's soul. Shame on me for writing it in such a way. My intent was to judge Coach McCallie's worthiness of maintaining my meaningless personal support as head coach of the women's basketball program.

[Class of '94]

I said no other coach could have displaced UConn or Stanford as a top four team, and nobody has done that.

Nobody has displaced UConn in the Final Four either. Stanford was upset last season but made the previous four Final Fours. Notre Dame made the Final Four in Skylar Diggins's last three seasons. It's true that Brittany Griner's Baylor team was upset twice in her four years.

My point was not that it was impossible for Duke to pull off an upset (as four teams have done in the past four seasons), just saying if you're the 5th or 6th best team, the expectation should be the Elite Eight and that's exactly what Coach P has done. In my opinion you don't fire someone for meeting but not exceeding expectations. And you shouldn't fire someone for not becoming the 3rd or 4th best team under the circumstances of the past four years, either.

I hear what you're saying; and I want to be clear that I am not asking or wanting her to be fired at this point. She has had success here. I'm more inclined at this point of having a "wait and see" approach in terms of how high Coach P can take this program. I want Coach to take this program to new heights and level of success; and I feel that she has the tools (players) in place to do so.

That being said, I do have my frustrations with her approach to the team in terms of defensive and offensive philosophies; and I preferred Coach G's system to P's; but as I've said previously, I think P's offense has improved; and I think that is another reason for hope in regards to Coach P getting to a Final 4. My main point is that I am wondering aloud if Duke has reached a ceiling with Coach P; and if this is the best that it will be (although it's not bad; but I just would like to see make it to a final 4 and compete for a NC). When I look back at Coach K's early years, you saw the progression of the program after the first 3 years. The program was steadily trending upwards; and when he went to 7 straight Final 4, I felt that it was just a matter of time before Duke won a NC; and it was amazing that Duke and K won their 1st one when I was a freshman; and the program just skyrocketed from there. Similarly, I felt the same with Coach G and the success she had with her program here. And while she didn't win a NC, it felt like she was close and that we would've won the NC under her guidance. It was just a matter of time. I could be wrong but I believe Coach G took some Duke teams to the Final 4 that had less talent than what P has worked with. I would also argue that Duke wasn't a top 4 program in her tenure; but Duke still made the Final 4 and played in championship games. G's first Final 4 team comes to my mind in that regards. That team figured out how to beat teams that were superior to it and won.

I think Coach P is a very good coach; but I don't think her Duke teams have reached their full potential during her tenure at Duke yet. It doesn't mean Duke will not reach their full potential in the future. During her tenure as coach, ND and Baylor have made it to Final 4s. At the times these teams made their runs to the Final 4, I wouldn't consider Baylor and ND perennial top 4 teams; yet, they still made it to the final 4 and won NCs. I also wouldn't consider Louisville a top 4 program; yet that team made it to the Final 4 and put themselves in position to almost win a NC. Duke has yet to sniff a Final 4. As has been shown in the past, I don't believe you need to be a perennial top 4 team to make it to a Final 4. I don't believe P should be fired just because she didn't win a NC; but I would like to see the team continue to progress moving forward; and I think part of that progression is at least making it to a Final 4 here and there. I say this because Coach didn't inherit a rebuilding team like K did, she was given the keys to a program that was on the cusp being a national power and winning a NC. And with P bringing elite talent and top 5 programs over the last several years, why can't we expect more out of this Duke program that just reach Elite 8s; and why can't this program become a top 4 program with the players that Duke has?

Maybe I am being unreasonable or unrealistic, but I believe Duke has too much talent and success over the years to keep falling short of Final 4 and competing for a NC. I'm just not sure if P will be the coach to help Duke do that at this point; but I want to give her more time to show that she can be that coach; and I hope that she does.

[Kedsy]

I say this because Coach didn't inherit a rebuilding team like K did, she was given the keys to a program that was on the cusp being a national power and winning a NC.

Well, Coach K took over the team in 1980-81. In 1977-78, Duke played in the NCAA championship game. In 1978-79, Duke was pre-season #1, tied for first in the ACC regular season, and lost in the ACC championship game before being upset in the NCAAT. In 1979-80, Duke was #1 for a couple weeks, was ACC champion, and made the Elite Eight. That sounds like a team that may have been "on the cusp of being a national power." The only reason it was a rebuilding effort was because Coach K didn't get many recruits his first two seasons (the first year it wasn't his fault, as his predecessor, Bill Foster, quit in March of 1980 and had only brought in one middling recruit before he left).

Coach P inherited a team that went 32-2 but lost in the Sweet 16 and, more importantly, lost by far its two best and most important players. Unlike Bill Foster, Coach G had a pretty good three-person freshman class coming in, but that's really the only reason Coach P had it easier than Coach K.

[brevity]

What's being described in this thread is a collective frustration with a perceived ceiling of Coach P's abilities and accomplishments. Every sport probably has an example of this. The NBA team that barely makes the playoffs as a 7 or 8 seed every year. The NFL team that keeps hovering at 8-8. The Pittsburgh men's basketball team under Jamie Dixon. Sustained, consistent success, with seemingly no possibility of breakthrough.

I get the feeling that if Coach P were to win a national championship at Duke, it wouldn't be because they kept beating the best, or captured lightning in a bottle. It would be because they backed into it thanks to the misfortunes of better programs in that tournament. This situation is hard to root for.


An NBA 8-seed is the 16th best team in a 30 team league. An 8-8 NFL team is the same, mediocrity defined. Perennial ACC champion and top-6-ranked Duke women's hoops is not like these things. For that matter, Jamie Dixon at Pitt has had far less success than P at Duke.

The second bolded part just makes no sense to me. Can you give me a list of teams that "backed into titles"? Of the teams on this no doubt very long list, how many were held in contempt by their fanbases and considered "hard to root for"?

What a bizarre reading of what I thought was a straightforward post.

In the first paragraph, I'm giving more familiar examples of teams that frustrate their fans by having a ceiling on their success. I'm not comparing them to each other, or any of them to Duke WBB.

In the second paragraph, I never said it would be hard to root for a team of any shape or form. I said that it would be hard to root for a situation where the favored teams all suffer misfortune so that your team is the best of what's left. In my opinion, there is no precedent for this. No college hoops team has ever backed into a title. (Duke haters have disagreed, accusing the 2010 men's team of exactly this.)

[msdukie]

While I agree with many of the sentiments above. I also think the fact that the offense has been (mostly) unwatchable for 7 years and has turned off many fans from supporting the team merits further discussion.

[Duvall]

In my opinion, there is no precedent for this. No college hoops team has ever backed into a title.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QPB9NBUG2g

[throatybeard]

While I agree with many of the sentiments above. I also think the fact that the offense has been (mostly) unwatchable for 7 years and has turned off many fans from supporting the team merits further discussion.

I don't think this is a fair assessment, and the reason is going to come off as very sexist, and I apologize for that, and I cite my long history of agitating for Women's sports.

If we were talking about Herb Sendek's NC State teams, you'd probably face little resistance from anyone. Let's miss a stupid shot and hope Kenny Inge cleans it up. That was Herb, at least up to 2001.

Most offense in college WBB is...unwatchable is too harsh. It's not good. I've spent the last two decades defending WBB and trying to convince people who aren't otherwise inclined to watch it, and failing at every turn because of hard-to-watch offense. (And I'd argue that offense in MBB has gotten a lot harder to watch too, because it's gotten so physical inside). But still, you watch anyone but the top two or three teams in the country in WBB, and you see a lot of failed entry passes and layups thrown at the bottom of the rim.

I HATE saying this. But if offense that makes you itch a little turns you off, WBB is a tough place to start.

I hate this post of mine.

[throatybeard]

Also, I find Tricia Liston's shooting rather watchable.

[killerleft]

Well, these are a bit misleading because the Coaches poll takes a final poll after the NCAAT, and some people here are already penalizing Coach P for not getting to the Final Four, so to me that seems like double-counting.

So, looking at the AP final (pre-tournament) poll, here are Duke's ranks:

'13 - 5th
'12 - 6th
'11 - 6th
'10 - 6th
'09 - 6th
'08 - 9th

Here are the number of times in those six years that each team made the final AP top 6:

UConn: 6
Stanford: 6
Duke: 5
Baylor: 4
Tennessee: 3
Maryland: 3
Notre Dame: 2
Xavier: 2
Nebraska, Oklahoma, California, LSU, UNC: 1 each

Similarly, if you give each team points for their place in the top 25, I didn't do the exact math, but Duke will easily be in the top 5, probably coming in at #4 (behind UConn, Stanford, and Baylor).

Thanks for this. It seems an important and revealing measure, and I suspect it comes much closer to revealing just how elite the Duke program has been recently.

[Wander]

The basic problem is related to the sport of women's basketball. In any other sport that I can think of, if you're consistently one of the best teams in the country during the regular season, you're eventually going to make your postseason's semifinals or finals or even win the title. And even if you're just good-but-not-great, you can still occasionally win the postseason, ie the Giants over the undefeated Patriots, Kemba Walker's UConn team, etc. Women's college basketball is the only sport I know of when there are years when the consensus 2nd best team in the country has no legitimate shot to win the national title. There have been years when it's more likely that a 16 seed beats a 1 in the men's game than it is that UConn doesn't win six in a row by double digits. It's ridiculous.

Here's my analogy: if you had to miss the 2004 Final Four because of some business meeting or whatever, but your friend spoiled the outcome of the Duke-UConn game to you, would you still be excited to watch a replay of the game? That's how I feel when Duke plays UConn in women's basketball. I am 100% sure that I know the outcome. It's a frustrating situation to be in, especially for a powerhouse program, and I don't think it's whiny or spoiled or whatever to feel annoyed by this - but I do think it says more about the sport than about Duke or Coach P.

[Class of '94]

Well, Coach K took over the team in 1980-81. In 1977-78, Duke played in the NCAA championship game. In 1978-79, Duke was pre-season #1, tied for first in the ACC regular season, and lost in the ACC championship game before being upset in the NCAAT. In 1979-80, Duke was #1 for a couple weeks, was ACC champion, and made the Elite Eight. That sounds like a team that may have been "on the cusp of being a national power." The only reason it was a rebuilding effort was because Coach K didn't get many recruits his first two seasons (the first year it wasn't his fault, as his predecessor, Bill Foster, quit in March of 1980 and had only brought in one middling recruit before he left).

Coach P inherited a team that went 32-2 but lost in the Sweet 16 and, more importantly, lost by far its two best and most important players. Unlike Bill Foster, Coach G had a pretty good three-person freshman class coming in, but that's really the only reason Coach P had it easier than Coach K.

I respectfully disagree. I would contend that Coach G's final team under-performed that season as evidenced by their 32-2 record; and that relatively speaking, P inherited a much more talented team than K did. And if even if I agreed with you want to say that K and P inherited similarly talented teams, K still pushed through the barrier and made a Final 4 by his 6th season, something P has yet to accomplish; and frankly, a feat that doesn't look like she will accomplish in her seventh season as well (although I'm hoping I am wrong about this). Granted, one could argue that injuries have played a major reason into why the team hasn't made it past an elite 8 by now (but I think there is more to that, which includes her offensive and defensive philosophies; however, that's a further discussion for another day).

Regardless of whether K and P inherited similarly talented teams or not, my main point is that I openly wonder if P can get Duke past an elite 8 and into a Final Four or has this team plateaued under her leadership. It just seems that no matter how high Duke is ranked or how bad Duke beats lesser competition, we appear to get hosed when Duke plays against those elite teams; and that's frustrating for me, especially when I believe Duke's talent has been very close to or on the same level as those elite teams imo. As I said previously, with K, you saw the improvement and progression; and I genuinely felt that it was just a matter of time before Duke would win its first NC. I don't have that same feeling with P yet, based on her teams' recent performances against elite teams. It's jmo. That being said, I'm open-minded to giving her more time to show that she can because of the success she has accomplished so far. I get it that you think she is a very good/great coach; she has won a lot of games at Duke; and by virtue of being Duke's HC, I want her to succeed and take Duke to greater heights of success. However, I still think it's fair to question after 6 seasons whether or not she can do it. Again, other teams during her tenure at Duke have broken through and made it to the Final 4 who weren't considered elite at the time.

[Class of '94]

The basic problem is related to the sport of women's basketball. In any other sport that I can think of, if you're consistently one of the best teams in the country during the regular season, you're eventually going to make your postseason's semifinals or finals or even win the title. And even if you're just good-but-not-great, you can still occasionally win the postseason, ie the Giants over the undefeated Patriots, Kemba Walker's UConn team, etc. Women's college basketball is the only sport I know of when there are years when the consensus 2nd best team in the country has no legitimate shot to win the national title. There have been years when it's more likely that a 16 seed beats a 1 in the men's game than it is that UConn doesn't win six in a row by double digits. It's ridiculous.

Here's my analogy: if you had to miss the 2004 Final Four because of some business meeting or whatever, but your friend spoiled the outcome of the Duke-UConn game to you, would you still be excited to watch a replay of the game? That's how I feel when Duke plays UConn in women's basketball. I am 100% sure that I know the outcome. It's a frustrating situation to be in, especially for a powerhouse program, and I don't think it's whiny or spoiled or whatever to feel annoyed by this - but I do think it says more about the sport than about Duke or Coach P.

Excellent points and a good analogy.......However, I would say that Coach G in her later seasons consistently won against the elite teams at the time (the Tenns, Uconns) both in the regular season (home and away) and in the tournament that had me believing we were going to eventually win a NC. Maybe Duke won because those teams weren't as good as they are now....I don't know; but what I do know is that I don't have the confidence right now to believe that Duke can beat those elite teams to get to a Final 4 and win a NC (something I believe it will have to do to get there). The good news in all of this is that Coach P is bringing in very talented players; and that will always imo give Duke a chance to break through and get to a Final 4 and win a NC/

[Des Esseintes]

The difference between the Final Four and the Elite Eight is one game. Does anyone seriously believe that if you have made several EEs in a row a Final Four is impossible without a coaching change? If you can make multiple Elite Eights, you can make a Final Four. Any other conclusion is basically primitive shamanism.

[GGLC]

The difference between the Final Four and the Elite Eight is one game. Does anyone seriously believe that if you have made several EEs in a row a Final Four is impossible without a coaching change? If you can make multiple Elite Eights, you can make a Final Four. Any other conclusion is basically primitive shamanism.

What if you make multiple Elite Eights but aren't competitive in any of them?

[Kedsy]

What if you make multiple Elite Eights but aren't competitive in any of them?

Duke was not competitive in the 2011 Elite Eight, but in the other three, we lost to Baylor by 3 points, Stanford by 12, and Notre Dame by 11. So I don't think your hypothetical is particularly relevant.

[GGLC]

Duke was not competitive in the 2011 Elite Eight, but in the other three, we lost to Baylor by 3 points, Stanford by 12, and Notre Dame by 11. So I don't think your hypothetical is particularly relevant.

You'll have to refresh my memory, but I don't recall the Stanford or Notre Dame losses being particularly competitive. As for the Baylor game...well, I concede that we led for much of that game, as both teams were absolutely awful on the offensive end.

So fair enough, I'll revise my hypothetical:

What if you make multiple Elite Eights and are competitive in only one -- and that one being four years ago?

[Des Esseintes]

You'll have to refresh my memory, but I don't recall the Stanford or Notre Dame losses being particularly competitive. As for the Baylor game...well, I concede that we led for much of that game, as both teams were absolutely awful on the offensive end.

So fair enough, I'll revise my hypothetical:

What if you make multiple Elite Eights and are competitive in only one -- and that one being four years ago?

Well, given that if the Baylor game had gone very slightly differently we wouldn't even be having this conversation...

But by all means, if you want to believe sporting events are determined by magical worthiness, that's your prerogative.

[Duvall]

The difference between the Final Four and the Elite Eight is one game. Does anyone seriously believe that if you have made several EEs in a row a Final Four is impossible without a coaching change? If you can make multiple Elite Eights, you can make a Final Four. Any other conclusion is basically primitive shamanism.

Well, the concern is a bit more nuanced than that. The worry is that Duke as currently led cannot beat - or compete with - elite opponents at any point in the season. They can beat well-coached teams with lesser talent and poorly-coached teams with elite talent, but have not shown well at all against well-coaches teams with elite talent. If that continues, Duke's only chance at getting to a Final Four would be to hope some other team upsets the top seed in their region and then falls to Duke in the regional final (which nearly happened in 2010) or to be seeded in a region without an elite team (which could happen this year, but is pretty rare).

Possible, I guess, but I can see why people aren't excited about waiting for the stars to align perfectly for Duke.

[Kedsy]

I respectfully disagree. I would contend that Coach G's final team under-performed that season as evidenced by their 32-2 record; and that relatively speaking, P inherited a much more talented team than K did.

The main reason Coach G's last team went 32-2 was because Duke had an All-American PG and an All-American center. Both of them graduated before Coach P's first season. Coach Foster's last men's team also graduated an All-American C and a PG (although Bob Bender wasn't nearly as good compared to his peers as was Lindsay Harding), but Coach K inherited some All-ACC talent in Gene Banks and Vince Taylor, along with solid regulars Kenny Dennard, Chip Engelland and Tom Emma. The cupboard wasn't bare. As I said before, the difference was Coach G had recruited a very good three-woman freshman class and they all stayed to play for Coach P. Coach Foster had only recruited one middling recruit for Coach K.

But it doesn't really matter. I'll concede the program Coach P took over was in better shape than the program Coach K took over, but not by nearly as large a margin as you seem to believe.

As far as Coach K making the Final Four in his sixth season, imagine how well he would have fared if Johnny Dawkins had suffered a season-ending injury in 1986, like Chelsea Gray did both this year and last. Also, in Coach K's first five seasons, he made the NCAA tourney twice and lost once in his first game and once in his second. Coach P has made the NCAAT six times out of six, including four Elite Eights in a row, including last year's Elite Eight with her best player injured.

Now, having said all that, I don't think it's fair to anyone to try and compare Coach P to Coach K. Different situations and different sports, and even though P's early teams have performed better than K's early teams, there's no way we should expect her career path to compare to one of the greatest basketball coaches of all time.

I just don't understand why after every loss, the women's team post-game thread devolves into people suggesting we need a new coach.

[jv001]

Let's face it. UConn has been like the John Wooden UCLA teams of past years. They have the elite talent and an elite coach. It's going to be hard for Duke to defeat them with Coach P or any other coach. Therefore winning a National Championship is going to be very hard. GoDuke!

[GGLC]

Well, given that if the Baylor game had gone very slightly differently we wouldn't even be having this conversation...

But by all means, if you want to believe sporting events are determined by magical worthiness, that's your prerogative.

Well, that's not at all my belief, as it happens. Quite the opposite.

If Ahmad Brooks had hit Drew Brees a quarter-inch lower, the Seahawks probably wouldn't be Super Bowl champions. So.

But over time and iterations, the better team can be expected to win most of the time -- this is true tautologically. Duke under P has made it to the Elite Eight four times and lost all four times, and in only one of those games could the ball have bounced differently and led to a Blue Devil victory. At some point given the unique talent distribution of women's college basketball is it possible to start believing that perhaps the "true talent" of a P-coached Duke team resides somewhere around the point where they will generally and decisively lose to the stratospheric class of team that tends to make the Final Four.

But maybe this will be the year when they burst through that ceiling. Or maybe next year. I'll be immensely happy when and if they do.

[GGLC]

Let's face it. UConn has been like the John Wooden UCLA teams of past years. They have the elite talent and an elite coach. It's going to be hard for Duke to defeat them with Coach P or any other coach. Therefore winning a National Championship is going to be very hard. GoDuke!

Which is why nobody, as far as I can see, is suggesting that winning the national championship should be the bellwether of how well the Duke women's program is doing, or that anything less should signify incapacity or incompetence.

But it would be nice, once in a while, to win a game that we're not "supposed" to win. Or at least not lose such a game decisively each time.

[Kedsy]

The worry is that Duke as currently led cannot beat - or compete with - elite opponents at any point in the season.

While it's true that UConn wallops us every time we play them, we've competed plenty with most other teams. In 2012 we lost by 2 points to Notre Dame; in 2010 we lost by 3 points to Baylor. Other competitive games against top 5 opponents include:

2008 -- beat #4 Rutgers
2008 -- beat #5 Maryland
2008 -- lost by 3 to #2 Tennessee
2008 -- lost by 5 to #4 Maryland
2009 -- beat #3 Stanford
2009 -- lost in OT to #4 Maryland
2010 -- beat #3 Ohio State
2011 -- beat #4 Xavier
2012 -- beat #5 Miami
2013 -- beat #5 Kentucky

Now, I'm making the assumption that a top 5 ranking makes a team "elite," and maybe you have a different definition, but the games I've mentioned above include either victories or competitive losses against Notre Dame, Baylor, Rutgers, Tennessee, Maryland, and Stanford, all of which I'd characterize as "well-coaches teams with elite talent." So I believe the worry you describe is unfounded.

[Kedsy]

Which is why nobody, as far as I can see, is suggesting that winning the national championship should be the bellwether of how well the Duke women's program is doing, or that anything less should signify incapacity or incompetence.

But it would be nice, once in a while, to win a game that we're not "supposed" to win. Or at least not lose such a game decisively each time.

Actually, I believe several people have suggested just that. Also, see my list above to games in which we've beaten or played very close with top-tier teams. It happens more than once in a while, just not against Connecticut.

Finally, I realize injuries are part of the game, but proclaiming a negative trend without taking major injuries into account seems short-sighted. Losing in last year's Elite Eight by 11 to Notre Dame when our best player was injured should hardly be held against Coach P, and I also bet the game a few days ago against Notre Dame would have been a very different and much closer game if Chelsea had played.

I really think all this is simply a reaction to our recent inability to play a close game against Connecticut, but Duke is hardly alone in that regard.

[GGLC]

Actually, I believe several people have suggested just that. Also, see my list above to games in which we've beaten or played very close with top-tier teams. It happens more than once in a while, just not against Connecticut.

Finally, I realize injuries are part of the game, but proclaiming a negative trend without taking major injuries into account seems short-sighted. Losing in last year's Elite Eight by 11 to Notre Dame when our best player was injured should hardly be held against Coach P, and I also bet the game a few days ago against Notre Dame would have been a very different and much closer game if Chelsea had played.

I really think all this is simply a reaction to our recent inability to play a close game against Connecticut, but Duke is hardly alone in that regard.

By "more than once in a while," do you mean "once per season for each of the last four seasons"? Because that's what the chart that you provide indicates. And NONE of the wins/close losses in the last four seasons came against "Notre Dame, Baylor, Rutgers, Tennessee, Maryland, and Stanford," which are the teams from your chart that you yourself characterize as well-coached teams with elite talent.

So, yes, from 2010 forward we've beaten Ohio State once, Xavier once, Miami once, and Kentucky once. Good for us.

[Kedsy]

While it's true that UConn wallops us every time we play them, we've competed plenty with most other teams. In 2012 we lost by 2 points to Notre Dame; in 2010 we lost by 3 points to Baylor. Other competitive games against top 5 opponents include:

2008 -- beat #4 Rutgers
2008 -- beat #5 Maryland
2008 -- lost by 3 to #2 Tennessee
2008 -- lost by 5 to #4 Maryland
2009 -- beat #3 Stanford
2009 -- lost in OT to #4 Maryland
2010 -- beat #3 Ohio State
2011 -- beat #4 Xavier
2012 -- beat #5 Miami
2013 -- beat #5 Kentucky

Now, I'm making the assumption that a top 5 ranking makes a team "elite," and maybe you have a different definition, but the games I've mentioned above include either victories or competitive losses against Notre Dame, Baylor, Rutgers, Tennessee, Maryland, and Stanford, all of which I'd characterize as "well-coaches teams with elite talent." So I believe the worry you describe is unfounded.

To show the other side of this, in all Coach P's tenure here are all of Duke's double-digit non-conference, non-UConn losses:

2008 -- lost to Texas A&M by 14 in NCAAT
2008 -- lost @Vanderbilt by 13
2009 -- lost @Michigan State by 14 in NCAAT
2010 -- lost @Stanford by 16
2010 -- lost @Texas A&M by 18
2012 -- lost to Stanford by 12 in NCAAT
2013 -- lost to Notre Dame by 11 in NCAAT (w/o our best player)
2014 -- lost to Notre Dame by 21 @Duke (w/o our best player)

Only Stanford and Notre Dame were top 5 in the above list. So, by my count, not counting the UConn embarrassments, we have 5 wins against non-conference top 5 teams (including a win against Stanford); 4 double-digit losses to non-conference top 5 teams; and 3 close losses to "elite" non-conference programs (Tennessee, Baylor, Notre Dame).

Again, I posit this entire debate is really almost entirely about our inability to compete with UConn.

[GGLC]

To show the other side of this, in all Coach P's tenure here are all of Duke's double-digit non-conference, non-UConn losses:

2008 -- lost to Texas A&M by 14 in NCAAT
2008 -- lost @Vanderbilt by 13
2009 -- lost @Michigan State by 14 in NCAAT
2010 -- lost @Stanford by 16
2010 -- lost @Texas A&M by 18
2012 -- lost to Stanford by 12 in NCAAT
2013 -- lost to Notre Dame by 11 in NCAAT (w/o our best player)
2014 -- lost to Notre Dame by 21 @Duke (w/o our best player)

Only Stanford and Notre Dame were top 5 in the above list. So, by my count, not counting the UConn embarrassments, we have 5 wins against non-conference top 5 teams (including a win against Stanford); 4 double-digit losses to non-conference top 5 teams; and 3 close losses to "elite" non-conference programs (Tennessee, Baylor, Notre Dame).

Again, I posit this entire debate is really almost entirely about our inability to compete with UConn.

So in the last four seasons, we have beaten Xavier, Miami, Kentucky, and Ohio State once each, while losing by double digits in non-conference games to Stanford twice, Notre Dame twice, and Texas A&M. Putting Connecticut aside, of course.

And also putting Maryland aside, for some reason. How have we done against them the last four years?

[Kedsy]

By "more than once in a while," do you mean "once per season for each of the last four seasons"? Because that's what the chart that you provide indicates. And NONE of the wins/close losses in the last four seasons came against "Notre Dame, Baylor, Rutgers, Tennessee, Maryland, and Stanford," which are the teams from your chart that you yourself characterize as well-coached teams with elite talent.

So, yes, from 2010 forward we've beaten Ohio State once, Xavier once, Miami once, and Kentucky once. Good for us.

I don't understand. Why should only the last four seasons count? Other than it being pretty convenient for your argument since we beat Stanford in 2009, the season before your arbitrary cutoff.

Oh, and the close loss to Baylor (2011) and a close loss to Notre Dame (2012) both came in the last four seasons. And we've beaten Maryland 7 times since 2010, they just weren't in the top five at the time. So even with your arbitrary cutoff, your statement is very wrong.

[GGLC]

I don't understand. Why should only the last four seasons count? Other than it being pretty convenient for your argument since we beat Stanford in 2009, the season before your arbitrary cutoff.

Oh, and the close loss to Baylor (2011) and a close loss to Notre Dame (2012) both came in the last four seasons. And we've beaten Maryland 7 times since 2010, they just weren't in the top five at the time. So even with your arbitrary cutoff, your statement is very wrong.

You win, Kedsy. Everything's peachy here.

Get back to me when we win a game we're not "supposed" to.

[Kedsy]

So in the last four seasons, we have beaten Xavier, Miami, Kentucky, and Ohio State once each, while losing by double digits in non-conference games to Stanford twice, Notre Dame twice, and Texas A&M. Putting Connecticut aside, of course.

And also putting Maryland aside, for some reason. How have we done against them the last four years?

I took Maryland out of the second list because they are a conference opponent and we've dominated the conference. To answer your question, we've gone 7-2 against Maryland in the last four years.

Although I still don't understand what the last four years have to do with it. And I put in the Texas A&M game because they beat us by double-digits, but they weren't top 5 or "elite" so they shouldn't really come in to the discussion. But you also understand that we play a lot of non-conference games and we win nearly all of them, every year, right? I just didn't list the wins against non-"elite" teams like this year's 12-point road win @ #9 California, this year's 21 point win against #16 Purdue, this year's 9-point road win @ #17 Oklahoma, last year's 14-point win over #10 California, last year's 9-point win against #24 Nebraska, and so forth.

So I don't entirely understand your point.

[Duvall]

Again, I posit this entire debate is really almost entirely about our inability to compete with UConn.

Well, that and the sense that the addition of Notre Dame and, to a lesser extent, Louisville to the ACC means that Duke will be relegated to second-tier status in its own conference, let alone the country. That certainly seems to the case this year, we'll see if it's true going forward.

[Kedsy]

Get back to me when we win a game we're not "supposed" to.

How many such games have we played?

We've beaten two top 10 teams (#9 California and #5 Kentucky) on the road this year. Were we "supposed" to win both games? We beat Stanford (who was ranked #3 when we were ranked #8) in 2009. That's too far in the past for you? We were ranked #5 when we beat #7 Texas A&M (who'd beaten us badly the year before) in 2011. We were ranked 11th when we beat #3 Ohio State in 2010. We beat Miami in 2012 when they were ranked higher than we were. We've won at College Park and at Chapel Hill twice each in the past four years, once when we were ranked #5 and Maryland was ranked #8 (but playing at home).

Were we supposed to win all those? Or are you really saying, "get back to me when we either beat UConn or make a Final Four"?

[throatybeard]

The basic problem is related to the sport of women's basketball. In any other sport that I can think of, if you're consistently one of the best teams in the country during the regular season, you're eventually going to make your postseason's semifinals or finals or even win the title. And even if you're just good-but-not-great, you can still occasionally win the postseason, ie the Giants over the undefeated Patriots, Kemba Walker's UConn team, etc. Women's college basketball is the only sport I know of when there are years when the consensus 2nd best team in the country has no legitimate shot to win the national title. There have been years when it's more likely that a 16 seed beats a 1 in the men's game than it is that UConn doesn't win six in a row by double digits. It's ridiculous.

Here's my analogy: if you had to miss the 2004 Final Four because of some business meeting or whatever, but your friend spoiled the outcome of the Duke-UConn game to you, would you still be excited to watch a replay of the game? That's how I feel when Duke plays UConn in women's basketball. I am 100% sure that I know the outcome. It's a frustrating situation to be in, especially for a powerhouse program, and I don't think it's whiny or spoiled or whatever to feel annoyed by this - but I do think it says more about the sport than about Duke or Coach P.

This is a great point, and I'm having a hard time coming up with comparable situations. Perhaps a couple of decades for UNC women's soccer. I think back in the day, there were only a few elite men's wrestling teams, but that has changed.

I don't have a recent media guide. What is McCallie's record against UNC?

[Duvall]

This is a great point, and I'm having a hard time coming up with oparable situations. Perhaps a couple of decades for UNC women's soccer. I think back in the day, there were only a few elite men's wrestling teams, but that has changed.

Eh, not really. UConn has won the title in three of the last six years, but they've also *not* won the title in three of the last six years. So it's still disappointing for Duke to be uncompetitive even in UConn's off-years.

[Bob Green]

I don't have a recent media guide.

Here you go: https://admin.xosn.com/pdf9/2560591.pdf?SPSID=22751&SPID=1846&DB_OEM_ID=4200&DB_OEM_ID=4200

[Kedsy]

I don't have a recent media guide. What is McCallie's record against UNC?

Duke went 0-3 against UNC in P's first year and 9-3 since. Overall, she's 9-6 against Sylvia.

[Des Esseintes]

The basic problem is related to the sport of women's basketball. In any other sport that I can think of, if you're consistently one of the best teams in the country during the regular season, you're eventually going to make your postseason's semifinals or finals or even win the title. And even if you're just good-but-not-great, you can still occasionally win the postseason, ie the Giants over the undefeated Patriots, Kemba Walker's UConn team, etc. Women's college basketball is the only sport I know of when there are years when the consensus 2nd best team in the country has no legitimate shot to win the national title. There have been years when it's more likely that a 16 seed beats a 1 in the men's game than it is that UConn doesn't win six in a row by double digits. It's ridiculous.



This is a great point, and I'm having a hard time coming up with oparable situations. Perhaps a couple of decades for UNC women's soccer. I think back in the day, there were only a few elite men's wrestling teams, but that has changed.



Eh, not really. UConn has won the title in three of the last six years, but they've also *not* won the title in three of the last six years. So it's still disappointing for Duke to be uncompetitive even in UConn's off-years.
Yeah, it's worth remembering that dominant UConn teams are dominant because they have a preponderance of talent. When other women's BB teams have those preponderances, they are similarly dominant. With P's recruiting, I think it's only a matter of time before Duke has one of the three best players in the country, healthy, at tournament time. And that year I expect Duke to make a Final Four.

[Bob Green]

Here are the game notes:

https://www.nmnathletics.com//pdf9/2636002.pdf?ATCLID=209401164&SPSID=22760&SPID=1846&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=4200

McCallie is 9-8 against the Heels.

[Kedsy]

Here are the game notes:

https://www.nmnathletics.com//pdf9/2636002.pdf?ATCLID=209401164&SPSID=22760&SPID=1846&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=4200

McCallie is 9-8 against the Heels.

Were two of the losses while she wasn't at Duke? That shouldn't count.

[Bob Green]

Were two of the losses while she wasn't at Duke? That shouldn't count.

I agree. Thanks for the correction.

[Kedsy]

Well, that and the sense that the addition of Notre Dame and, to a lesser extent, Louisville to the ACC means that Duke will be relegated to second-tier status in its own conference, let alone the country. That certainly seems to the case this year, we'll see if it's true going forward.

You really think Louisville will year-in and year-out be better than Maryland has been over the past years? That would surprise me. Also, you appear to be equating second best with "second-tier status." Does the fact that in men's basketball Syracuse might be better than Duke this season mean Coach K's program has been relegated to second-tier status? And while I agree Notre Dame appeared to be the better team when they played the other day (thus relegating Duke to the 2nd-best team in the conference), I would also remind you that Duke lost its best player to injury. Under these circumstances I don't see why you think it's already a trend.

[burnspbesq]

If it is legitimate to be talking about firing P based on her record, we should be talking about firing every Duke coach except K, Dano, Cut, and Brooks. And maybe we should be talking about firing Brooks: after all, it's been eight years since women's golf won its last national championship.

That's how absurd this thread has become.

In fact, let's fire Dano. We only beat Jacksonville by six, so the decline and fall is clearly imminent.

[Kedsy]

In Coach P's first season, Duke went 2-8 against higher-ranked teams (at the time of the game). In the five-plus seasons since then (2008-09 to the present), she's gone:

0-6 against UConn (UConn was better ranked than Duke going into every game)
3-5 against higher-ranked teams other than UConn (including this year's loss to Notre Dame)
2-0 against top five teams that Duke outranked
3-1 in true road games against teams ranked within three spots of Duke

In Coach G's last five seasons at Duke (2002-03 to 2006-07), she went:

2-1 against UConn (but Duke was better ranked than UConn in 2 of the 3 games)
3-4 against higher ranked teams other than UConn
6-5 against top five teams that Duke outranked (*not* counting one loss against UConn when we were #1 and they were #2)
3-1 in true road games against teams ranked within three spots of Duke

So, other than performance against UConn, to me these charts look pretty similar. Again, I think the problem is entirely a UConn issue.

And I'm not saying our inability to beat UConn is unimportant, but considering UConn went to all five Final Fours from 2009 to 2013 (three championships), and only went to two Final Fours from 2003 to 2007*, I would argue it's not as big a deal as people are making it out to be.



* UConn missed the Final Four in 2005, 2006, and 2007, although they only missed in 2006 because Duke beat them in the Elite Eight. They won the championship in 2003 and 2004. Our two wins against UConn came in years they missed the Final Four. Perhaps not coincidentally, our one UConn loss in this era came in one of their two Final Four/championship years.

[Duvall]

If it is legitimate to be talking about firing P based on her record, we should be talking about firing every Duke coach except K, Dano, Cut, and Brooks. And maybe we should be talking about firing Brooks: after all, it's been eight years since women's golf won its last national championship.

That's how absurd this thread has become.

In fact, let's fire Dano. We only beat Jacksonville by six, so the decline and fall is clearly imminent.

I agree that Duke is a tough spot. McCallie has been too good to fire, but not good enough to compete for championships. Nothing to do but wait it out, I guess.

[Des Esseintes]

* UConn missed the Final Four in 2005, 2006, and 2007, although they only missed in 2006 because Duke beat them in the Elite Eight. They won the championship in 2003 and 2004. Our two wins against UConn came in years they missed the Final Four. Perhaps not coincidentally, our one UConn loss in this era came in one of their two Final Four/championship years.
Exactly. Part of G having a better record than P against UConn is that recent UConn teams have been ridiculously good. Geno has been the coach throughout this entire period, but some stretches he had better horses than others. Meanwhile, G had Alana Beard for many of those UConn tilts, and McCallie has yet to have as great a player.

[Duvall]

Exactly. Part of G having a better record than P against UConn is that recent UConn teams have been ridiculously good. Geno has been the coach throughout this entire period, but some stretches he had better horses than others. Meanwhile, G had Alana Beard for many of those UConn tilts, and McCallie has yet to have as great a player.

Yet to have, or yet to develop? Player development also matters.

[Des Esseintes]

Yet to have, or yet to develop? Player development also matters.

Absolutely it does. But let's not forget that Rick Barnes was Kevin Durant's college coach.

[Kedsy]

I agree that Duke is a tough spot. McCallie has been too good to fire, but not good enough to compete for championships. Nothing to do but wait it out, I guess.

Well, except Coach P has competed for a national championship, coaching in the national championship game in 2005. So clearly she is "good enough" to do it. She just hasn't done it for Duke yet.


Yet to have, or yet to develop? Player development also matters.

Oh, please. Alana Beard was Duke's leading scorer as a freshman and was by far Duke's best player the moment she stepped on campus. How much did Coach G "develop" her?

And Chelsea Gray was a first-team All American last season, even after she missed the last weeks of the season with an injury. So Coach P can "develop" players too.

[miramar]

I agree that Duke is a tough spot. McCallie has been too good to fire, but not good enough to compete for championships. Nothing to do but wait it out, I guess.

I don't think that we need to roll out the tumbrils or anything, but I also assume that we won't be having this conversation ten years in, so I would expect that the situation will sort itself out one way or another.

At the end of the day Duke WBB needs to start reaching the Final Four, which so far has proven elusive since in the last six years Duke has lost in the tournament by 11-14 points five times (ND, Stanford, Baylor, MSU, and A&M), along with one blowout at the hands of UConn. No matter what your final rankings are, elite teams don't lost by double digits in six straight NCAA tournaments.

During those six years, ten teams have reached the Final Four--six multiple times (UConn 6, Stanford 5, ND 3, and Louisville, Oklahoma, and Baylor 2) and four once (Tennessee, LSU, A&M, and Cal)--so there is no reason why Duke can't crash the party.

It's also true that Coach P reached the championship game in 2005 with MSU, but that's a two-edged sword. Many people (and I'm one of them) assumed that if she could get to the Final Four with a team like Michigan State, then we could certainly expect her to do the same with Duke. As far as I am concerned, that assumption still stands.

[vick]

I don't think that we need to roll out the tumbrils or anything, but I also assume that we won't be having this conversation ten years in, so I would expect that the situation will sort itself out one way or another.

At the end of the day Duke WBB needs to start reaching the Final Four, which so far has proven elusive since in the last six years Duke has lost in the tournament by 11-14 points five times (ND, Stanford, Baylor, MSU, and A&M), along with one blowout at the hands of UConn. No matter what your final rankings are, elite teams don't lost by double digits in six straight NCAA tournaments.

During those six years, ten teams have reached the Final Four--six multiple times (UConn 6, Stanford 5, ND 3, and Louisville, Oklahoma, and Baylor 2) and four once (Tennessee, LSU, A&M, and Cal)--so there is no reason why Duke can't crash the party.

It's also true that Coach P reached the championship game in 2005 with MSU, but that's a two-edged sword. Many people (and I'm one of them) assumed that if she could get to the Final Four with a team like Michigan State, then we could certainly expect her to do the same with Duke. As far as I am concerned, that assumption still stands.

I don't think this is so clear. I can think of a coach who failed to reach a single Final Four in 13 seasons at a school, and no championship games in the first 15. Nevertheless, holding on to John Wooden seemed to have worked out well for UCLA.

[Kedsy]

At the end of the day Duke WBB needs to start reaching the Final Four, which so far has proven elusive since in the last six years Duke has lost in the tournament by 11-14 points five times (ND, Stanford, Baylor, MSU, and A&M), along with one blowout at the hands of UConn. No matter what your final rankings are, elite teams don't lost by double digits in six straight NCAA tournaments.

We lost by 3 to Baylor in 2010. So we haven't lost by double-digits in six straight NCAA tournaments.

But not counting 2010, you're right that we've lost by double-digits in the other five tournaments during Coach P's tenure. But tell me, which of the following is a better five-year performance (excluding 2010 in both charts)?

2013: Lost by 11 in Elite Eight
2012: Lost by 12 in Elite Eight
2011: Lost by 35 in Elite Eight
2009: Lost by 14 to #9 seed in Round of 32
2008: Lost by 14 to #2 seed in Sweet 16

OR

2013: Lost by 22 in Elite Eight
2012: Lost by 5 to #15 seed in Round of 64
2011: Lost by 16 to #4 seed in Sweet 16
2009: Lost by 23 to #3 seed in Sweet 16
2008: Lost by 6 to #7 seed in Round of 32

I know it's not double-digits every year, but I'd argue that losing by 14 on a #9 seed's home floor is no worse than losing by 6 to a #7 seed on a neutral floor. And that losing to a #15 by 6 in the Round of 64 is WAY worse than losing by 12 to a #1 seed in the Elite Eight.

And yet, despite performing worse than Coach P's record during these five seasons, I'd still call Coach K's Duke team "elite." How about you?

[Kedsy]

I don't think this is so clear. I can think of a coach who failed to reach a single Final Four in 13 seasons at a school, and no championship games in the first 15. Nevertheless, holding on to John Wooden seemed to have worked out well for UCLA.

Actually, Wooden went 15 years without a Final Four. He only made the NCAA tournament five times in those first 15 years.

[vick]

Actually, Wooden went 15 years without a Final Four. He only made the NCAA tournament five times in those first 15 years.

15 years overall (two at Indiana State), but 13 at UCLA, which is the apples-to-apples comparison I was trying to make with McCallie. I believe Wooden reached the 1962 Final Four in his fourteenth season there. But this is a quibble, the point is, going well over a decade somewhere without crossing the mystical "championship" barrier in no way indicates you can't do it in the future, or even that you won't be the best there ever was at winning championships.

[Kedsy]

15 years overall (two at Indiana State), but 13 at UCLA, which is the apples-to-apples comparison I was trying to make with McCallie. I believe Wooden reached the 1962 Final Four in his fourteenth season there. But this is a quibble, the point is, going well over a decade somewhere without crossing the mystical "championship" barrier in no way indicates you can't do it in the future, or even that you won't be the best there ever was at winning championships.

Agreed. Sorry about nitpicking.

[Class of '94]

I want to reiterate, I'm not suggesting that Coach P should be fired now; and I could be wrong, but I don't believe "Coach P should be fired" comes up every time after Duke loses. Again, after losing to an elite team like ND and Uconn again this year and neither game was competitive, it makes you wonder whether or not Coach P can get the Duke program back to a Final 4 this season, especially when you consider their recent results in the NCAAT.

To Kedsy's points, Duke has beaten teams like Tenn and Stanford earlier, and was competitive in some elite 8 games. That being said, Duke hasn't beaten those elite teams in the NCAAT, under Coach P, to breakthrough to a Final 4. And I think the results over the losses to Uconn and ND this season makes you wonder if Duke can get to a Final 4 this season because more than likely Duke will have to be a team like Uconn or ND to do so (and personally right now I don't believe they can). Granted, losing Chelsea was a big loss; however, we had her for the Uconn game earlier this season; and still Duke got hosed in Cameron by Uconn. Moreover, we had a healthy Chelsea at Duke for her first 2 years; and Duke still didn't make it through to a Final 4. And while I do not consider Louisville to be an elite team or have had the recent sustained success that Duke has had, Louisville still make it to a Final 4 and upsetting (with lesser talent) a current elite team in Baylor to do so. Moreover, Duke didn't always have to play Uconn (which imo has been the one super dominant program during Coach P's tenure) to make it to a Final 4; and Duke still failed to make it there.

Wins over top 10 teams in the regular season are great; but it's a double-edged sword because it could lead one to believe that Duke has the talent to make a Final 4. To this point, that simply hasn't happened yet for a variety of reasons. Coach G did the unexpected and broke through with her first Final 4 team; and that team beat a higher ranked team to get there. Despite the run that Uconn has had, I firmly believe that Duke under Coach P has had the talent to make it to a Final 4; and just hasn't done it yet. It doesn't mean she won't; and she most certainly has earned to the right to have more time to do so.

[miramar]

2013: Lost by 22 in Elite Eight
2012: Lost by 5 to #15 seed in Round of 64
2011: Lost by 16 to #4 seed in Sweet 16
2009: Lost by 23 to #3 seed in Sweet 16
2008: Lost by 6 to #7 seed in Round of 32

I know it's not double-digits every year, but I'd argue that losing by 14 on a #9 seed's home floor is no worse than losing by 6 to a #7 seed on a neutral floor. And that losing to a #15 by 6 in the Round of 64 is WAY worse than losing by 12 to a #1 seed in the Elite Eight.

And yet, despite performing worse than Coach P's record during these five seasons, I'd still call Coach K's Duke team "elite." How about you?

I hear you, but I would include the 2010 team in the stats. But even if we add that championship team, I would say that some of the other teams were deeply flawed.

I would say that in 2013 Coach K did a really great job of getting to the elite eight since Ryan was not fully recovered, Seth couldn't play back to back games, and Quin had disappeared. The 2012 team simply wasn't very good. The 2011 team was outstanding at the beginning of the year, but it wasn't the same team after Kyrie's injury. Not to mention that Arizona would have pummeled absolutely any team in the country that night. So I would say that those were not elite teams by the time they got to the NCAAs.

I think that it's good to have a friendly exchange of opinions on this and any other topic, especially since I think that the jury is still out on this question.

[Des Esseintes]

And yet, despite performing worse than Coach P's record during these five seasons, I'd still call Coach K's Duke team "elite." How about you?


I hear you, but I would include the 2010 team in the stats. But even if we add that championship team, I would say that some of the other teams were deeply flawed.

I would say that in 2013 Coach K did a really great job of getting to the elite eight since Ryan was not fully recovered, Seth couldn't play back to back games, and Quin had disappeared. The 2012 team simply wasn't very good. The 2011 team was outstanding at the beginning of the year, but it wasn't the same team after Kyrie's injury. Not to mention that Arizona would have pummeled absolutely any team in the country that night. So I would say that those were not elite teams by the time they got to the NCAAs.

I think that it's good to have a friendly exchange of opinions on this and any other topic, especially since I think that the jury is still out on this question.

So there you go, Kedsy. Turns out, Duke's men's team isn't elite either! Betcha didn't think we'd end up here, but the message board is an amazing invention where all things are possible.

[throatybeard]

The best part of this absurd argument is that we get to have it again following Duke WBB's season-terminal loss. Maybe a bonus one if we stumble against Carolina, or Notre Dame beats us down in the ACCT Final.

My hope is that Kedsy has as much energy then as he does now to ward off the fire-McCallie crowd.

[uh_no]

i've been reading this thread, but haven't said too much because it really is an interesting topic...and i'm not sure I have any definitive opinion, but as someone who cares about women's college basketball a good deal, I find the conclusions people are reaching very interesting.

I see a few things:

a lot of people down on P, but for seemingly abstract reasons which are difficult to articulate (performance, public actions)
people who are refuting those points using actual data

Do I think either of those groups are wrong? no.

I find the data that P has performers compelling. But I also find myself not being a huge fan of her as a coach...so I have to ask myself why? after some reflection, I came to the following reasons:

people look at uconn, ND, Bayloar and see the success, they look at the talent that duke brings in, and say "why not us?

people look at the performance against the standards, especially uconn, and get extremely frustrated with the results.

and lastly, people look at the reasons we lose those games and see no improvement.


there is no doubt that P has brought in great athletes....I don't think any team in the country wouldn't be satisfied with the guys that are coming in here...uconn, ND, stanford included. so why do those teams not have issues competing with each-other? why do they reach the final four seemingly annually? do I think that geno or muffet could take one of the duke teams the past couple of years and contend for a national title? 100% yes....heck people like E-will and haley were heavily recruited by uconn...

Take a look at the players on ND any given year....are they that much better than duke's? nope....and yet ND gave uconn fits running on 3 years....beating them something like 6/8 times....and yet duke can't beat them once....we can't beat either team.

and what makes it all the worse (aside from having top notch talent) is that we lose the same way....going through a stretch where we can't score the darn ball....a money quote came from a uconn player after a loss...and I can't find the exact quote, but it was something akin to "we know they're going to go through a stretch when they wouldn't score...so we didn't get nervous, we just kept playing hard and waited for it"...

the opponents are so accustomed to the offense, that they know it will stall....wan't another?

what was coach P's first reason for the loss?


We didn't do what we needed to do defensively...

so we have opponents saying duke's offense is bad, yet P still jumps to 1) defense, 2) rebounding, 3) offense


...We didn't rebound the way we need to rebound. And we showed little patience on offense at critical times.

as a fan hearing that, how do you not want to throw a brick and say "WHY IS THE 10 MINUTES WE WENT SCORING 3 POINTS NOT THE FIRST ISSUE??!?!?"

in 3 of their 4 losses last year, they still put up 70+ points...and yet year after year P comes out thinking the way to beat them is to slow down uconn's offense and hope Duke's offense works itself out.....couple years ago she said stuff like "the way to score points is to take a shot and let E-will get the offensive rebound" again, I don't have the exact quote....but that's nuts! how can you take stuff like that and say "this is a a coach with the ability to make duke among the best teams in the country year in and year out and win a few titles"

I watch a lot of uconn women....and so to some degree I'm spoiled.....but i watch some duke women...and as good as the offense is against bad teams, it's not developed, it's not mature, and the results show when the rubber hits the road...and the opponents know how to deal with it...this is certainly cherry picking, but lets look at the 10-11 team:

in 4 losses, duke scored

51
60
47
40

they also had the following wins:

61-55 over CHARLOTTE
46-43 over xavier
54-48 over UK

it's certainly gotten somewhat better over the past couple years, but the fact remains, and this, I think is the thesis:

Duke cannot consistently score for 40 minutes against top teams, and coach P has no idea how to fix that.

that's it. We all see the results, and the results aren't bad, but we also see the issues, THIS issue, and we see no evidence that it will get better, and as a fan, that is extremely frustrating...to know that the years go on, the team flaws will remain the same, and likely will do so so long as the head coach is here....and THAT is why people want a change, is that an invalid feeling? I don't think so...I also think that while it is frustrating, finding someone who will necessarily be better might be a tall task....and likely one not worth the risk.

so Coach P is a great recruiter, and an okay coach....I think there are better coaches out there who might not be able to recruit like P does....and the same could be said for someone like, say, Roy Williams, and I think this board would be equally as frustrated with Roy...despite his having won TWO titles....

and that's all I have to say about that....best of luck to the team this year and in the future.

[Duvall]

The best part of this absurd argument is that we get to have it again following Duke WBB's season-terminal loss. Maybe a bonus one if we stumble against Carolina, or Notre Dame beats us down in the ACCT Final.

My hope is that Kedsy has as much energy then as he does now to ward off the fire-McCallie crowd.

Well, there's also the beatdown Duke will catch in South Bend, but maybe we can just keep this thread rolling until then.

[killerleft]

Yet to have, or yet to develop? Player development also matters.

I sure wish Chelsea had developed. What might we have seen out of Tricia, if she had only developed? Karima Christmas, she could have been a pro. Too bad Jasmine Thomas never got any better. Alison Vernerey, pfft. It's a wonder we ever won a game.:rolleyes:

[burnspbesq]

Meanwhile, Louisville, one of the programs we're allegedly in danger of slipping behind ... just got curb-stomped by UConn.

[miramar]

Meanwhile, Louisville, one of the programs we're allegedly in danger of slipping behind ... just got curb-stomped by UConn.

UConn has beaten #3 Stanford by 19, #4 Louisville by 17, #5 Duke by 22, #6 Baylor by 11, and #9 Maryland by 19. They don't play #2 Notre Dame this year now that the Irish are in the ACC, but apparently a home and home series starts next year.

[uh_no]

Meanwhile, Louisville, one of the programs we're allegedly in danger of slipping behind ... just got curb-stomped by UConn.

lousicille also doesn't have near the talent that duke does....lets take a look at the recruiting rankings through the year:

2008:
duke 5
UL 13

09:
duke 34
UL 23

10:
duke 1
UL 5

11:
duke 4
UL 7

12:
duke 7
UL unranked

13
duke 2
UL unranked

14
duke 2
UL 8

so aside from 1 year (which has already graduated), duke has outrecruited UL, and in the past 2 years, it has been by a significant margin

This is key in the frustration....duke seems unable to perform better than teams with substantially less talent do against uconn.

[Indoor66]

lousicille also doesn't have near the talent that duke does....lets take a look at the recruiting rankings through the year:

2008:
duke 5
UL 13

09:
duke 34
UL 23

10:
duke 1
UL 5

11:
duke 4
UL 7

12:
duke 7
UL unranked

13
duke 2
UL unranked

14
duke 2
UL 8

so aside from 1 year (which has already graduated), duke has out recruited UL, and in the past 2 years, it has been by a significant margin

This is key in the frustration....duke seems unable to perform better than teams with substantially less talent do against uconn.

Frankly, the differences appear to me to be quite negligible considering the usual inaccuracy of most recruiting rankings.

[uh_no]

Frankly, the differences appear to me to be quite negligible considering the usual inaccuracy of most recruiting rankings.

Right... the difference between consecutive top 10 and unranked is negligible...

[Kfanarmy]

We lost by 3 to Baylor in 2010. So we haven't lost by double-digits in six straight NCAA tournaments.

But not counting 2010, you're right that we've lost by double-digits in the other five tournaments during Coach P's tenure. But tell me, which of the following is a better five-year performance (excluding 2010 in both charts)?

2013: Lost by 11 in Elite Eight
2012: Lost by 12 in Elite Eight
2011: Lost by 35 in Elite Eight
2009: Lost by 14 to #9 seed in Round of 32
2008: Lost by 14 to #2 seed in Sweet 16

OR

2013: Lost by 22 in Elite Eight
2012: Lost by 5 to #15 seed in Round of 64
2011: Lost by 16 to #4 seed in Sweet 16
2009: Lost by 23 to #3 seed in Sweet 16
2008: Lost by 6 to #7 seed in Round of 32

I know it's not double-digits every year, but I'd argue that losing by 14 on a #9 seed's home floor is no worse than losing by 6 to a #7 seed on a neutral floor. And that losing to a #15 by 6 in the Round of 64 is WAY worse than losing by 12 to a #1 seed in the Elite Eight.

And yet, despite performing worse than Coach P's record during these five seasons, I'd still call Coach K's Duke team "elite." How about you?comparing results of any men's team to those of a women's team is not very helpful. There is virtually no parity in WBB.

[Mike Corey]

Briefly, I just wanted to thank everyone for what has been a spirited back and forth about the past, present, and future of Duke women's basketball.

Now let's beat the crap out of C*rolina.

[DukieInKansas]

briefly, i just wanted to thank everyone for what has been a spirited back and forth about the past, present, and future of duke women's basketball.

Now let's beat the crap out of c*rolina.

amen!


9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f 9f

[msdukie]

The best part of this absurd argument is that we get to have it again following Duke WBB's season-terminal loss. Maybe a bonus one if we stumble against Carolina, or Notre Dame beats us down in the ACCT Final.

My hope is that Kedsy has as much energy then as he does now to ward off the fire-McCallie crowd.

Well, let's get at it....

[AIM4excellence]

Briefly, I just wanted to thank everyone for what has been a spirited back and forth about the past, present, and future of Duke women's basketball.

Now let's beat the crap out of C*rolina.

As someone new to this forum, I went looking for past threads about women's games. I have to say that the contributions of Mike Corey are the most compelling. I had come to similar conclusions for similar reasons before reading his summaries here. I am very happy, of course that the team stomped Maryland's butt. But I've gone too many seasons getting my hopes up yet again, only to face the same disappointment year after year. It was Chelsea's electric play that made this team fun to watch. Now that she's no longer on the floor, the fun is just gone. Watching the Maryland game on TV, I did not for a minute wish I had made the effort to go.

Those of you who are happy with the program: more power to you. But you're not going to make the rest of us feel any differently by beating us over the head with winning percentage. You may think that those of us who've given up on this coach are all flawed from having expectations that are too high or unrealistic. To be ultra-clear - I am NOT calling to fire the coach. It's just not fun anymore, which is sad for me and others.

I do have to say that I'm glad I found a place where some have very articulately spelled out what I've seen and felt. Kudos.

[Des Esseintes]

As someone new to this forum, I went looking for past threads about women's games. I have to say that the contributions of Mike Corey are the most compelling. I had come to similar conclusions for similar reasons before reading his summaries here. I am very happy, of course that the team stomped Maryland's butt. But I've gone too many seasons getting my hopes up yet again, only to face the same disappointment year after year. It was Chelsea's electric play that made this team fun to watch. Now that she's no longer on the floor, the fun is just gone. Watching the Maryland game on TV, I did not for a minute wish I had made the effort to go.

Those of you who are happy with the program: more power to you. But you're not going to make the rest of us feel any differently by beating us over the head with winning percentage. You may think that those of us who've given up on this coach are all flawed from having expectations that are too high or unrealistic. To be ultra-clear - I am NOT calling to fire the coach. It's just not fun anymore, which is sad for me and others.

I do have to say that I'm glad I found a place where some have very articulately spelled out what I've seen and felt. Kudos.

This injury-decimated team routs a hated top-10 rival by 20+, and a day later this is your takeaway. I agree. It's sad for you.

Hopefully, sweetness, a day will come when you can walk again in sunshine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H888yfanNr8&feature=kp

[AIM4excellence]

This injury-decimated team routs a hated top-10 rival by 20+, and a day later this is your takeaway. I agree. It's sad for you.

Hopefully, sweetness, a day will come when you can walk again in sunshine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H888yfanNr8&feature=kp

Like I said, I've gotten my hopes up WAY too many times before only to have them dashed to smithereens. There's always an excuse. I'm done with excuses. I want results. And a regular season beatdown, even of Maryland, is not the result I'm looking for. Maryland is not a top 10 ten - not by a longshot. If there was one season where the team achieved less than they should on paper, that would be one thing. But year after year...different year, different excuse. The thing that made me mad when Chelsea went down was I saw it coming "now she has an excuse for this year."

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. Just stating what has become true for me. Just wondering, are you a season ticket holder? How many games do you go to? This team still has plenty of talent, but will again go nowhere in March. I want them to prove me wrong, but no longer believe that will happen.

[Kedsy]

Maryland is not a top 10 te[am] - not by a longshot.

Well, before Duke beat them, Maryland was ranked #8, so I suppose it depends on whether your definition of "top 10 team" is based on, you know, whether a team is in the top 10, or whether it's some mythical comparison in your own mind.

[miramar]

Well, before Duke beat them, Maryland was ranked #8, so I suppose it depends on whether your definition of "top 10 team" is based on, you know, whether a team is in the top 10, or whether it's some mythical comparison in your own mind.

Maryland was of course ranked number eight, but I have to admit that I don't understand the women's rankings. After UNC lost three in a row, they were still #13 IIRC. Duke WBB had two double-digit losses at home and they were ranked #7.

Fortunately, Duke did play like the #7 team in the country, but I get the impression that they could have gone oh for February and they would have still been in the top 25. I get the talent differentials and all that, but these results are just seem strange to me.

[Wander]

Maryland was of course ranked number eight, but I have to admit that I don't understand the women's rankings. After UNC lost three in a row, they were still #13 IIRC. Duke WBB had two double-digit losses at home and they were ranked #7.

1. Women's college basketball is such that the #7 team in the country can legitimately be 40 points worse than the #1 team. I think this is basically the source of frustration here - in men's college basketball, if you're the #7 team playing at home against the #1 team, you probably win that game, what, 5 out of 10 times?

2. With the above being said: the #7 team in men's college basketball has two 20 point losses to UNRANKED teams, so I'm not sure why you find Duke's ranking particularly strange.

[Des Esseintes]

1. Women's college basketball is such that the #7 team in the country can legitimately be 40 points worse than the #1 team. I think this is basically the source of frustration here - in men's college basketball, if you're the #7 team playing at home against the #1 team, you probably win that game, what, 5 out of 10 times?

2. With the above being said: the #7 team in men's college basketball has two 20 point losses to UNRANKED teams, so I'm not sure why you find Duke's ranking particularly strange.

At home? It depends on how strong the #1 is, but Pomeroy and his percentages say the #7 probably wins six or seven of those games. Agreed on everything else.

[CameronBornAndBred]

When was the last post made in this thread that was actually about the ND game? Shouldn't it be re-titled to "Coach P Sucks" or something so it is at least on topic again?
:rolleyes:

[miramar]

1. Women's college basketball is such that the #7 team in the country can legitimately be 40 points worse than the #1 team. I think this is basically the source of frustration here - in men's college basketball, if you're the #7 team playing at home against the #1 team, you probably win that game, what, 5 out of 10 times?

The WBB rankings seem to be a bit like the Richter scale, where each number is ten times as powerful as the one below. The rankings may not be quite geometric, but I suppose that the tremendous drop off is the natural result of the talent differential in the women's game.

[AIM4excellence]

When was the last post made in this thread that was actually about the ND game? Shouldn't it be re-titled to "Coach P Sucks" or something so it is at least on topic again?
:rolleyes:

I suppose this is my fault for not being here yet. But I really take issue with the pro-McCallie folks being so defensive about any/all criticism of the coach. There have been plenty of well-reasoned criticisms along with some of us who have been longtime loyal fans who just don't enjoy being fans of this team anymore. So you want to attack us for what you see as a character flaw? Have you been out there for years and years, getting your hopes up to return to the Final Four and year after year getting your hopes crashed and burned? You have no idea what it's like to no longer enjoy something you've done every winter for years.

This fits in the thread of the Notre Dame loss due to this game signifies the changing of the guard at the top of the ACC women's basketball standings. It's fitting that the loss to UNC soon followed. Maryland is off to the B1G. Maybe the victory over Maryland keeps Duke as a top 4 seed and 1st round bye in the ACC tourney, which is good. BIG games coming up vs NC State and at UNC to see if Duke finishes in the top 4.

[Kedsy]

Have you been out there for years and years, getting your hopes up to return to the Final Four and year after year getting your hopes crashed and burned?

You're absolutely right. None of us have been rooting for Duke for those six long years since Coach P took over. We all started rooting for Duke just last week.

Seriously, if you want to renounce your fandom because Duke has only made four straight Elite Eights, and can only be happy if the team had won one more game in one of those seasons, then go ahead. But if you can no longer enjoy being a fan, why do you bother posting at all, then?


You have no idea what it's like to no longer enjoy something you've done every winter for years.

Actually, I used to love getting dressed in my snow pants and spending the whole day sledding, building snow forts and having snowball fights. Now, not so much. And yet, I survived, without blaming anybody else for the change in my attitude.

[Duvall]

Maybe the victory over Maryland keeps Duke as a top 4 seed and 1st round bye in the ACC tourney, which is good. BIG games coming up vs NC State and at UNC to see if Duke finishes in the top 4.

Not sure how much the game at UNC will matter for the standings - a win over NC State would give Duke a two-game or more lead for the #2 seed over everyone with only three games left to play, with tiebreakers over Maryland and NC State.

[aswewere]

You're absolutely right. None of us have been rooting for Duke for those six long years since Coach P took over. We all started rooting for Duke just last week.

Seriously, if you want to renounce your fandom because Duke has only made four straight Elite Eights, and can only be happy if the team had won one more game in one of those seasons, then go ahead. But if you can no longer enjoy being a fan, why do you bother posting at all, then?



Actually, I used to love getting dressed in my snow pants and spending the whole day sledding, building snow forts and having snowball fights. Now, not so much. And yet, I survived, without blaming anybody else for the change in my attitude.

Some things change and some don't, like our offense which was nice in the 90s. Lets leave the twitter and the asst. coaches episode's for another day.

[Kedsy]

Some things change and some don't, like our offense which was nice in the 90s.

In the '90s? We made the Final Four in 1999 and the Sweet 16 in 1998 and that was it for the decade. And I don't remember our offense looking any "nicer" then than it does now.

I'll take Coach P's record over that any day of the week.

Maybe you meant 2002 to 2007? Granted, that was the best six year stretch in Duke women's basketball history. The next best 6-year stretch has been the last six years with Coach P.

[AIM4excellence]

You're absolutely right. None of us have been rooting for Duke for those six long years since Coach P took over. We all started rooting for Duke just last week.

Seriously, if you want to renounce your fandom because Duke has only made four straight Elite Eights, and can only be happy if the team had won one more game in one of those seasons, then go ahead. But if you can no longer enjoy being a fan, why do you bother posting at all, then?



Actually, I used to love getting dressed in my snow pants and spending the whole day sledding, building snow forts and having snowball fights. Now, not so much. And yet, I survived, without blaming anybody else for the change in my attitude.

Okay, I'm just going to ignore the snarkiness here. The question isn't whether you've been there since McCallie arrived - it's whether you were a fan of this team before she arrived. If you can't see a big difference in the game experience in the last six years vs before that, then that probably explains a lot of why you're satisfied and why I'm not.

I never "renounced" being a fan of Duke women's basketball. That's exactly why I'm here! I wanted to find people who felt similarly to me.

I'm not "upset" that Duke lost their last game of the season the last six years. It is so much deeper than that. I think only 2 Div.1 teams win their last game, so that would be silly. I simply do not like the style (or lack thereof) that is being played and feel that directly leads to the end result. I know we have very talented young women playing for Duke, and don't feel they are able to achieve as a group as much as their talent indicates they should. The result is less than the sum of the parts. Different people are drawn more to different aspects of competition and my favorite part is when players are able to achieve MORE, not less than expected. I am also very put off by the sophomoric behavior of the head coach in social media and think this program deserves much better.

I am not campaigning to fire McCallie, so please don't make that or other assumptions. I do want a program that is exciting to watch again and a coach I can be proud of. I simply cannot support a coach who behaves the way McCallie does. I just can't. You can make fun of that all you want to, I frankly don't care. I get that these things are not important to you. Fine. But they are important to me. I want the fun of players who surprise themselves with what they are able to accomplish.

[burnspbesq]

Some things change and some don't, like our offense which was nice in the 90s. Lets leave the twitter and the asst. coaches episode's for another day.

Nothing about Duke women's basketball was nice until (a) the Purdue program melted down in 1997 and Coach G convinced Michelle Van Gorp and Nicole Erickson to transfer to Duke and (b) Pat Summit inexplicably failed to recruit a kid from Shreveport who desperately wanted to be a Lady Vol, and she fell in G's lap. There was the occasional nice player (Ali Day, Kira Orr), and the occasional nice win (I remember a four-overtime job against Bama), but in the grand scheme of things Duke women's basketball was utterly irrelevant until 1999.

[burnspbesq]

Interesting. I just noticed that the "join date" for the two commenters who are driving the anti-P side of this thread is "Feb 2014."

Fellas, where ya been all this time (FWIW, I started coming to DBR when it was still one page on Juliovision, c. 1995)? Did you join just to rant? Or can we expect to see some actual, you know, analysis from you in future WBB threads?

Do you promise to at least pretend to be happy if Duke wins on Sunday?

[AIM4excellence]

Nothing about Duke women's basketball was nice until (a) the Purdue program melted down in 1997 and Coach G convinced Michelle Van Gorp and Nicole Erickson to transfer to Duke and (b) Pat Summit inexplicably failed to recruit a kid from Shreveport who desperately wanted to be a Lady Vol, and she fell in G's lap. There was the occasional nice player (Ali Day, Kira Orr), and the occasional nice win (I remember a four-overtime job against Bama), but in the grand scheme of things Duke women's basketball was utterly irrelevant until 1999.

Wow. So Coach G was just "lucky." Here's what I saw. From the very first game Coach G coached at Duke, the instituted changes that were exciting to watch. She slowly built momentum and recruited players that fit the motion offense she taught and could carry out the many different offensive and defensive schemes she had in her bag of tricks. Bringing Michelle and Nicole to Duke did kick the team into overdrive and they rose fast after that. That victory over Tennessee in '99 was epic. And likewise the recruiting of Alana Beard. Coach G's note after watching her for the first time went something like "best women's bball player I've ever seen." Then Alana got injured and fell off the top of the recruiting world during prime time. So Coach G got the one player she really, really, really wanted. But, yeah, she "fell in her lap."

And, by the way, Duke LOST the quadruple overtime game! Then turned around and went to their first Final Four. It doesn't make the current coach look better to downplay the achievement of the coach who came before. Especially when the current coach hasn't even matched those achievements.

[AIM4excellence]

Interesting. I just noticed that the "join date" for the two commenters who are driving the anti-P side of this thread is "Feb 2014."

Fellas, where ya been all this time (FWIW, I started coming to DBR when it was still one page on Juliovision, c. 1995)? Did you join just to rant? Or can we expect to see some actual, you know, analysis from you in future WBB threads?

Do you promise to at least pretend to be happy if Duke wins on Sunday?

My bad. I didn't realize this forum included people following the women's program. I've been cheering for the Duke women for lots of years. Ranting? Is that what you call everyone who doesn't agree with you? The most abrasive people on here are those on a crusade to defend this coach from reasoned critiques.

I'm happy every time Duke wins. I'd love to be happier.

[Kedsy]

The question isn't whether you've been there since McCallie arrived - it's whether you were a fan of this team before she arrived. If you can't see a big difference in the game experience in the last six years vs before that, then that probably explains a lot of why you're satisfied and why I'm not.

I went to Duke WBB games in the early '80s, when .500 was considered an achievement, though I admit I didn't really get excited about the program until the mid-'90s under Coach G. Quite honestly I can't imagine why that matters.

I also don't see why the possibility of there being a "big difference" matters. Every coach coaches differently. On some level, I guess, the first great Coach G teams were more exciting because Duke being good was all new then. But to me it's not Coach P's fault that she inherited a program where the expectations were so much higher. The issue is the people who are unwilling to be satisfied with anything less than either (a) her being Coach G, which is impossible; or (b) her making the Final Four every year, which is unreasonable.

Also, I think you (and others) may be romanticizing the early G years. The "style" wasn't so pretty then, either. For example, in each of the last three years, Duke has turned the ball over between 16.5 and 16.8 times a game. That may sound like a lot, but in Coach G's first 9 seasons at Duke, the team got below 17 to's a game just once (16.55 in 1996, about the same as Coach P's teams have been doing the last 3 years). The other 8 of Coach G's first 9 teams were worse than 17 topg. So not as pretty as you perhaps remember. And I don't have stats for this, but there seemed to be at least as many missed layups then, too, if not more.


I simply do not like the style (or lack thereof) that is being played and feel that directly leads to the end result. I know we have very talented young women playing for Duke, and don't feel they are able to achieve as a group as much as their talent indicates they should. The result is less than the sum of the parts.

I can't disagree more with this. I've really enjoyed watching the team grow over the past several years. In 2010, I didn't think the team was talented enough to go far in the NCAAT; I was pleasantly surprised we reached the Elite Eight and came within 3 points of making the Final Four. In 2011 we had talent but relied on a lot of freshmen. If we'd gotten past UConn in the Elite Eight it would have been a monumental upset.

In 2012 I felt it all started to click for the (then) sophomore class plus Elizabeth. I thought the team was a joy to watch before Richa and then Elizabeth got hurt. Getting to the Elite Eight with Elizabeth hobbled like that was more than anybody should have expected from that team. Again in 2013, the team had plenty of style and was plenty fun to watch -- not to mention being an awesome team -- before Chelsea got hurt. Frankly, I still thought the team was quite fun to watch after Chelsea got hurt, but after losing a first-team All American, they clearly weren't as talented as the top teams in the NCAAT. The fact that we won the ACC tournament and got to the Elite Eight was another huge overachievement in my mind, not an underachievement as you appear to believe.

Again, this year, I thought the team looked great and was really fun to watch before Chelsea got hurt. We're going through a little bit of a rough patch now, but that's to be expected with us in the middle of an 11 game stretch including 6 road games and 6 games against ranked competition (with some overlap, obviously, but only two of the 11 games have involved or will involve home games against unranked teams).

I have no idea what the short-term future holds for this team, but I'll be rooting like crazy every game, whether we make the Final Four or not. If you decide to do otherwise, that's up to you.

[AIM4excellence]

I went to Duke WBB games in the early '80s, when .500 was considered an achievement, though I admit I didn't really get excited about the program until the mid-'90s under Coach G. Quite honestly I can't imagine why that matters.

I also don't see why the possibility of there being a "big difference" matters. Every coach coaches differently. On some level, I guess, the first great Coach G teams were more exciting because Duke being good was all new then. But to me it's not Coach P's fault that she inherited a program where the expectations were so much higher. The issue is the people who are unwilling to be satisfied with anything less than either (a) her being Coach G, which is impossible; or (b) her making the Final Four every year, which is unreasonable.

Also, I think you (and others) may be romanticizing the early G years. The "style" wasn't so pretty then, either. For example, in each of the last three years, Duke has turned the ball over between 16.5 and 16.8 times a game. That may sound like a lot, but in Coach G's first 9 seasons at Duke, the team got below 17 to's a game just once (16.55 in 1996, about the same as Coach P's teams have been doing the last 3 years). The other 8 of Coach G's first 9 teams were worse than 17 topg. So not as pretty as you perhaps remember. And I don't have stats for this, but there seemed to be at least as many missed layups then, too, if not more.



I can't disagree more with this. I've really enjoyed watching the team grow over the past several years. In 2010, I didn't think the team was talented enough to go far in the NCAAT; I was pleasantly surprised we reached the Elite Eight and came within 3 points of making the Final Four. In 2011 we had talent but relied on a lot of freshmen. If we'd gotten past UConn in the Elite Eight it would have been a monumental upset.

In 2012 I felt it all started to click for the (then) sophomore class plus Elizabeth. I thought the team was a joy to watch before Richa and then Elizabeth got hurt. Getting to the Elite Eight with Elizabeth hobbled like that was more than anybody should have expected from that team. Again in 2013, the team had plenty of style and was plenty fun to watch -- not to mention being an awesome team -- before Chelsea got hurt. Frankly, I still thought the team was quite fun to watch after Chelsea got hurt, but after losing a first-team All American, they clearly weren't as talented as the top teams in the NCAAT. The fact that we won the ACC tournament and got to the Elite Eight was another huge overachievement in my mind, not an underachievement as you appear to believe.

Again, this year, I thought the team looked great and was really fun to watch before Chelsea got hurt. We're going through a little bit of a rough patch now, but that's to be expected with us in the middle of an 11 game stretch including 6 road games and 6 games against ranked competition (with some overlap, obviously, but only two of the 11 games have involved or will involve home games against unranked teams).

I have no idea what the short-term future holds for this team, but I'll be rooting like crazy every game, whether we make the Final Four or not. If you decide to do otherwise, that's up to you.

Kedsy, thank you so much for a reasonable summary of your viewpoint on this team. I don't have to agree in order to appreciate you taking the time to lay it out like you did. Bravo. It seems we have a fundamental difference in what we like and value in being a fan and there's plenty of room for both/all of us. We've got a tough 4 game stretch. I'll be watching for signs that this team is ready to make a run with these seniors. I look forward to a time when I want to be in the stands again. Based on performance to date, it's unlikely to happen with this coach at the helm. Enjoy the games!

[Des Esseintes]

The thing that made me mad when Chelsea went down was I saw it coming "now she has an excuse for this year."


I don't think this little cupcake of joy got enough attention the first time around. It's the worst thing that I have read about a Duke coach on DBR in at least half a decade, maybe ever. Seriously. Even the opposing fans who made an account just to say something unpleasant and call K a name never managed this hateful an insinuation. So, congratulations?

[-jk]

Let's keep it civil, folks.

-jk

[Indoor66]

Let's keep it civil, folks.

-jk

Actually, he kept it quite civil, considering the odious statement he was commenting on. I agree with the "uncivil" poster.

[killerleft]

Wow. So Coach G was just "lucky." Here's what I saw. From the very first game Coach G coached at Duke, the instituted changes that were exciting to watch. She slowly built momentum and recruited players that fit the motion offense she taught and could carry out the many different offensive and defensive schemes she had in her bag of tricks. Bringing Michelle and Nicole to Duke did kick the team into overdrive and they rose fast after that. That victory over Tennessee in '99 was epic. And likewise the recruiting of Alana Beard. Coach G's note after watching her for the first time went something like "best women's bball player I've ever seen." Then Alana got injured and fell off the top of the recruiting world during prime time. So Coach G got the one player she really, really, really wanted. But, yeah, she "fell in her lap."

And, by the way, Duke LOST the quadruple overtime game! Then turned around and went to their first Final Four. It doesn't make the current coach look better to downplay the achievement of the coach who came before. Especially when the current coach hasn't even matched those achievements.

I think that if Coach P had been able to coach up the 2002-2007 teams at Duke, we would have that national championship by now. Like everybody else, I was in love with Coach G. But I never did like that 'deer in the headlights' look she'd get every once in a while. Say what you want about Coach P, she's feisty, combative, and doesn't take any crap. If a couple of tweetie-tweets come across as brusque and a bit biting at times, so be it. If you're going to war, take a warrior.

[aswewere]

I think that if Coach P had been able to coach up the 2002-2007 teams at Duke, we would have that national championship by now. Like everybody else, I was in love with Coach G. But I never did like that 'deer in the headlights' look she'd get every once in a while. Say what you want about Coach P, she's feisty, combative, and doesn't take any crap. If a couple of tweetie-tweets come across as brusque and a bit biting at times, so be it. If you're going to war, take a warrior.

Abby was part of that group, enough said

[Duvall]

I think that if Coach P had been able to coach up the 2002-2007 teams at Duke, we would have that national championship by now. Like everybody else, I was in love with Coach G. But I never did like that 'deer in the headlights' look she'd get every once in a while. Say what you want about Coach P, she's feisty, combative, and doesn't take any crap. If a couple of tweetie-tweets come across as brusque and a bit biting at times, so be it. If you're going to war, take a warrior.

Can Duke cash in some of that spunk for a few more points during the next UConn or Notre Dame game? It would be nice to be able to stay within single-digits for once.

[Mike Corey]

I think that if Coach P had been able to coach up the 2002-2007 teams at Duke, we would have that national championship by now. Like everybody else, I was in love with Coach G. But I never did like that 'deer in the headlights' look she'd get every once in a while. Say what you want about Coach P, she's feisty, combative, and doesn't take any crap. If a couple of tweetie-tweets come across as brusque and a bit biting at times, so be it. If you're going to war, take a warrior.

For fear of diving back into this conversation, I must bite:

I can understand and respect those who are happy with Coach P's coaching style and approach and her level of success thus far in Durham. But it makes no sense to me in suggesting that Coach P would have been more likely to win a title than the coach that put us in four final fours in ten years, and that could compete with the best teams in the country, given the fact that Coach P is yet to take one of our teams to the Final Four or to beat Notre Dame or UConn.

And being a combative coach is fine, if it's harnessed; airing that combativeness publicly in going after former assistants and the parents of players is unprofessional. Dismissing them as mere tweets is a silly critique; they are public comments drafted and published by the coach--it's just like saying them in a press conference in front of the cameras. It's inappropriate all the same.

[throatybeard]

For fear of diving back into this conversation, I must bite:

I can understand and respect those who are happy with Coach P's coaching style and approach and her level of success thus far in Durham. But it makes no sense to me in suggesting that Coach P would have been more likely to win a title than the coach that put us in four final fours in ten years, and that could compete with the best teams in the country, given the fact that Coach P is yet to take one of our teams to the Final Four or to beat Notre Dame or UConn.

Goestenkors left. We had to hire someone who was available. In 2007, who looked like a better idea than McCallie?

[Mike Corey]

Goestenkors left. We had to hire someone who was available. In 2007, who looked like a better idea than McCallie?

Respectfully, that's not a conversation I'm willing to have publicly, but I'll shoot you a PM with my thoughts; I do think it's fair to criticize the overall performance of the coach since her hiring, and as noted way up thread, her public statements coupled with everything else have made her seem like less than the best option for Duke going forward in this humble person's opinion.

[killerleft]

Can Duke cash in some of that spunk for a few more points during the next UConn or Notre Dame game? It would be nice to be able to stay within single-digits for once.

We'll see. Down to two real ballhandlers. Tricia's good, but needs to be free to score. Unfortunately, as you know, injuries have made it tough. But I'm not counting us out, yet, either. I'm encouraged about the toughness of this team.

[Des Esseintes]

We'll see. Down to two real ballhandlers. Tricia's good, but needs to be free to score. Unfortunately, as you know, injuries have made it tough. But I'm not counting us out, yet, either. I'm encouraged about the toughness of this team.

For real. This team ought to be one fans find easy to love. Instead, it's endless talk of disappointment and never-gonna-happen. They will have a talent deficit from all the injuries for the remainder of the season, but I'm excited to see what a pretty mentally tough group of seniors and supporting players can accomplish in spite of that hurdle.

[Kedsy]

Tricia's good, but needs to be free to score.

One of the things I've been happiest to see this season has been Tricia's improvement (a testament, at least in part, to good coaching, in my opinion). ESPN posted a nice article about her (http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/10483893/total-access-duke-blue-devils-tricia-liston-steps-game-senior-season).


For real. This team ought to be one fans find easy to love. Instead, it's endless talk of disappointment and never-gonna-happen. They will have a talent deficit from all the injuries for the remainder of the season, but I'm excited to see what a pretty mentally tough group of seniors and supporting players can accomplish in spite of that hurdle.

Count me in on this sentiment. Right now the team would be poised to break through, if only they had another top shelf guard. Losing Chelsea (and then Chloe, just when she was needed most), would cripple most teams, but this team seems to be fighting through it. We all ought to get behind the team for the stretch run.

[Mike Corey]

We all ought to get behind the team for the stretch run.

I'll sign-on to this pledge, and will zip my negative nabobbing through the rest of the season.

But before I clam up on the criticisms, one final defense of those who have challenged our status as an elite program. I quote a Coach P tweet from 2/16/2013 (https://twitter.com/CoachPDuke/statuses/302944748933627904):


"Top dog vs underdog. Take the top dog status any day. Got to bring home a national title or a few to truly be top dog. It's concrete. #Real."

That's far too high of a threshold, IMO, but at least makes those critics among us seem a little less unreasonable for arguing that the lack of Final Fours in the past 6 seasons had displaced us a notch below elite status.

[MCFinARL]

I'll sign-on to this pledge, and will zip my negative nabobbing through the rest of the season.

do you promise not to natter as well? ;)

Let's go Blue Devils!

[Mike Corey]

do you promise not to natter as well? ;)

Let's go Blue Devils!

As a natter of fact, I don't. ;)

[aswewere]

We'll see. Down to two real ballhandlers. Tricia's good, but needs to be free to score. Unfortunately, as you know, injuries have made it tough. But I'm not counting us out, yet, either. I'm encouraged about the toughness of this team.

Jenna is our second best ball handler now love to see her get a few minutes in relief.

[CameronBornAndBred]

This thread (and any other discussion available online) should be required reading for K's replacement. That poor guy is doomed.