Has the Duke Hatred Tsunami finally started to fade?

[Billy Dat]

With the winning of the national championship, I sense a thawing in Duke Hatred among a lot of traditional anti-Duke media sources.

I feel the change is being caused by a few things, most of which are K related:

-K's ability to win a title with one-and-done players which, I feel, is viewed somehow as K and Duke "coming down off their high horse".

-K's ability to adapt with the times, winning titles in different eras and with different kinds of teams, especially the contrast between 2010 and 2015

-5 titles for K across 12 Final Fours are legit Wooden level numbers

-K's work with Team USA over the past decade has earned him a lot of fans from former haters

-The Christian Laettner 30 for 30 examined the topic and was released as the tournament run was happening and kind of took the air out of it a little

-People liked the style of play of this team and the players - they were exciting, huge talents, and good kids

While many nice Duke articles and comments from former critics (Bill Simmons, etc.) have been posted through several threads on DBR, I offer the following audio from Jalen Rose who, over 10 minutes, starts talking about John Calipari as a backdrop to Marc Cuban's criticism of the college game, starts what seems like a critique of Duke, but ultimately winds up in a huge tribute to Coach K and the Duke program on whom he heaps the highest praise...although he does hint that K is so important that it risks falling off when he steps down.

The relevant section starts at 35 minutes in, the Duke praise really starts around 42 minutes in:
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/grantland/player?id=12657392

Fans will always hate, but the media changing their tune somewhat will also lead the charge.

[roywhite]

With the winning of the national championship, I sense a thawing in Duke Hatred among a lot of traditional anti-Duke media sources.

I feel the change is being caused by a few things, most of which are K related:

-K's ability to win a title with one-and-done players which, I feel, is viewed somehow as K and Duke "coming down off their high horse".

-K's ability to adapt with the times, winning titles in different eras and with different kinds of teams, especially the contrast between 2010 and 2015

-5 titles for K across 12 Final Fours are legit Wooden level numbers

-K's work with Team USA over the past decade has earned him a lot of fans from former haters

-The Christian Laettner 30 for 30 examined the topic and was released as the tournament run was happening and kind of took the air out of it a little

-People liked the style of play of this team and the players - they were exciting, huge talents, and good kids...

Fans will always hate, but the media changing their tune somewhat will also lead the charge.

Yeah, seeing more favorable coverage in the NC media (long dominated by a lighter shade of blue)

Hamilton: Coach K alone on basketball throne (http://www.journalnow.com/sports/columnists/scott_hamilton/hamilton-coach-k-alone-on-basketball-throne/article_15e26796-dfcb-11e4-adad-93059ad273aa.html)

This from the Winston-Salem Journal (Scott Hamilton now the main columnist, a big drop-off from the retired Lenox Rawlings)


This column was written without a helmet. One might be required by the time the last graph is read, especially if readers can figure out how to throw rocks via email.

That said, when it comes to all the things that turn a program into a dynasty, no one can eclipse Duke’s Mike Krzyzewski. His fifth national championship secures his place as the lead figurehead on coaching’s Mount Rushmore.


And, a similar take from the Greensboro News and Record

Ed Hardin: Krzyzewski's biggest win might've come at home (http://www.news-record.com/sports/accxtra/ed-hardin-krzyzewski-s-biggest-win-might-ve-come-at/article_a0d00650-dd47-11e4-abea-97b6e41f9516.html)


Duke is the national champion again. Let the howling begin.

That’s a tradition in college basketball. And a recurring theme. But a funny thing happened on the way to Duke’s 2015 championship. Mike Krzyzewski got the respect he deserved. And his team rewarded him....

There were Carolina fans pulling for him. There were State fans pulling for him. Granted, most people in this state were just pulling against Kentucky.....

Frank McGuire begat Dean, and Dean begat Roy, while Everett Case led the way to Norm Sloan and Jimmy V, who fought and fell and gave us stories to tell.

Krzyzewski rose above them all Monday night and put Duke back atop the game in a run for the ages. It was a basketball clinic and a history lesson. And somewhere along the way, Mike Krzyzewski finally got the respect he deserved.

Not nationally, but here in North Carolina.

[NashvilleDevil]

I think it's thawed considering the reaction by the media over Bo Ryan's post game comments. I do not recall what Gary Williams and Lute said after the '01 run but I do remember what Billy Packer said during the '01 title game and after that it became a theme to latch on to. 15 years later with no Packer, Elmore is the only analyst that goes all in with Duke gets all the calls and he doesn't have the stature that Packer did and that meme only exists in Len's terrapin bubble.

[gocanes0506]

The hatred has fallen off because UK has taken over the top spotlight in CBB. Everyone cheered against UK this year. Duke is in more of a positive light because UK didnt win.

Had all the freshmen came back I think the Duke hate tsunami would have been one of the biggest we've seen.

[TruBlu]

Grayson will revive the hate. I will love him for it.

[flyingdutchdevil]

The hatred has fallen off because UK has taken over the top spotlight in CBB. Everyone cheered against UK this year. Duke is in more of a positive light because UK didnt win.

I think this is part of it. But I also think the Duke program has evolved, and all the parts that go with it. Coach K hasn't lost his passion for the game, but he was totally mellowed. He is getting excited about the right times and showing positive emotion will holding back on the "negative" emotion (his reaction when Duke doesn't get a call, arguing with the refs non-stop, etc). Also, Duke is attracting players that are really difficult to "hate" (and I don't like using that word). They are good kids, kids who often come from basketball families, and often athletic. And there is a huge correlation between athleticism and hatred (and there is also a correlation between being white and being perceived as nonathletic). Lastly, and I point that I think is important, is that Duke students don't have as obnoxious a reputation as they once had. The height of Duke hatred also coincided with the height of the financial services industry. And it's a well known fact that Duke produced a lot of kids who worked on Wall Street or something similar (myself included). With the financial crash, bankers mellowing somewhat, and Duke students more interested in consulting, tech, and entrepreneurship, the hatred to Duke has certainly mellowed.

[Tripping William]

Grayson will revive the hate. I will love him for it.

In support of your proposition, I offer a recent post by The Onion:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/mike-krzyzewski-admits-hed-like-to-smack-grayson-a,38389/

(Note: Salty language throughout.)

[budwom]

For those of us who don't live in NC and therefore aren't subjected to the inanities of the local pale blue fan base, Duke negativity is minimal....yeah there are some in the national
press who still harp on it, but they can easily be ignored.

[rocketeli]

I think this is part of it. But I also think the Duke program has evolved, and all the parts that go with it. Coach K hasn't lost his passion for the game, but he was totally mellowed. He is getting excited about the right times and showing positive emotion will holding back on the "negative" emotion (his reaction when Duke doesn't get a call, arguing with the refs non-stop, etc). Also, Duke is attracting players that are really difficult to "hate" (and I don't like using that word). They are good kids, kids who often come from basketball families, and often athletic. And there is a huge correlation between athleticism and hatred (and there is also a correlation between being white and being perceived as nonathletic). Lastly, and I point that I think is important, is that Duke students don't have as obnoxious a reputation as they once had. The height of Duke hatred also coincided with the height of the financial services industry. And it's a well known fact that Duke produced a lot of kids who worked on Wall Street or something similar (myself included). With the financial crash, bankers mellowing somewhat, and Duke students more interested in consulting, tech, and entrepreneurship, the hatred to Duke has certainly mellowed.

I'm sorry to see such an excellent commentator apparently buying into the ridiculous meme that Coach K is more obnoxious or aggressive to referees than other coaches or somehow "works" them more. This meme drives me nuts. If you actually pay attention to the sideline as much as you can during a TV broadcast or attend a game in person and watch the benches, you will quickly see that K for many years has been actually much less demonstrative than most coaches and does only a moderate amount of talking to the backs of the refs about things he doesn't like-about average I'd say for a head coach.

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

Another reason: The Tarheel nation has found it necessary to chill out....glass houses, stones and all. Bless its heart.
Love, Ima

[Clay Feet POF]

-People liked the style of play of this team and the players - they were exciting, huge talents, and good kids

.


I followed one of the big East team's Board closely and not only could they not hate this team, they actually Like them. All of them seemed to agree it was because they were 'Fun to watch"

I don't think this will continue To me it more like an eclipsing of the Sun moment.

[Duke95]

Out here in the Southwest, the Duke chatter is minimal, even after the National Championship. Duke did get quite a bit of press, but just because we played and beat Utah.

I think Duke "hatred" is pretty minimal, once you get outside of the NC or South as a whole. Except for maybe in Wisconsin at the moment.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I'm sorry to see such an excellent commentator apparently buying into the ridiculous meme that Coach K is more obnoxious or aggressive to referees than other coaches or somehow "works" them more. This meme drives me nuts. If you actually pay attention to the sideline as much as you can during a TV broadcast or attend a game in person and watch the benches, you will quickly see that K for many years has been actually much less demonstrative than most coaches and does only a moderate amount of talking to the backs of the refs about things he doesn't like-about average I'd say for a head coach.

I don't think it's ridiculous at all. And I'm not buying into anything. I call it like I see it, and I've been watching Duke games in person and on TV for only 12 years. Part of the responsibility of coaches is to work the refs. It's a very important part of the game. I don't dislike coaches who do it.

I have watched plenty of Duke games and, as you said, Coach K does as much working the refs as every other coach. But he was a lot more verbose and energetic about doing this a decade plus ago. He has certainly mellowed on the sidelines. Not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing, merely that it has led to less "hate" from certain parties.

[OldPhiKap]

Somewhere in the bowels of Lower Crumudgeonville, Len Elmore is hunched over a luke-warm cup of coffee and muttering to himself about how Duke gets all the calls. Bitter, angry and despondent, he scowls into the vague darkness and grumbles incoherently about the unfair conspiracy that is too obvious to succeed yet another time -- and yet it did.

This thought warms my soul.

[elvis14]

I don't think it's ridiculous at all. And I'm not buying into anything. I call it like I see it, and I've been watching Duke games in person and on TV for only 12 years. Part of the responsibility of coaches is to work the refs. It's a very important part of the game. I don't dislike coaches who do it.

I have watched plenty of Duke games and, as you said, Coach K does as much working the refs as every other coach. But he was a lot more verbose and energetic about doing this a decade plus ago. He has certainly mellowed on the sidelines. Not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing, merely that it has led to less "hate" from certain parties.

What I've noticed is that Coach K gets shown on TV working the refs more than other coaches are shown on TV working the refs. As a result people think that Coach K is working the refs more than other coaches.

I'm re-watching the National Championship game right now (what a great way to spend a leisurely Sunday morning) and just saw the half time interview where Coach K mentioned that we were unable to get them in foul trouble. There are actually people who believe that Coach K's 20 second halftime interview influenced the refs into calling more fouls on Wisconsin the second half (sometimes it's tough to be Facebook friends with UNCheats fans!).

[Troublemaker]

The haters seem to hate our white players the most, and this team started 5 black players, whether it was Matt or Amile in the starting lineup.

Let's see what happens when Grayson and Luke play prominent roles in the coming years. I suspect the hate has not subsided.

[Reisen]

Grayson will revive the hate. I will love him for it.

This. There is a huge racial and cultural correlation with Duke hate. It has been shown and repeated ad nauseum on DBR over the years.

This year's team played an exciting, athletic, uptempo style of basketball, coupled with fancy dunks, and a tremendous transition game. We also featured primarily African-American players, many of whom have bright pro careers ahead of them. I loved it to the point where I spent quite a chunk of change winning a BH auction to take my dad to see the team in person. I loved everything about this year's players, regardless of skin color, background, athleticism, or style of play. I also loved hated players like Redick & Battier equally well.

The Duke players that have gotten the hate are guys like Ferry, Laettner, Hurley, Wojo, Redick, Battier, Scheyer, Paulus, etc. Guys like Brand, Maggette, Hill, Deng, Irving, Parker, etc. are generally pretty well received by opposing fan bases.

Look at Grayson, and look at who we have coming in next year as freshmen. The Duke hate will be back. I, for one, will relish it. I can love Duke players of all backgrounds, skin colors, and talent levels. The fact that opposing fans and media will so aggressively hate on 18 year old kids for factors that they cannot control, for factors that would be unacceptable in virtually any other setting... That just convinces me I'm right to cheer for Duke, our players, and Coach K.

[53n206]

Somewhere in the bowels of Lower Crumudgeonville, Len Elmore is hunched over a luke-warm cup of coffee and muttering to himself about how Duke gets all the calls. Bitter, angry and despondent, he scowls into the vague darkness and grumbles incoherently about the unfair conspiracy that is too obvious to succeed yet another time -- and yet it did.

This thought warms my soul.

He is certainly to be found" Somewhere in the bowels.......". And most certainly in the lower bowels

[BD80]

The haters seem to hate our white players the most, and this team started 5 black players, whether it was Matt or Amile in the starting lineup.

Let's see what happens when Grayson and Luke play prominent roles in the coming years. I suspect the hate has not subsided.

It is somewhat of a backlash to the attention that teams featuring white players receive, ie Wisconsin, Butler, Gonzaga, Notre Dame.

It will be interesting to see what happens when Grayson and Luke are featured on an SI cover ...

[alteran]

Somewhere in the bowels of Lower Crumudgeonville, Len Elmore is hunched over a luke-warm cup of coffee and muttering to himself about how Duke gets all the calls. Bitter, angry and despondent, he scowls into the vague darkness and grumbles incoherently about the unfair conspiracy that is too obvious to succeed yet another time -- and yet it did.

This thought warms my soul.

Is it wrong that I'm picturing Gollum right now?

[sagegrouse]

"Duke Hatred Tsunami?" Whatever floats your boat, but ... puh-leese!

Duke has been ranked the most popular college basketball team for five years in a row, according to the Harris Poll (http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2014/03/27/Research-and-Ratings/Harris-Poll.aspx). Duke is also the most popular program in North Carolina, according to this survey (http://btn.com/2015/03/18/which-college-basketball-team-is-the-most-popular-in-your-home-state/).

So, what are we talking about? The mad howling of rival and not-our-rival fan bases. The palpable physical jealousy of pimply-faced kids towards guys that really can play college basketball ... and do get all the girls? The ravings of bloggers and big city sports columnists who are appealing to five or ten percent of sports fans?

At the Final Four, Kentucky got resoundingly booed while Duke got cheers. Coach K is the highly successful coach of Team USA and gets a lot of nationalistic pride from Americans. Moreover, his public persona has improved to the point that he is almost a basketball Walter Cronkite.

Oh, yeah! That's right! The announcers are all rooting against Duke -- like Bilas and JWill and Grant and, of course, sourpuss Len Elmore. Could this be a little imaginary? Elmore's greatest moment as an announcer was sitting next to Verne Lundquist on the Grant-to-Laettner play in 1992. We could probably dig into the announcer thing a little more, but why are so many announcers Duke grads and hoop players? It is almost embarrassing, and it is possible that their announcing leans a bit the other way.

True story: Seth Davis went up to my 9YO grand-daughter on a break at the Studio Show at LucasOil Arena. "Who are you pulling for?" he asked. "Duke," she replied -- she wasn't wearing any fan gear. "So am I, but I can't say so on television."

Kindly,
Sage Grouse
'BTW the mot popular team by state is fascinating. Only Duke, Clemson and Syracuse are the most popular teams in their home states. UVa loses to VCU but is shown as the most popular team in By Gawd West Virginia. BC loses to Harvard in Mass. Pitt and Penn State lose to 'Nova in Pennsylvania'

[KandG]

I'm sorry to see such an excellent commentator apparently buying into the ridiculous meme that Coach K is more obnoxious or aggressive to referees than other coaches or somehow "works" them more. This meme drives me nuts. If you actually pay attention to the sideline as much as you can during a TV broadcast or attend a game in person and watch the benches, you will quickly see that K for many years has been actually much less demonstrative than most coaches and does only a moderate amount of talking to the backs of the refs about things he doesn't like-about average I'd say for a head coach.


I don't think it's ridiculous at all. And I'm not buying into anything. I call it like I see it, and I've been watching Duke games in person and on TV for only 12 years. Part of the responsibility of coaches is to work the refs. It's a very important part of the game. I don't dislike coaches who do it.

I have watched plenty of Duke games and, as you said, Coach K does as much working the refs as every other coach. But he was a lot more verbose and energetic about doing this a decade plus ago. He has certainly mellowed on the sidelines. Not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing, merely that it has led to less "hate" from certain parties.

The "meme" or perception that K is more obnoxious/aggressive with refs has been a real thing for nearly his entire career, even if the reality might be slightly overblown by certain segments of the media. K himself joked about it at the Cameron pep rally a few days ago (which surprised me a little).

So I'm with flyingdutchdevil on this one. K has visibly moderated his sideline behavior in recent years and tends to pick his spots more with officials. Some of this might be age, some of it might be influenced by his experience with FIBA as part of USA basketball (where yelling at/working the refs is frowned upon heavily). But he sits more and flashes more exasperated smiles than he used to when he encounters a call he doesn't like (rather than just flat out yelling/popping his veins).

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in this thread as part of this train of thought is K doing halftime interviews with sideline reporters, which I had always considered to be the last line of resistance for K. Though he still assigns many of them to Jeff, to see him provide extensive thoughts to Tracy Wolfson or other reporters in the heat of a game definitely softens the perception of him among the irrational folk just a little more. (if people think I'm exaggerating, they haven't heard the numerous whispers in the past from media and fans about "why is K allowed to blow off halftime interviews while other coaches do them? Why does he think he's better than everybody else? blah blah blah)

[BD80]

... One thing I haven't seen mentioned in this thread as part of this train of thought is K doing halftime interviews with sideline reporters, which I had always considered to be the last line of resistance for K. Though he still assigns many of them to Jeff, to see him provide extensive thoughts to Tracy Wolfson or other reporters in the heat of a game definitely softens the perception of him among the irrational folk just a little more. (if people think I'm exaggerating, they haven't heard the numerous whispers in the past from media and fans about "why is K allowed to blow off halftime interviews while other coaches do them? Why does he think he's better than everybody else? blah blah blah)

I believe he was required to do the interviews, I'm guessing part of the TV contract. When not required, he prefers to have his lead assistant get the time on camera, figuring that people have seen enough of him on TV. Kinda the anti-calipari, who has never, ever, turned down a television appearance.

[OldPhiKap]

I believe he was required to do the interviews, I'm guessing part of the TV contract. When not required, he prefers to have his lead assistant get the time on camera, figuring that people have seen enough of him on TV. Kinda the anti-calipari, who has never, ever, turned down a television appearance.

I think this is right, they must be required in the NCAA.

[hurleyfor3]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in this thread as part of this train of thought is K doing halftime interviews with sideline reporters, which I had always considered to be the last line of resistance for K. Though he still assigns many of them to Jeff, to see him provide extensive thoughts to Tracy Wolfson or other reporters in the heat of a game definitely softens the perception of him among the irrational folk just a little more.

And his interviews have real content!


(if people think I'm exaggerating, they haven't heard the numerous whispers in the past from media and fans about "why is K allowed to blow off halftime interviews while other coaches do them? Why does he think he's better than everybody else? blah blah blah)

I've long found this putative "criticism" amusing. The haters are effectively saying they want to see and hear more of K!

[Duvall]

Calipari, Calipari, Calipari, Calipari. Giving spiteful Internet losers and hot take purveyors another flashy blueblood target to snipe at has had a profound impact.

[77devil]

Somewhere in the bowels of Lower Crumudgeonville, Len Elmore is hunched over a luke-warm cup of coffee and muttering to himself about how Duke gets all the calls. Bitter, angry and despondent, he scowls into the vague darkness and grumbles incoherently about the unfair conspiracy that is too obvious to succeed yet another time -- and yet it did.

While drooling over his Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/07/duke-really-did-get-all-the-foul-calls-in-the-2015-ncaa-tournament/) confirming his dogma.

[NancyCarol]

I was at my 7 year olds Baseball game yesterday in Dallas (they won 13-0 on his two grand slams tyvm). Among the Texas Rangers and Dallas Cowboys stuff parents were wearing there were three of us in Duke gear. Makes Texas almost feel like home. And no, there was none of that "other blue" to be seen.

[OldPhiKap]

While drooling over his Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/07/duke-really-did-get-all-the-foul-calls-in-the-2015-ncaa-tournament/) confirming his dogma.

Good grief. Driving to the rim and drawing contact has been a staple of our better offenses for years. Have they never heard of this concept in Wisconsin?!?

As for the WP, well -- Terping is to be expected. Know your audience.

[jmck214]

For those of us who don't live in NC and therefore aren't subjected to the inanities of the local pale blue fan base, Duke negativity is minimal....yeah there are some in the national
press who still harp on it, but they can easily be ignored.

I am a University of Rhode Island grad so I check out their forum and there was a lot of hate for Duke on there and all they talked about was how they got all the calls vs Wisconsin. I had to post as a non duke fan to remind them of the ticky tack fouls on winslow and okafor. They are also still bitter about the 1988 sweet 16 loss which was before my time. Speaking of my time at URI I'll never forget the professor from Indiana who somehow got on the topic of the 1991 final four and went on and on about the refs favoring Duke in that game. It took every bit of restraint to not call him out in front of a class of 75

[MChambers]

Good grief. Driving to the rim and drawing contact has been a staple of our better offenses for years. Have they never heard of this concept in Wisconsin?!?

As for the WP, well -- Terping is to be expected. Know your audience.

The Post article just shows that Duke did much better in the NCAAs at drawing fouls and not giving fouls. It doesn't say that the calls were bad calls.

I'm no fan of the Post's sports section, and this article had a ridiculous headline, but the actual text wasn't that bad.

[KenTankerous]

Let me reassure y'alll, the tsunami is alive and thrivin' here in the 502. The natty did nothing but erk every Cardinal fan I know and meet, ACC brotherhood be damned! We're just back from a street fest where I sported my rather modest Blue Devil hat and her a sublime shirt (the LAX Natty from '13) and while the UK fans were playfully hostile (and even a tad grateful - a lost to bucky is waaaay less sucky than a loss in the final to K) the UofL fans, well, let's just say Maryland has a dutiful replacement. They are seething because they really think they are the best program and Slick Rick is the best coach in the ACC.

[tbyers11]

The Post article just shows that Duke did much better in the NCAAs at drawing fouls and not giving fouls. It doesn't say that the calls were bad calls.

I'm no fan of the Post's sports section, and this article had a ridiculous headline, but the actual text wasn't that bad.

I beg to differ. The Vines embedded in the article and the distortion of stats at the beginning were very much in the Duke (wrongfully) gets all the calls vein. The author tries to come back to some degree of neutrality later by saying that Duke drove to the hole more and makes a "maybe the calls were correct" point in his summary paragraph but that is a little too late for a fair and balanced approach.

Quoted sections are directly taken from the Post article


The team’s free throw rate for the NCAA tournament fell just under its season average (37 percent), but from the Sweet 16 to the title game, Duke benefited from a tremendous amount of whistles — their combined rate against Utah, Gonzaga, Michigan State and Wisconsin ballooned to 50 percent.

The author cherry-picks his stats here grossly. I can understand not including the 1-16 game b/c those are mismatches. But why not include the San Diego St game against a quality opponent? Because Duke's FTRate in that game was 3.6%. Including that in the average calculation, would have given Duke a 40.7% avg FTRate and his point that it "ballooned" to 50% from 40% in the regular season would have been moot. Additionally, Duke's increased FTRate came from shooting 16 FTs in the last 3 minutes against Utah as they tried the Valvano approach to get back in the game and the blowout against Mich St. Duke's FTRate was below average for Gonzaga and Wisconsin.


Those extra freebies greatly helped against Wisconsin. The Blue Devils attempted six free throws in a four-minute span immediately after the Badgers opened up a nine-point lead, and those generously awarded attempts kept Duke within striking distance while Justise Winslow and Jahlil Okafor sat on the bench.

The first sentence here displays a stunning lack of math skills. Duke's FTRate in the last 4 games of the tourney was 50%. That is true. However, in the Wisconsin game alone it was 39.2%, slightly less than the 39.8% average for the whole year. His thesis is that Duke got "extra freebies" (above its season average) against Wisconsin is WRONG. You can't use the average of 4 games as the value for a single game.

The other thing that is missing is comparison to other teams. If we calculate Wisconsin's FTRate in the last 5 games of the tourney, it was 46%, also 10% above its season average of 36%. No discussion of whether Wisconsin got all the foul calls.

I agree it wasn't an awful hack job in the text but the incorrect representation of statistics that was the basis of the article was pretty bad.

[MChambers]

I beg to differ. The Vines embedded in the article and the distortion of stats at the beginning were very much in the Duke (wrongfully) gets all the calls vein. The author tries to come back to some degree of neutrality later by saying that Duke drove to the hole more and makes a "maybe the calls were correct" point in his summary paragraph but that is a little too late for a fair and balanced approach.

Quoted sections are directly taken from the Post article



The author cherry-picks his stats here grossly. I can understand not including the 1-16 game b/c those are mismatches. But why not include the San Diego St game against a quality opponent? Because Duke's FTRate in that game was 3.6%. Including that in the average calculation, would have given Duke a 40.7% avg FTRate and his point that it "ballooned" to 50% from 40% in the regular season would have been moot. Additionally, Duke's increased FTRate came from shooting 16 FTs in the last 3 minutes against Utah as they tried the Valvano approach to get back in the game and the blowout against Mich St. Duke's FTRate was below average for Gonzaga and Wisconsin.



The first sentence here displays a stunning lack of math skills. Duke's FTRate in the last 4 games of the tourney was 50%. That is true. However, in the Wisconsin game alone it was 39.2%, slightly less than the 39.8% average for the whole year. His thesis is that Duke got "extra freebies" (above its season average) against Wisconsin is WRONG. You can't use the average of 4 games as the value for a single game.

The other thing that is missing is comparison to other teams. If we calculate Wisconsin's FTRate in the last 5 games of the tourney, it was 46%, also 10% above its season average of 36%. No discussion of whether Wisconsin got all the foul calls.

I agree it wasn't an awful hack job in the text but the incorrect representation of statistics that was the basis of the article was pretty bad.

You're right. Last time I try to defend the increasingly bad WaPo sports section.

[Newton_14]

While drooling over his Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/07/duke-really-did-get-all-the-foul-calls-in-the-2015-ncaa-tournament/) confirming his dogma.

Laughing all the way to the trophy case. Both calls were easy to make. They are both called in every game of the season no matter who the teams are. You could not find two more easy calls to make. Koenig should learn how to move his feet and also learn how to stop whining. His coach needs to stop teaching something in practice that is both against the playing rules and totally opposite of how ref's officiate games. The 6'10 Wisc dude (sorry can never recall how to spell his name) should learn how to score on a 6'1 guard without having to lower his shoulder and bowl over the smaller guard. All he had to do was pivot the other direction and he had an easy layup. Instead he turns toward the middle, lowers his shoulder and runs over the much smaller defender in a brain dead move.

Let'em cry, whine, and let'em hate. Wisconsin had Duke's two best players on the bench in heavy foul trouble, a 9 point lead, all the momentum, and 90% of the crowd screaming loudly for them, and they could not get it done. They could not stop Grayson Allen, and they could not stop Tyus Jones.

Koenig can cry, Bo can cry, and the fool that wrote this hatchet job article can cry. Meanwhile, I will be in Cameron on 4/23 taking lots of photo's of that 5th Banner going up.

Chew on that haters.

[Newton_14]

Let me reassure y'alll, the tsunami is alive and thrivin' here in the 502. The natty did nothing but erk every Cardinal fan I know and meet, ACC brotherhood be damned! We're just back from a street fest where I sported my rather modest Blue Devil hat and her a sublime shirt (the LAX Natty from '13) and while the UK fans were playfully hostile (and even a tad grateful - a lost to bucky is waaaay less sucky than a loss in the final to K) the UofL fans, well, let's just say Maryland has a dutiful replacement. They are seething because they really think they are the best program and Slick Rick is the best coach in the ACC.

Wow. I never realized Louisville fans were so delusional. Crack must be sold in large quantities there. If they truly think they are the best program in the ACC and have the best coach they truly are delusional. I thought only UK fans fit that category.

[KenTankerous]

Wow. I never realized Louisville fans were so delusional. Crack must be sold in large quantities there. If they truly think they are the best program in the ACC and have the best coach they truly are delusional. I thought only UK fans fit that category.

Crack, not so much, we are more weed and bourbon type delusional.

And for as much as Duke is the new UK to these fans, none of them seem to remember 1986. I suppose as the rivalry develops and more pre-games replay it, it'll stick and become a nyanner-nyanner moment for them. I'm calling it now though - Cards are the new Terps....

[AncientPsychicT]

Koenig can cry, Bo can cry, and the fool that wrote this hatchet job article can cry. Meanwhile, I will be in Cameron on 4/23 taking lots of photo's of that 5th Banner going up.

Chew on that haters.


Wow. I never realized Louisville fans were so delusional. Crack must be sold in large quantities there.

Wow, Newton's lettin' loose! Fire in the hole!

[Atldukie79]

As I read the several regional perspectives on Duke hate, I must chime in with the Atlanta region.

It is not a matter of whether the local media or fans hate or love Duke, but rather whether they will remember the NCAA tourney is happening at all.
I was neither amused nor surprised to tune into the local radio talk shows during the Final Four weekend to find that there was as much discussion about what team would draft UGA's Todd Gurley or what time the spring football started as there was about hoops.

[weezie]

You're right. Last time I try to defend the increasingly bad WaPo sports section.

Nobody reads that section. It's been horrible forever. Pinheads on "staff" gobbling up their perks. I'll bet they'd love to wear fedoras with "PRESS" cards stuck in the band.

[wilson]

As I read the several regional perspectives on Duke hate, I must chime in with the Atlanta region.

It is not a matter of whether the local media or fans hate or love Duke, but rather whether they will remember the NCAA tourney is happening at all.
I was neither amused nor surprised to tune into the local radio talk shows during the Final Four weekend to find that there was as much discussion about what team would draft UGA's Todd Gurley or what time the spring football started as there was about hoops.I noticed the same. In typical fashion, my Atlanta sports talking heads of choice briefly touched on the subject during the few weeks of the NCAA Tournament, openly acknowledged that they know little to nothing about college hoops, but then firmly proclaimed that Kentucky was going to win the championship no matter what, and that Calipari is by far the best coach in the college game today. After Cal got roundly outcoached (again) in the Final Four, there was essentially nothing said to revisit the topic; it was just back to breaking down round 6 of the NFL Draft. Sigh.

[miramar]

While drooling over his Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/07/duke-really-did-get-all-the-foul-calls-in-the-2015-ncaa-tournament/) confirming his dogma.

After all, Coach K obviously invented the concepts of initiating contact on offense and drawing the charge on defense. It's amazing that no one ever thought of these things before.

I would also like to give a shout out to Frank Kaminsky for creating the "Take four steps and draw Okafor's fourth foul" move. For his age, he may be every bit as cunning as Coach K, who stopped barking at the officials in order to get more fouls.

[DarkstarWahoo]

As I read the several regional perspectives on Duke hate, I must chime in with the Atlanta region.

It is not a matter of whether the local media or fans hate or love Duke, but rather whether they will remember the NCAA tourney is happening at all.
I was neither amused nor surprised to tune into the local radio talk shows during the Final Four weekend to find that there was as much discussion about what team would draft UGA's Todd Gurley or what time the spring football started as there was about hoops.

NCAA tournament was in January, was it not? Ohio State, Oregon, FSU and Bama? Don't know why they'd be bringing up old stuff now.

[killerleft]

While drooling over his Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/04/07/duke-really-did-get-all-the-foul-calls-in-the-2015-ncaa-tournament/) confirming his dogma.

I was a bit disappointed. Not only did he not show all the calls, but the three (including the picture of Grayson being fouled on the steal attempt) he showed were correct calls made against Wisconsin. Poor guy can't even cherry-pick right.

[MChambers]

Nobody reads that section. It's been horrible forever. Pinheads on "staff" gobbling up their perks. I'll bet they'd love to wear fedoras with "PRESS" cards stuck in the band.
If one lives in DC, you read it. And it used to be good, back in the early 90s, when Wilbon actually wrote about things he knew, and Boswell was covering baseball. But I don't read the basketball coverage very closely these days.

[sagegrouse]

From this AM's WaPo, syndicated columnist and good guy Norman Chad publishes letters from readers:

Q. In the NCAA men's basketball title game, Wisconsin was called for two fouls in the first half and 13 in the second half. What halftime adjustments did Coach K make to get the referees back on track to playing Duke basketball? (Ed Cole; Arlington)
A. Pay the man, Shirley. [Prize-winning letter]

Q. I'm curious -- does the cost of Duke's traveling set of referees come directly from NCAA tournament profits, or does Coach K merely get a tax break? (John Vernon; Clarksville)
A. Pay this wise soul, too. [Ditto]

Sage
'The first 3/4 of his column was railing against the new ESPN web site'

"The Couch Slouch's most famous throwaway line: 'Did I get a college education? No, I went to the University of Maryland -- all I got were parking tickets'"

[BD80]

This won't help:

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/25146798/kevin-durant-on-russell-westbrooks-tech-thats-some-bs

It won't be long before someone figures out that it was Coach K who called the NBA offices and told them to rescind a technical foul against one of his Team USA players

[rocketeli]

I'm not sure the "Duke gets all the calls" (which alas is not true) will ever go away, especially as long as opposing coaches work it as hard as they do. Do you think that Bo Ryan is just speaking from disappointment in the moment or Jim Boeheiem just lost it and tore off his jacket? No, these are delibrate and though out ploys by very smart men -thye are trying to pant that little seed that might make an official swallow his whistle next time...

[Duvall]

If one lives in DC, you read it. And it used to be good, back in the early 90s, when Wilbon actually wrote about things he knew, and Boswell was covering baseball. But I don't read the basketball coverage very closely these days.

You don't have to read the Post sports section, even if you live in DC. (Unless you want to laugh at how terrible the coverage has become, which has its appeal.)

[Tom B.]

You don't have to read the Post sports section, even if you live in DC. (Unless you want to laugh at how terrible the coverage has become, which has its appeal.)

This is the offseason for the Post's sportswriters. They come up with columns like this because they're desperate for something to do until they can get back in their wheelhouse and start writing again about how Dan Snyder is already screwing up the Redskins this year.

[MPandolfi]

As long as Cal keeps doing his thing (http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/clip/11368316/coach-calipari-disses-memphis#.VScd_sz7vox.facebook), I think we're safe.

[AZLA]

Out here in the Southwest, the Duke chatter is minimal, even after the National Championship. Duke did get quite a bit of press, but just because we played and beat Utah.

I think Duke "hatred" is pretty minimal, once you get outside of the NC or South as a whole. Except for maybe in Wisconsin at the moment.

Out in the SouthWest, in a nutshell, they'll root for underdog teams against Duke just for the upset factor, but otherwise respect K and the University. Major media outlets in the area have written some outstanding pieces on Coach K's accomplishment, outright calling him the best coach (not just "modern era"). Most Pac 12 programs (sans UA) generally respect the program @ a min.

Unless of course, they're UofA fans who can't shake off the 2001 championship -- and their disdain has reached folklore levels of acceptance that the fix was in because they didn't call the JayWill "hover defense." I assume this will be similar to how Wisconsin fans will have a perpetuated victim mentality -- thanks to Bo's ridiculous passive aggressive griping.

I think basically you have to expect that Wisconsin, Kentucky, and UA will be stuck in an infinite loop of denial for quite some ... infinity plus one actually. For some reason I haven't run into UNLV or Michigan fans who thought Duke won the championship with the support of Refs.

I can tell you, absolutely, 100% that Bobby Hurley coming to ASU is generating an incredible amount of positive buzz, e.g., "game changer." Anyone associated with ASU program, which they're tired of getting kicked up and down by UA both in recruiting and on the scoreboard, has extremely high expectations -- as does anyone who is wanting to see more parity in the P12. He's got a big challenge ahead of him, but he's got overwhelming support across the board.

Well, except in Tucson.

[Billy Dat]

People will love Duke if they just get to know it better:

http://www.si.com/nba/2015/04/10/matt-barnes-los-angeles-clippers-kobe-bryant-lakers-chris-paul?page=3&devicetype=default
• The only player he’s ever hated in the NBA is the same guy who said that nice stuff earlier in the story. “J.J. Redick kind of changed my whole perspective on judging people, because I’m judged so much,” says (Matt) Barnes. “Before I played with him, I was like, ‘I *** hate that guy!’ He never did anything to me, but to see him at Duke and the way he acted, I was like, ‘I do not like that guy.’” Then Barnes played with Redick, and realized he was the unlikeliest of dogs. “He’s tough, and if you play dirty, he’ll play dirty,” explains Barnes. The two are now close friends.

[NashvilleDevil]

People will love Duke if they just get to know it better:

http://www.si.com/nba/2015/04/10/matt-barnes-los-angeles-clippers-kobe-bryant-lakers-chris-paul?page=3&devicetype=default
• The only player he’s ever hated in the NBA is the same guy who said that nice stuff earlier in the story. “J.J. Redick kind of changed my whole perspective on judging people, because I’m judged so much,” says (Matt) Barnes. “Before I played with him, I was like, ‘I *** hate that guy!’ He never did anything to me, but to see him at Duke and the way he acted, I was like, ‘I do not like that guy.’” Then Barnes played with Redick, and realized he was the unlikeliest of dogs. “He’s tough, and if you play dirty, he’ll play dirty,” explains Barnes. The two are now close friends.
Doesn't surprise me that Barnes dislikes Duke. He was on the '01 UCLA team that Duke, thanks to JWill scoring 18 straight, beat in the Sweet 16.

[Utley]

My first hand experience at Indy was that the tsunami was alive and well. Never had so much vitriol thrown my way - led by just about every woman from KY I saw screaming F Duke at me. The abuse from the Big 10 ten fans was more polite but I still didn't feel very popular. Worst for me was when I was returning my car at the Cincinnati airport Tuesday morning - which is technically in KY. I walk in wearing nothing but Duke from head to toe - including a Laettner autographed jacket of all things - and the lady at the counter goes we don't like Duke very much around here.

I do think this was a very likable team and won over the media. I was all but shocked to hear all the broadcasters cast the officiating aside and just say that Duke was the best team. I think the average fan still has a ways to go.

[hurleyfor3]

My first hand experience at Indy was that the tsunami was alive and well. Never had so much vitriol thrown my way - led by just about every woman from KY I saw screaming F Duke at me.

Funny, I never got any crap from anyone in Indy and I was wearing a Duke shirt everywhere. The Kentucky fans in particular seemed nervous and on edge and kept to themselves.

[weezie]

... the lady at the counter goes we don't like Duke very much around here.


Lol, was she picking her teeth with a wheat stalk and strumming on her old banjo? Are you sure she didn't say, "we don't cotton to you Dukies around here..."

I love mingling amongst the unwashed hordes. Those anti-Duke moments are priceless. I enjoy pointing and laughing.:cool:

[sagegrouse]

Funny, I never got any crap from anyone in Indy and I was wearing a Duke shirt everywhere. The Kentucky fans in particular seemed nervous and on edge and kept to themselves.

We were all dressed in Duke stuff -- nobody cared -- even the two guys at Fanfest wearing "I Still Hate Christian Laettner" shirts -- or especially the two guys at Fanfest -- they were just enjoying themselves and watching Laettner sign autographs.

As I have posted previously, there were no audible boos when Duke entered the arena or the Duke players were introduced. That was true both Saturday night and Monday night. Believe me, the Big Ten crowd HATES Kentucky with every fiber of their being -- and showed it.

[budwom]

Lol, was she picking her teeth with a wheat stalk and strumming on her old banjo? Are you sure she didn't say, "we don't cotton to you Dukies around here..."

I love mingling amongst the unwashed hordes. Those anti-Duke moments are priceless. I enjoy pointing and laughing.:cool:

Duke hate and squirrel brains are two things Kentucky fans can obsess over...we flick metaphorical boogers in their general direction with our national championship fingers.

[porkpa]

I wonder how much, if at all, the Duke Lacrosse fiasco played into and contributed to the Duke hatred scenario.

[rasputin]

I wonder how much, if at all, the Duke Lacrosse fiasco played into and contributed to the Duke hatred scenario.

Not a bit, in my view. The tsunami was already in full force.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Not a bit, in my view. The tsunami was already in full force.

Yup. If anything, I'll sure the haters just told themselves, "Total makes sense. Duke got what it deserved."

[Stray Gator]

Funny, I never got any crap from anyone in Indy and I was wearing a Duke shirt everywhere. The Kentucky fans in particular seemed nervous and on edge and kept to themselves.

Same here. I wore a Duke jacket throughout my stay in Indy and never once heard any negative remarks or saw anyone make an unpleasant face (or gesture). I was prepared for the worst early Friday afternoon, walking back from the open practice at Lucas to the Circle Centre into an oncoming horde of Kentucky fans -- thousands of whom appeared to come without tickets (but with entire families, from toddlers to elders) to take advantage of the opportunity to see their team at the open practice. Everyone I saw, including the Kentucky fans, behaved well and devoted their energy to cheering positively for their own team. We had a few friendly interactions with some Michigan State and Wisconsin fans, and of course enjoyed meeting and mingling with fans from a variety of schools in the Lobby Bar at the coaches' hotel (Hyatt Regency) -- always a great spot to hang out between sessions. The only evidence of animosity I saw was from two middle-aged Kentucky fans who were standing in the back of the Duke section after our semifinal game, and were making a few snide comments suggesting that they wouldn't have to watch Duke fans celebrating after the Cats got through with them on Monday night.

[alteran]

Same here. I wore a Duke jacket throughout my stay in Indy and never once heard any negative remarks or saw anyone make an unpleasant face (or gesture). I was prepared for the worst early Friday afternoon, walking back from the open practice at Lucas to the Circle Centre into an oncoming horde of Kentucky fans -- thousands of whom appeared to come without tickets (but with entire families, from toddlers to elders) to take advantage of the opportunity to see their team at the open practice. Everyone I saw, including the Kentucky fans, behaved well and devoted their energy to cheering positively for their own team. We had a few friendly interactions with some Michigan State and Wisconsin fans, and of course enjoyed meeting and mingling with fans from a variety of schools in the Lobby Bar at the coaches' hotel (Hyatt Regency) -- always a great spot to hang out between sessions. The only evidence of animosity I saw was from two middle-aged Kentucky fans who were standing in the back of the Duke section after our semifinal game, and were making a few snide comments suggesting that they wouldn't have to watch Duke fans celebrating after the Cats got through with them on Monday night.
And they were right-- they didn't have to watch Duke celebrate because the Cats were already through.

[Utley]

Same here. I wore a Duke jacket throughout my stay in Indy and never once heard any negative remarks or saw anyone make an unpleasant face (or gesture). I was prepared for the worst early Friday afternoon, walking back from the open practice at Lucas to the Circle Centre into an oncoming horde of Kentucky fans -- thousands of whom appeared to come without tickets (but with entire families, from toddlers to elders) to take advantage of the opportunity to see their team at the open practice. Everyone I saw, including the Kentucky fans, behaved well and devoted their energy to cheering positively for their own team. We had a few friendly interactions with some Michigan State and Wisconsin fans, and of course enjoyed meeting and mingling with fans from a variety of schools in the Lobby Bar at the coaches' hotel (Hyatt Regency) -- always a great spot to hang out between sessions. The only evidence of animosity I saw was from two middle-aged Kentucky fans who were standing in the back of the Duke section after our semifinal game, and were making a few snide comments suggesting that they wouldn't have to watch Duke fans celebrating after the Cats got through with them on Monday night.

Must just be our foursome. I got at least 5 f-bombs if not more and a bunch of other stupid remarks. I don't particularly look like Christian or JJ.

[-jk]

Same here. I wore a Duke jacket throughout my stay in Indy and never once heard any negative remarks or saw anyone make an unpleasant face (or gesture). I was prepared for the worst early Friday afternoon, walking back from the open practice at Lucas to the Circle Centre into an oncoming horde of Kentucky fans -- thousands of whom appeared to come without tickets (but with entire families, from toddlers to elders) to take advantage of the opportunity to see their team at the open practice. Everyone I saw, including the Kentucky fans, behaved well and devoted their energy to cheering positively for their own team. We had a few friendly interactions with some Michigan State and Wisconsin fans, and of course enjoyed meeting and mingling with fans from a variety of schools in the Lobby Bar at the coaches' hotel (Hyatt Regency) -- always a great spot to hang out between sessions. The only evidence of animosity I saw was from two middle-aged Kentucky fans who were standing in the back of the Duke section after our semifinal game, and were making a few snide comments suggesting that they wouldn't have to watch Duke fans celebrating after the Cats got through with them on Monday night.

That was our experience, too. Very good crowd in Indy. Everyone enjoying the moment. Made for a really fun Final Four...

-jk

[westwall]

As I have posted previously, there were no audible boos when Duke entered the arena or the Duke players were introduced. That was true both Saturday night and Monday night. .

Wait until the rest of America realizes, tomorrow, that the head of the IRS is a Dukie.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Wait until the rest of America realizes, tomorrow, that the head of the IRS is a Dukie.

This is the only legitimate reason I've heard to dislike Duke.

[gus]

This is the only legitimate reason I've heard to dislike Duke.

John Oliver's analogy is apt:

The IRS is like the anus. It's no one's favorite body part, but you need that thing working properly or everything goes to [insert a word less offensive than "wanker" but yet inexplicably filtered out in favor of that] real quick.

[devildeac]

John Oliver's analogy is apt:

The IRS is like the anus. It's no one's favorite body part, but you need that thing working properly or everything goes to [insert a word less offensive than "wanker" but yet inexplicably filtered out in favor of that] real quick.


A couple variations of "you don't have to have brains to be the boss" joke/story/moral:


http://www.spunk.org/texts/humour/sp001525.html

http://www.cs.cuhk.hk/~cslui/JOKE/leader.html

[moonpie23]

the one i don't get is our "cake walk" to the finals .....if the other teams were all so dominant and guaranteed to take us down, why couldn't they make it to the party?

.....all the other "elite" teams had to do was beat the team in front of them. Too bad the Kansas's, UNC's Nova's, and loo'villes all fell down.

[Mike Corey]

I'll add a few more pennies to the pile and report that my experience as a Duke fan was overwhelmingly positive as I interacted with, sat near, walked by, and overheard fans from the three other schools in Indianapolis.

When I first arrived Saturday evening, I came across some Michigan State bros that were very excited to be there. They probably had one too many champagne flutes, and were giving anyone and everyone a quick (slurred) razzing, no matter their affiliation.

But aside from that: Courtesy was all around.

[brevity]

Wait until the rest of America realizes, tomorrow, that the head of the IRS is a Dukie.


This is the only legitimate reason I've heard to dislike Duke.

I did not know that.

We should own it, and start calling this place (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=218133) Tax Field. When UNC visits, Duke fans can put up signs saying "You're being audited" and really put some fear in them.

[Duke95]

So, let's recap.

The head of the NBA is a Dukie.
Melinda Gates of Microsoft is a Dukie.
Tim Cook of Apple is a Dukie.
The head of the IRS is a Dukie.
Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is a Dukie.

So, the people who entertain you, make your money, take your money, and kick your enemy's rear are all Dukies.

[sagegrouse]

I did not know that.

We should own it, and start calling this place (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=218133) Tax Field. When UNC visits, Duke fans can put up signs saying "You're being audited" and really put some fear in them.

And not just any Dukie. He's a former Chairman of the Board of Trustees, John Koskinen, T'61.

[NashvilleDevil]

So, let's recap.

The head of the NBA is a Dukie.
Melinda Gates of Microsoft is a Dukie.
Tim Cook of Apple is a Dukie.
The head of the IRS is a Dukie.
Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is a Dukie.

So, the people who entertain you, make your money, take your money, and kick your enemy's rear are all Dukies.

Sean McManus, chairman of CBS sports, is also a Dukie.

[wsb3]

I don't know if the hatred has subsided any but last Tuesday on Around the Horn, I was shocked that Israel Gutierrez was actually complimentary about a question about Coach K & where he stood among the greatest coaches.

Maybe the work Coach K has done with the Olympic Teams has toned the hatred down a bit, though it amuses me when people write or say how easy it has been for him to win Gold with the talent on the team. Gee, how easy was it for Larry Brown? It is easy to forget now what state USA Basketball was in before Coach K & Jerry Colangelo
teamed up.

[sagegrouse]

I don't know if the hatred has subsided any but last Tuesday on Around the Horn, I was shocked that Israel Gutierrez was actually complimentary about a question about Coach K & where he stood among the greatest coaches.

Maybe the work Coach K has done with the Olympic Teams has toned the hatred down a bit, though it amuses me when people write or say how easy it has been for him to win Gold with the talent on the team. Gee, how easy was it for Larry Brown? It is easy to forget now what state USA Basketball was in before Coach K & Jerry Colangelo
teamed up.

I am working up an idea for a thread on Coach K .... but last summer was special... a bunch of unknowns representing the USA slaughtered the global competition ... I thought Coach K was been totally euphoric ever since ... Of course, now he has another reason to be euphoric ... An NCAA championship with 88 percent of the Duke points scored by freshmen.

[pfrduke]

I am working up an idea for a thread on Coach K .... but last summer was special... a bunch of unknowns representing the USA slaughtered the global competition ... I thought Coach K was been totally euphoric ever since ... Of course, now he has another reason to be euphoric ... An NCAA championship with 88 percent of the Duke points scored by freshmen.

"Bunch of unknowns" is a little much. That team had what likely will be three of the top 4 MVP vote getters, plus other all-NBA level talent. It's not like he took the Luke Babbitt's of the world (to pick a random NBA eighth/ninth man) and won a title - the U.S. talent level was still extremely high.

[ricks68]

We were all dressed in Duke stuff -- nobody cared -- even the two guys at Fanfest wearing "I Still Hate Christian Laettner" shirts -- or especially the two guys at Fanfest -- they were just enjoying themselves and watching Laettner sign autographs.

As I have posted previously, there were no audible boos when Duke entered the arena or the Duke players were introduced. That was true both Saturday night and Monday night. Believe me, the Big Ten crowd HATES Kentucky with every fiber of their being -- and showed it.

Ditto on this. Biggest boos of the entire FF was when Calamari stepped forward when it was announced that he got in the Hall of Fame. It was LOUD.

ricks

[ricks68]

Same here. I wore a Duke jacket throughout my stay in Indy and never once heard any negative remarks or saw anyone make an unpleasant face (or gesture). I was prepared for the worst early Friday afternoon, walking back from the open practice at Lucas to the Circle Centre into an oncoming horde of Kentucky fans -- thousands of whom appeared to come without tickets (but with entire families, from toddlers to elders) to take advantage of the opportunity to see their team at the open practice. Everyone I saw, including the Kentucky fans, behaved well and devoted their energy to cheering positively for their own team. We had a few friendly interactions with some Michigan State and Wisconsin fans, and of course enjoyed meeting and mingling with fans from a variety of schools in the Lobby Bar at the coaches' hotel (Hyatt Regency) -- always a great spot to hang out between sessions. The only evidence of animosity I saw was from two middle-aged Kentucky fans who were standing in the back of the Duke section after our semifinal game, and were making a few snide comments suggesting that they wouldn't have to watch Duke fans celebrating after the Cats got through with them on Monday night.

Pretty sure those were the two guys a row behind us next to the top of the stairs. Right after UK scored their second basket on that breakaway big man dunk, one of them screamed: "That's it! Ram it right down their throat!" Seemingly total silence after that for the rest of the game. (Put in 3 smiley faces here, as I don't know how to do that from this cell phone post.)

ricks

[Tom B.]

Not a bit, in my view. The tsunami was already in full force.

I think you're right, but man -- mid-March through mid-April of 2006 was one painful stretch to be a Duke fan.

First, the Duke men's basketball team is upset by LSU in the Sweet 16. JJ and Shelden see their careers come to a premature end, as JJ has a horrid shooting night, going 3-for-18.

Then the lacrosse allegations explode.

Then the women's basketball team loses the national championship game to Maryland in gut-wrenching fashion, as Maryland overcomes a 13-point second-half deficit, ties the game on a buzzer-beating three-pointer at the end of regulation, and ultimately wins in overtime.

Now that I've taken this walk down Memory Lane, I think I'll go give myself a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice on it.

[Henderson]

Isn't the Grayson Allen hate a media construct? Congrats to them (I guess) for creating a story line where none existed. It benefits them, and the sheep among fan bases ride along like bobbleheads. But I don't remember a groundswell of hatred until media folks started pushing the story for their own unhealthy and selfish purposes. The sheeples that buy in, boosting the media-created story lines, seem so easily led.

[-jk]

Heh: http://www.aseaofblue.com/2015/4/15/8421127/kentucky-basketball-media-hypocrites-are-fully-exposed-by-mike

-jk

[Duvall]

Isn't the Grayson Allen hate a media construct? Congrats to them (I guess) for creating a story line where none existed. It benefits them, and the sheep among fan bases ride along like bobbleheads. But I don't remember a groundswell of hatred until media folks started pushing the story for their own unhealthy and selfish purposes. The sheeples that buy in, boosting the media-created story lines, seem so easily led.

It's weirdly performative - "I hate Grayson Allen, but I don't actually know anything about him, so I am going to make up a character to hate and call him Grayson Allen and hate THAT." Which I guess is what hot takesters do with every athlete, but with Allen it happened in one evening. So strange to see.

[Philadukie]

I think it has, at least for this year, for many of the reasons others have already indicated. I was pleasantly surprised at the degree to which the sports media pushed back on the whining about the calls in the championship game, as opposed to carrying that narrative. I think there was a lot of respect for this year's team, including what Coach K did with them. He made some marvelous coaching adjustments this year.

[devildeac]

Sean McManus, chairman of CBS sports, is also a Dukie.

No wonder the refs didn't see Justise's fingernail touch that ball:rolleyes:;).

[Henderson]

Maybe there should be a hatred tsunami warning system with gradations. Like moving from Condition 1 to Condition 10. Or Condition Green to Condition Red. Maybe with some kind of cinder block conversion equation that includes a vigil component and a button that says "It's over" when the barbarians are at the gate and coming for all the craft brews, single malts, and freshly-ground Sulawesi pea-berry beans.

[Edouble]

"Bunch of unknowns" is a little much. That team had what likely will be three of the top 4 MVP vote getters, plus other all-NBA level talent. It's not like he took the Luke Babbitt's of the world (to pick a random NBA eighth/ninth man) and won a title - the U.S. talent level was still extremely high.

Well, Steph Curry didn't really show up, for whatever reason.

Coach K made Kenneth Faried look like a rising star. Faried was drafted waaaaay too high in my Fantasy League last October, thanks mostly to his summer performance.

[Billy Dat]

I am resurrecting this thread that I started (and forgot I started) because I feel like the Zion signing was an earthquake that has potentially revved up another Duke hatred tsunami. What's most interesting is that the reasons I stated in the original post, for the tsunami abating, are the same ones that are causing it to rev back up.

Ground zero for this take is the Ringer's "One Shining Podcast" with Tate Frazier and Mark "Club Trillion" Titus that hit this week.

https://www.theringer.com/2018/1/23/16924962/zion-williamson-duke-brotherhood

Now, I understand the source here...Frazier is a recent Carolina grad and Titus is largely an instigator and they are both trying to make the show funny/entertaining. As Titus says, "Unless you went to Duke, most people hate Duke", so he is pandering. However, Frazier makes the anti-Duke case and it's a rare one for a Heel. I am doing this from memory, but these were the key points:

-"The Brotherhood" is a marketing message and it's a bunch of BS. Dean Smith was the inventor of the concept of a team and program being a family and Duke turning it into a recruiting tactic is gauche.

-Frazier's sad that the Duke he used to hate is no longer the same Duke. The Duke v UNC rivarly was about overwhelming talent (UNC) facing highly intelligent hard-nosed execution (Duke). That was the magic. Duke has essentially sold it's old self out, and it makes him sad for what has been lost.

-Both hosts go hard on the idea that K is a complete hypocrite who wanted nothing to do with one-and-done talent until he started losing to it. Now, he's sold all that out yet no one calls him out on it.

-Per the recent success with one-and-dones, the credit is given to Capel whose tenure at OU ended in recruiting scandal. Yet, despite this, no one dares suggest that Duke may be doing something shady in recruiting, like paying families/handlers, etc. Everyone is very quick to accuse Cal every time he gets a great class, but no one dares suggest that K is doing the same thing, he is somehow beyond reproach.

-Finally, Duke fans are also delusional, suggesting that nothing has changed, Duke is still the same Duke from the 80s and 90s who were scholar-athletes who overachieved through collective effort and smarts, and continue to feel this way despite the commitment of a highlight-reel kid like Zion who never would have been a "Duke kid" in the past.

-Villanova and UVA and programs of that ilk are the REAL programs in college basketball. Duke and Kentucky aren't even trying to win titles, they are just trying to win the recruiting/NBA draft headlines.

-Overall, the feeling is that K has taken the program in a completely different direction yet claims its the same as it always was, that the Duke fans fall right into line behind their svengali, and that the national media and "everyone else" refuses to call Duke out on it.

I don't need to list out all the ways that their argument is highly flawed, but I was surprised to see a college basketball writer I respect, Sam Vecenie, chime in on Twitter this AM in affirmation:

@Sam_Vecenie
The first 25 minutes here are basically perfect about Duke. Love them calling out the bull****.

In the replies, I was happy to see local media guys Ben Swain and Joe Ovies clap back at Vecenie and the pod.

I know people can be sensitive about giving Duke-bashing a forum here on DBR, but I think this is a topic worth keeping an eye on. As with the rest of it, it can be easily summarized with "They hate us cause the aint us" and "Haters gonna hate", but I do feel like the stress on K's supposed hypocrisy and the eyerolls at "The Brotherhood" is a new wrinkle.

[budwom]

This is all a huge nothing burger and and most people have no idea about the stuff you're describing.

[left_hook_lacey]

I am resurrecting this thread that I started (and forgot I started) because I feel like the Zion signing was an earthquake that has potentially revved up another Duke hatred tsunami. What's most interesting is that the reasons I stated in the original post, for the tsunami abating, are the same ones that are causing it to rev back up.

Ground zero for this take is the Ringer's "One Shining Podcast" with Tate Frazier and Mark "Club Trillion" Titus that hit this week.

https://www.theringer.com/2018/1/23/16924962/zion-williamson-duke-brotherhood

Now, I understand the source here...Frazier is a recent Carolina grad and Titus is largely an instigator and they are both trying to make the show funny/entertaining. As Titus says, "Unless you went to Duke, most people hate Duke", so he is pandering. However, Frazier makes the anti-Duke case and it's a rare one for a Heel. I am doing this from memory, but these were the key points:

-"The Brotherhood" is a marketing message and it's a bunch of BS. Dean Smith was the inventor of the concept of a team and program being a family and Duke turning it into a recruiting tactic is gauche.

-Frazier's sad that the Duke he used to hate is no longer the same Duke. The Duke v UNC rivarly was about overwhelming talent (UNC) facing highly intelligent hard-nosed execution (Duke). That was the magic. Duke has essentially sold it's old self out, and it makes him sad for what has been lost.

-Both hosts go hard on the idea that K is a complete hypocrite who wanted nothing to do with one-and-done talent until he started losing to it. Now, he's sold all that out yet no one calls him out on it.

-Per the recent success with one-and-dones, the credit is given to Capel whose tenure at OU ended in recruiting scandal. Yet, despite this, no one dares suggest that Duke may be doing something shady in recruiting, like paying families/handlers, etc. Everyone is very quick to accuse Cal every time he gets a great class, but no one dares suggest that K is doing the same thing, he is somehow beyond reproach.

-Finally, Duke fans are also delusional, suggesting that nothing has changed, Duke is still the same Duke from the 80s and 90s who were scholar-athletes who overachieved through collective effort and smarts, and continue to feel this way despite the commitment of a highlight-reel kid like Zion who never would have been a "Duke kid" in the past.

-Villanova and UVA and programs of that ilk are the REAL programs in college basketball. Duke and Kentucky aren't even trying to win titles, they are just trying to win the recruiting/NBA draft headlines.

-Overall, the feeling is that K has taken the program in a completely different direction yet claims its the same as it always was, that the Duke fans fall right into line behind their svengali, and that the national media and "everyone else" refuses to call Duke out on it.

I don't need to list out all the ways that their argument is highly flawed, but I was surprised to see a college basketball writer I respect, Sam Vecenie, chime in on Twitter this AM in affirmation:

@Sam_Vecenie
The first 25 minutes here are basically perfect about Duke. Love them calling out the bull****.

In the replies, I was happy to see local media guys Ben Swain and Joe Ovies clap back at Vecenie and the pod.

I know people can be sensitive about giving Duke-bashing a forum here on DBR, but I think this is a topic worth keeping an eye on. As with the rest of it, it can be easily summarized with "They hate us cause the aint us" and "Haters gonna hate", but I do feel like the stress on K's supposed hypocrisy and the eyerolls at "The Brotherhood" is a new wrinkle.

I think it had died down quite a bit. But yes, the Zion signing has pushed some folks over the edge and stirred up old hate that had waned, IMO. We've changed. We're not what we used to be in regards to recruiting. People like to put labels on things, and place you in a type of box. We've changed our profile so that box doesn't fit us anymore. People don't like that. The first response is to lash out, which I think has stirred up old hate.

Now, if we don't do anything with the class we have this year or next year. The hate will die down again, assuming we don't land another historic class like next years. But if we get to the FF this year, and/or next year, or win another title or two with these two classes? Katie bar the door.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I am resurrecting this thread that I started (and forgot I started) because I feel like the Zion signing was an earthquake that has potentially revved up another Duke hatred tsunami. What's most interesting is that the reasons I stated in the original post, for the tsunami abating, are the same ones that are causing it to rev back up.

Ground zero for this take is the Ringer's "One Shining Podcast" with Tate Frazier and Mark "Club Trillion" Titus that hit this week.

https://www.theringer.com/2018/1/23/16924962/zion-williamson-duke-brotherhood

Now, I understand the source here...Frazier is a recent Carolina grad and Titus is largely an instigator and they are both trying to make the show funny/entertaining. As Titus says, "Unless you went to Duke, most people hate Duke", so he is pandering. However, Frazier makes the anti-Duke case and it's a rare one for a Heel. I am doing this from memory, but these were the key points:

-"The Brotherhood" is a marketing message and it's a bunch of BS. Dean Smith was the inventor of the concept of a team and program being a family and Duke turning it into a recruiting tactic is gauche.

-Frazier's sad that the Duke he used to hate is no longer the same Duke. The Duke v UNC rivarly was about overwhelming talent (UNC) facing highly intelligent hard-nosed execution (Duke). That was the magic. Duke has essentially sold it's old self out, and it makes him sad for what has been lost.

-Both hosts go hard on the idea that K is a complete hypocrite who wanted nothing to do with one-and-done talent until he started losing to it. Now, he's sold all that out yet no one calls him out on it.

-Per the recent success with one-and-dones, the credit is given to Capel whose tenure at OU ended in recruiting scandal. Yet, despite this, no one dares suggest that Duke may be doing something shady in recruiting, like paying families/handlers, etc. Everyone is very quick to accuse Cal every time he gets a great class, but no one dares suggest that K is doing the same thing, he is somehow beyond reproach.

-Finally, Duke fans are also delusional, suggesting that nothing has changed, Duke is still the same Duke from the 80s and 90s who were scholar-athletes who overachieved through collective effort and smarts, and continue to feel this way despite the commitment of a highlight-reel kid like Zion who never would have been a "Duke kid" in the past.

-Villanova and UVA and programs of that ilk are the REAL programs in college basketball. Duke and Kentucky aren't even trying to win titles, they are just trying to win the recruiting/NBA draft headlines.

-Overall, the feeling is that K has taken the program in a completely different direction yet claims its the same as it always was, that the Duke fans fall right into line behind their svengali, and that the national media and "everyone else" refuses to call Duke out on it.

I don't need to list out all the ways that their argument is highly flawed, but I was surprised to see a college basketball writer I respect, Sam Vecenie, chime in on Twitter this AM in affirmation:

@Sam_Vecenie
The first 25 minutes here are basically perfect about Duke. Love them calling out the bull****.

In the replies, I was happy to see local media guys Ben Swain and Joe Ovies clap back at Vecenie and the pod.

I know people can be sensitive about giving Duke-bashing a forum here on DBR, but I think this is a topic worth keeping an eye on. As with the rest of it, it can be easily summarized with "They hate us cause the aint us" and "Haters gonna hate", but I do feel like the stress on K's supposed hypocrisy and the eyerolls at "The Brotherhood" is a new wrinkle.

Thanks for posting. After the Vecenie tweet (and I am generally a fan of his writing), I listened to the podcast as well.

One thing I will note is that Titus, a highly entertaining writer, generally took the position that he is happy about watching Duke's team next year because it will be an exciting team.

The position that Frazier takes was just asinine UNC fan stuff. Were the Duke teams of 1999-2002 not built on overwhelming talent?

As time goes on, and some of these old threads have rekindled debates about one-and-dones, my own views have evolved slightly. Coach K has long stated that he wanted to coach the best players. That's one of the reasons he wanted to coach the USA Mens Basketball Team. They had the best players on the planet. If you look at Duke's recruiting strategy, the volume of great players recruited has increased, but the overall talent level within each class hasn't really changed. Take a look at the RSCI final rankings for the Class of 1999 (https://sites.google.com/site/rscihoops/home/1999-final):

3. Jason "Jay" Williams
8. Carlos Boozer
16. Casey Sanders
26. Michael Dunleavy

Here's the Class of 2002 (https://sites.google.com/site/rscihoops/home/2002-final)

8. Shelden Williams
11. J.J. Redick
14. Shavlik Randolph
21. Sean Dockery
30. Michael Thompson

The RSCI Database doesn't go back to 1997, but that class included William Avery, Shane Battier, Elton Brand, and Chris Burgess. They were all among the best in the country in their recruiting class.

In between those years, Duke brought in top talent, but it was a one- or two-man class of Corey Maggette, Chris Duhon, and Daniel Ewing. With the amount of roster turnover, it's only natural that Coach K and staff would have to respond by having larger recruiting classes each and every year. The era of the majority of Top 25 guys staying for 3-4 years is over. That's not Coach K's fault or a result of his coaching style so much as a result of players expecting and wanting to leave early. With so much roster turnover, Duke is now able to pitch immediate playing time. Come to Duke, we won't have a returning starter at your position! That's the main difference as far as I can tell.

Duke has always been about family atmosphere. The fact that some guys don't fit into that family - Chris Burgess, Michael Thompson, Chase Jeter, etc. - isn't a reflection of the way in which Duke has changed. It's just the way things are. Not everyone experiences college the way they anticipated or hoped. These are adolescent young men. Their decisions - to commit to Duke or to transfer - aren't always made with clear vision. It's a shame, but that's how it is and largely how it has always been. Coach K has and always will want to bring in the best. Now he can stack up those classes next to each other because the culture and expectations of these young men has changed. Sure, he's adapted to it. But he's changed less than the culture.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I am resurrecting this thread that I started (and forgot I started) because I feel like the Zion signing was an earthquake that has potentially revved up another Duke hatred tsunami. What's most interesting is that the reasons I stated in the original post, for the tsunami abating, are the same ones that are causing it to rev back up.

Ground zero for this take is the Ringer's "One Shining Podcast" with Tate Frazier and Mark "Club Trillion" Titus that hit this week.

https://www.theringer.com/2018/1/23/16924962/zion-williamson-duke-brotherhood

Now, I understand the source here...Frazier is a recent Carolina grad and Titus is largely an instigator and they are both trying to make the show funny/entertaining. As Titus says, "Unless you went to Duke, most people hate Duke", so he is pandering. However, Frazier makes the anti-Duke case and it's a rare one for a Heel. I am doing this from memory, but these were the key points:

-"The Brotherhood" is a marketing message and it's a bunch of BS. Dean Smith was the inventor of the concept of a team and program being a family and Duke turning it into a recruiting tactic is gauche.

-Frazier's sad that the Duke he used to hate is no longer the same Duke. The Duke v UNC rivarly was about overwhelming talent (UNC) facing highly intelligent hard-nosed execution (Duke). That was the magic. Duke has essentially sold it's old self out, and it makes him sad for what has been lost.

-Both hosts go hard on the idea that K is a complete hypocrite who wanted nothing to do with one-and-done talent until he started losing to it. Now, he's sold all that out yet no one calls him out on it.

-Per the recent success with one-and-dones, the credit is given to Capel whose tenure at OU ended in recruiting scandal. Yet, despite this, no one dares suggest that Duke may be doing something shady in recruiting, like paying families/handlers, etc. Everyone is very quick to accuse Cal every time he gets a great class, but no one dares suggest that K is doing the same thing, he is somehow beyond reproach.

-Finally, Duke fans are also delusional, suggesting that nothing has changed, Duke is still the same Duke from the 80s and 90s who were scholar-athletes who overachieved through collective effort and smarts, and continue to feel this way despite the commitment of a highlight-reel kid like Zion who never would have been a "Duke kid" in the past.

-Villanova and UVA and programs of that ilk are the REAL programs in college basketball. Duke and Kentucky aren't even trying to win titles, they are just trying to win the recruiting/NBA draft headlines.

-Overall, the feeling is that K has taken the program in a completely different direction yet claims its the same as it always was, that the Duke fans fall right into line behind their svengali, and that the national media and "everyone else" refuses to call Duke out on it.

I don't need to list out all the ways that their argument is highly flawed, but I was surprised to see a college basketball writer I respect, Sam Vecenie, chime in on Twitter this AM in affirmation:

@Sam_Vecenie
The first 25 minutes here are basically perfect about Duke. Love them calling out the bull****.

In the replies, I was happy to see local media guys Ben Swain and Joe Ovies clap back at Vecenie and the pod.

I know people can be sensitive about giving Duke-bashing a forum here on DBR, but I think this is a topic worth keeping an eye on. As with the rest of it, it can be easily summarized with "They hate us cause the aint us" and "Haters gonna hate", but I do feel like the stress on K's supposed hypocrisy and the eyerolls at "The Brotherhood" is a new wrinkle.

Thanks Billy. Good stuff. For the most part, this is all BS. Say what you want about Coach K, but the dude is just looking to do what every respectable coach is looking to do: win. And he's clearly doing it legally.

The part I bolded is the one part I 100% agree with. Duke fans are indeed delusional if they think Duke's recruiting profile/team profile hasn't changed over the last decade. We are getting different kids. I tend to think that Zion would never have been a Dukie prior to 2015. Things absolutely have changed. But so what? Duke is about winning and doing things correctly. And nothing we have done in the last 30 years contradicts that.

Let the haters hate.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Thanks for posting. After the Vecenie tweet (and I am generally a fan of his writing), I listened to the podcast as well.

One thing I will note is that Titus, a highly entertaining writer, generally took the position that he is happy about watching Duke's team next year because it will be an exciting team.

The position that Frazier takes was just asinine UNC fan stuff. Were the Duke teams of 1999-2002 not built on overwhelming talent?

As time goes on, and some of these old threads have rekindled debates about one-and-dones, my own views have evolved slightly. Coach K has long stated that he wanted to coach the best players. That's one of the reasons he wanted to coach the USA Mens Basketball Team. They had the best players on the planet. If you look at Duke's recruiting strategy, the volume of great players recruited has increased, but the overall talent level within each class hasn't really changed. Take a look at the RSCI final rankings for the Class of 1999 (https://sites.google.com/site/rscihoops/home/1999-final):

3. Jason "Jay" Williams
8. Carlos Boozer
16. Casey Sanders
26. Michael Dunleavy

Here's the Class of 2002 (https://sites.google.com/site/rscihoops/home/2002-final)

8. Shelden Williams
11. J.J. Redick
14. Shavlik Randolph
21. Sean Dockery
30. Michael Thompson

The RSCI Database doesn't go back to 1997, but that class included William Avery, Shane Battier, Elton Brand, and Chris Burgess. They were all among the best in the country in their recruiting class.

In between those years, Duke brought in top talent, but it was a one- or two-man class of Corey Maggette, Chris Duhon, and Daniel Ewing. With the amount of roster turnover, it's only natural that Coach K and staff would have to respond by having larger recruiting classes each and every year. The era of the majority of Top 25 guys staying for 3-4 years is over. That's not Coach K's fault or a result of his coaching style so much as a result of players expecting and wanting to leave early. With so much roster turnover, Duke is now able to pitch immediate playing time. Come to Duke, we won't have a returning starter at your position! That's the main difference as far as I can tell.

Duke has always been about family atmosphere. The fact that some guys don't fit into that family - Chris Burgess, Michael Thompson, Chase Jeter, etc. - isn't a reflection of the way in which Duke has changed. It's just the way things are. Not everyone experiences college the way they anticipated or hoped. These are adolescent young men. Their decisions - to commit to Duke or to transfer - aren't always made with clear vision. It's a shame, but that's how it is and largely how it has always been. Coach K has and always will want to bring in the best. Now he can stack up those classes next to each other because the culture and expectations of these young men has changed. Sure, he's adapted to it. But he's changed less than the culture.

Duke has always gotten elite talent. Duke has never had this much elite talent.

Look at the RSCI recruiting classes for 2016, 2017, and 2018:

2016:
2. Harry Giles
3. Jayson Tatum
11. Marques Bolden
14. Frank Jackson
35. Javin DeLaurier

2017:
1. Marvin Bagley
5. Trevon Duval
7. Wendell Carter
14. Gary Trent
59. Jordan Tucker
69. Alex O'Connell

2018:
1. RJ Barrett
2. Zion Williamson
3. Cam Reddish
7. Tre Jones

I'm sorry, but you cannot look at the last three years and say Duke has always recruited like this. 1999 and 2002 were really good, but the averages of the top 3/4 players in those classes do not compare with the averages of the top 3/4 players in the last three classes.

Duke has always gotten talent; we've never cleaned up like this before.

[Troublemaker]

Thanks Billy. Good stuff. For the most part, this is all BS. Say what you want about Coach K, but the dude is just looking to do what every respectable coach is looking to do: win. And he's clearly doing it legally.

The part I bolded is the one part I 100% agree with. Duke fans are indeed delusional if they think Duke's recruiting profile/team profile hasn't changed over the last decade. We are getting different kids. I tend to think that Zion would never have been a Dukie prior to 2015. Things absolutely have changed. But so what? Duke is about winning and doing things correctly. And nothing we have done in the last 30 years contradicts that.

Let the haters hate.

Why?

Now, recruiting power is cyclical, and there have certainly been periods in Coach K's career where Duke's recruiting cachet wasn't as strong, and so you could argue that Zion wouldn't have considered Duke strongly during those periods.

But we would've recruited him. Why wouldn't we have recruited Zion in the past?

[Natty_B]

I think Sam Vecenie is awful so I'm probably not going to put too much stock into his tweet YMMV.

Duke hate IS abating and has been and overall Zion will help that. There was MAYBE a spike this weekend because Zion picking Duke got the large and very active UK and UNC fans mad on the internet (which is where they really shine). Sad!

And dear lord man never listen to that podcast. Titus is actually kinda fine but that other kid is like if "twerp UNC fan" was perfected in some hellish laboratory. I'm proud to say I made a fake, since disabled, Serge Zwikker twitter account specifically to troll him. Then I realized I was wasting my life so I started doing productive stuff like posting here!

Anyway sorry NOT SORRY Zion picked Duke.

[left_hook_lacey]

Thanks for posting. After the Vecenie tweet (and I am generally a fan of his writing), I listened to the podcast as well.

One thing I will note is that Titus, a highly entertaining writer, generally took the position that he is happy about watching Duke's team next year because it will be an exciting team.

The position that Frazier takes was just asinine UNC fan stuff. Were the Duke teams of 1999-2002 not built on overwhelming talent?

As time goes on, and some of these old threads have rekindled debates about one-and-dones, my own views have evolved slightly. Coach K has long stated that he wanted to coach the best players. That's one of the reasons he wanted to coach the USA Mens Basketball Team. They had the best players on the planet. If you look at Duke's recruiting strategy, the volume of great players recruited has increased, but the overall talent level within each class hasn't really changed. Take a look at the RSCI final rankings for the Class of 1999 (https://sites.google.com/site/rscihoops/home/1999-final):

3. Jason "Jay" Williams
8. Carlos Boozer
16. Casey Sanders
26. Michael Dunleavy

Here's the Class of 2002 (https://sites.google.com/site/rscihoops/home/2002-final)

8. Shelden Williams
11. J.J. Redick
14. Shavlik Randolph
21. Sean Dockery
30. Michael Thompson

The RSCI Database doesn't go back to 1997, but that class included William Avery, Shane Battier, Elton Brand, and Chris Burgess. They were all among the best in the country in their recruiting class.

In between those years, Duke brought in top talent, but it was a one- or two-man class of Corey Maggette, Chris Duhon, and Daniel Ewing. With the amount of roster turnover, it's only natural that Coach K and staff would have to respond by having larger recruiting classes each and every year. The era of the majority of Top 25 guys staying for 3-4 years is over. That's not Coach K's fault or a result of his coaching style so much as a result of players expecting and wanting to leave early. With so much roster turnover, Duke is now able to pitch immediate playing time. Come to Duke, we won't have a returning starter at your position! That's the main difference as far as I can tell.

Duke has always been about family atmosphere. The fact that some guys don't fit into that family - Chris Burgess, Michael Thompson, Chase Jeter, etc. - isn't a reflection of the way in which Duke has changed. It's just the way things are. Not everyone experiences college the way they anticipated or hoped. These are adolescent young men. Their decisions - to commit to Duke or to transfer - aren't always made with clear vision. It's a shame, but that's how it is and largely how it has always been. Coach K has and always will want to bring in the best. Now he can stack up those classes next to each other because the culture and expectations of these young men has changed. Sure, he's adapted to it. But he's changed less than the culture.

Nope. Those classes don't even compare to what we've done the last 3 years in a row. Three of our starting 5(assuming they'll start) next year are #'s 1,2,3, in the class!!!

[DavidBenAkiva]

Duke has always gotten elite talent. Duke has never had this much elite talent.

Look at the RSCI recruiting classes for 2016, 2017, and 2018:

2016:
2. Harry Giles
3. Jayson Tatum
11. Marques Bolden
14. Frank Jackson
35. Javin DeLaurier

2017:
1. Marvin Bagley
5. Trevon Duval
7. Wendell Carter
14. Gary Trent
59. Jordan Tucker
69. Alex O'Connell

2018:
1. RJ Barrett
2. Zion Williamson
3. Cam Reddish
7. Tre Jones

I'm sorry, but you cannot look at the last three years and say Duke has always recruited like this. 1999 and 2002 were really good, but the averages of the top 3/4 players in those classes do not compare with the averages of the top 3/4 players in the last three classes.

Duke has always gotten talent; we've never cleaned up like this before.

I addressed this in my last post, but the counter argument is that Duke can offer top 10 players something that they haven't been able to offer in the past: An open roster spot. Trevon Duval was able to come to Duke because Frank Jackson left. Do they get Duval otherwise? Probably not. It's the same reason why they were able to recruit Carlos Boozer: Elton Brand wasn't going to be there. And then, we recruited Shelden Williams to replace Carlos Boozer. So it's not a fundamental change by Coach K so much as a shift in the culture of young players wanting and expecting to go to the NBA sooner. The roster is turning over quicker, allowing Duke to stack up these classes closer to each other. I don't think I am being delusional in suggesting the approach taken by Coach K has shifted less than the culture of the players. And I'm not saying the culture is wrong or bad. It's just different. Throughout this whole time, the players have made the best decision available to them. Maybe I am 30-40% delusional, but not 100%.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Why?

Now, recruiting power is cyclical, and there have certainly been periods in Coach K's career where Duke's recruiting cachet wasn't as strong, and so you could argue that Zion wouldn't have considered Duke during those periods.

But we would've recruited him. Why wouldn't we?

Never said we wouldn't recruit him. Just saying we wouldn't have gotten him. To me, Zion never seemed like a typical Duke recruit. Before everyone gets their panties in a bunch, let me explain. Zion is off the charts as an athlete. As a talent, he's really good but not great, especially for a top 3 player. On the surface, he looks like the opposite of Jayson Tatum (high skill, medium athleticism. Although we know Jayson's athleticism is underrated).

Duke - prior to 2016 - has missed on a bunch of insane athletes: Myles Turner, Shabazz Muhammad, John Wall, etc. Of course, Duke has gotten some, like Winslow and Maggette, but I feel it's always been the exception and not the rule. That's just my take on our recruiting prior to 2015. Coach K values talent and skill on the court moreso than sheer athleticism.

That's why I wasn't surprised by Barrett's or Reddish's committment: both are highly polished, highly talented wings. Zion is a different beast.

However, with what's happened over the last 3 years, all Duke stigmas and perceptions go out the window. It's like Coach K can cherry pick whoever the hell he wants.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I addressed this in my last post, but the counter argument is that Duke can offer top 10 players something that they haven't been able to offer in the past: An open roster spot. Trevon Duval was able to come to Duke because Frank Jackson left. Do they get Duval otherwise? Probably not. It's the same reason why they were able to recruit Carlos Boozer: Elton Brand wasn't going to be there. And then, we recruited Shelden Williams to replace Carlos Boozer. So it's not a fundamental change by Coach K so much as a shift in the culture of young players wanting and expecting to go to the NBA sooner. The roster is turning over quicker, allowing Duke to stack up these classes closer to each other. I don't think I am being delusional in suggesting the approach taken by Coach K has shifted less than the culture of the players. And I'm not saying the culture is wrong or bad. It's just different. Throughout this whole time, the players have made the best decision available to them. Maybe I am 30-40% delusional, but not 100%.

But Coach K didn't target the "best" players (those who actually played in college). In 2002, he didn't get Melo, he didn't get Felton, he didn't get McCants, he didn't get Bosh, he didn't get Jason Fraser, and he didn't get Paul Davis. And he recruited players at all those positions. I have no idea if Coach K recruited any of the players I just listed, but I'd be surprised if he didn't at least sniff out their interest in Duke.

I think you're right that more turnover leads to more recruits, but the average ranking of said recruit, especially the elite ones, has absolutely increased. That may not exclusively be a product of different recruiting tactics, but I'm sure it helps.

[CDu]

Thanks Billy. Good stuff. For the most part, this is all BS. Say what you want about Coach K, but the dude is just looking to do what every respectable coach is looking to do: win. And he's clearly doing it legally.

The part I bolded is the one part I 100% agree with. Duke fans are indeed delusional if they think Duke's recruiting profile/team profile hasn't changed over the last decade. We are getting different kids. I tend to think that Zion would never have been a Dukie prior to 2015. Things absolutely have changed. But so what? Duke is about winning and doing things correctly. And nothing we have done in the last 30 years contradicts that.

Let the haters hate.

I don't fully agree that our profile has changed. We are getting the same kids as 20 years ago, but the times have changed. We have a long history of getting top recruits. Brand, Battier, Jason Williams, Deng, McRoberts, and Livingston were all top-5 recruits. Boozer, Duhon, Shelden Williams, Paulus, Henderson, and Singler were top-10 guys. Burgess, Redick, Maggette, Randolph, Sanders, and Henderson were top-15 guys If they were recruited today, almost all would be one-and-done candidates. And we were recruiting other top-10 guys that we didn't land along the way.

Where things HAVE changed is compared to the mid/late 2000s. In that time frame, we were largely missing on the top-10 guys and entirely on the top-5 guys. We were still trying to get those guys though (Brandan Wright, Love, Monroe, and Barnes were top-5ish players that we went after but missed on). That turned with the recruitment of Irving and Rivers, and the success those guys had.

But again, I don't think Coach K has changed his philosophy. He's always recruited top talent. And from 1997-2005, he was getting that top talent in droves. It was just that stretch from 2006-2009 where we got just the one top-5ish recruit (Singler) in which things drifted a bit. Now we're back to getting those guys again.

The combination of returning to success in landing those guys and the one-and-done era exploding means we have a ton more one and dones, and that has compounded upon itself the last few years.

That said, I agree that the podcast is largely BS. I mean, really, part of his argument is that it was overwhelming talent against experienced intelligence? Did he not watch the 1999, 2001, 2002, or 2004 Duke teams? Those teams were loaded with talent. Or the 1992 and 1993 teams? They were stacked too.

And the argument that we aren't trying to win? Ridiculous. Coach K is as competitive as anyone. He is absolutely trying to win.

And I don't think Duke fans are saying that we're still the same program of juniors/seniors as in the old days. But very few consistently elite teams are. And the ones that are still that way are only that way because they have failed to get top-5 talent.

Haters gonna hate.

[CDu]

Never said we wouldn't recruit him. Just saying we wouldn't have gotten him. To me, Zion never seemed like a typical Duke recruit. Before everyone gets their panties in a bunch, let me explain. Zion is off the charts as an athlete. As a talent, he's really good but not great, especially for a top 3 player. On the surface, he looks like the opposite of Jayson Tatum (high skill, medium athleticism. Although we know Jayson's athleticism is underrated).

Duke - prior to 2016 - has missed on a bunch of insane athletes: Myles Turner, Shabazz Muhammad, John Wall, etc. Of course, Duke has gotten some, like Winslow and Maggette, but I feel it's always been the exception and not the rule. That's just my take on our recruiting prior to 2015. Coach K values talent and skill on the court moreso than sheer athleticism.

That's why I wasn't surprised by Barrett's or Reddish's committment: both are highly polished, highly talented wings. Zion is a different beast.

However, with what's happened over the last 3 years, all Duke stigmas and perceptions go out the window. It's like Coach K can cherry pick whoever the hell he wants.

All you have described here though is outcome changes, not process changes. We were always recruiting the best talent. And in a lot of cases (Brand, Battier, Williams, Deng, McRoberts) we were getting said talent. We didn't ALWAYS get said talent, but we tried.

What has changed appears to be a combination of things:
- Coach K's stature with USA Basketball and LeBron/Kobe/etc
- Irving's NBA success
- Improved branding ("the Brotherhood")
- Capel's recruiting chops probably being better than Wojo's and Collins'
- The early entry era clearing space on rosters, which allows more top talent to join together

But again, that's not a change in approach or philosophy for Coach K. It's just a change in success.

[Billy Dat]

I think we can all refute many/most/all of the points made on the podcast. As a highly attuned Duke fan, I was mostly sensitive to the perception that Duke fans have our collective heads in the sand, but maybe that's what the media hears from an artificially outsized social media cohort (which tends to be overspoken and underinformed in my opinion - not on this platform of course)

A change that I have perceived is the tsunami moving from Duke as a brand to K himself, and a lot of it is media driven.

I feel like people used to generally hate DUKE but liked/respected K. The hate was driven by a combo of winning, the elitism of the school, the distaste for its overachiveing/scrappy/annoying white players, etc.

I think the worm has turned a bit on K. Jim Sumner probably has the best handle on the truth behind what I perceive, but I sense that save for a few media members he has cultivated over the recent years (Dan Patrick being the prime example), K doesn't let many people "in" and, in general, is pretty snarky/short with them. This is in contrast to coaches who allow much more media access and are much more "real" in those interactions like Cal, Bill Self, Izzo. The sense is that K is so media trained that you are always getting a carefully plotted soundbite meant to forward a carefully plotted agenda. For example, Cal's recent shade thrown over Zion, the feeling is K would never "be real" like that. But, the times when his real competitive nature comes to the fore, like when he said Hansborough shouldn't have been in the game when Gerald smashed his nose, or when he lectured Dylan Brooks about showboating/woofing, he sticks to his guns even when it appears that he may be in the wrong. Obviously, much of this is based on a career-worth of interactions with the media and the man can do what he pleases, but I sense that he's resented for not owning up to what is perceived to be his true nature/true feelings, thus the claims of hypocrisy - and the latest perceived slight in that area is not admitting that he's changed the focus of his program to go all in on the one-and-done because he wants the best talent. What he says is that he hasn't changed anything as far as his standards, the environment changed and the quality of the kids has changed - and he makes great logical sense when he explains it in depth (as he did on JJ Redicks pod last year). Maybe the simplest answer is that anyone as successful as K will be a lightning rod no matter what he does.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I don't fully agree that our profile has changed. We are getting the same kids as 20 years ago, but the times have changed. We have a long history of getting top recruits. Brand, Battier, Jason Williams, Deng, McRoberts, and Livingston were all top-5 recruits. Boozer, Duhon, Shelden Williams, Paulus, Henderson, and Singler were top-10 guys. Burgess, Redick, Maggette, Randolph, Sanders, and Henderson were top-15 guys If they were recruited today, almost all would be one-and-done candidates. And we were recruiting other top-10 guys that we didn't land along the way.

Where things HAVE changed is compared to the mid/late 2000s. In that time frame, we were largely missing on the top-10 guys and entirely on the top-5 guys. We were still trying to get those guys though (Brandan Wright, Love, Monroe, and Barnes were top-5ish players that we went after but missed on). That turned with the recruitment of Irving and Rivers, and the success those guys had.

But again, I don't think Coach K has changed his philosophy. He's always recruited top talent. And from 1997-2005, he was getting that top talent in droves. It was just that stretch from 2006-2009 where we got just the one top-5ish recruit (Singler) in which things drifted a bit. Now we're back to getting those guys again.

The combination of returning to success in landing those guys and the one-and-done era exploding means we have a ton more one and dones, and that has compounded upon itself the last few years.

That said, I agree that the podcast is largely BS. I mean, really, part of his argument is that it was overwhelming talent against experienced intelligence? Did he not watch the 1999, 2001, 2002, or 2004 Duke teams? Those teams were loaded with talent. Or the 1992 and 1993 teams? They were stacked too.

And the argument that we aren't trying to win? Ridiculous. Coach K is as competitive as anyone. He is absolutely trying to win.

And I don't think Duke fans are saying that we're still the same program of juniors/seniors as in the old days. But very few consistently elite teams are. And the ones that are still that way are only that way because they have failed to get top-5 talent.

Haters gonna hate.

Even in those glory years (98-05. RSCI only starts in '98), Duke had zero classes with 2 recruits in the top 5 (and only counting recruits who actually went to college instead of the NBA). The last 3 classes have featured at least 2 top 5 players. That's nuts!

I fully accept that recruits are much more interested in Duke now than they were 5 years ago. And I fully understand that Coach K will always go after the best talent. But I 100% believe the recruiting tactics, messaging, marketing, ability of Assistant Coaches to relate to recruits, etc has ALL changed in the last ~5-6 years.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. To me, things certainly have changed. And, unlike some, I love change.

[CDu]

Even in those glory years (98-05. RSCI only starts in '98), Duke had zero classes with 2 recruits in the top 5 (and only counting recruits who actually went to college instead of the NBA). The last 3 classes have featured at least 2 top 5 players. That's nuts!

I fully accept that recruits are much more interested in Duke now than they were 5 years ago. And I fully understand that Coach K will always go after the best talent. But I 100% believe the recruiting tactics, messaging, marketing, ability of Assistant Coaches to relate to recruits, etc has ALL changed in the last ~5-6 years.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. To me, things certainly have changed. And, unlike some, I love change.

Brand and Battier were both top-5 recruits. Arguably #1 and #2 in fact. And when we recruited Burgess, he was also top-5, though he faded in his senior year. That 1997 class was very similar in nature to this year's class. Not quite as dominant, but pretty darn similar.

Times have changed. Results have certainly changed (especially relative to the mid/late-2000s, but even historically). Coach K's approach/philosophy hasn't.

And what the podcast is arguing is that Duke fans can't accept that our philosophy has changed, when it hasn't changed. We're just getting those guys again, and those guys are going pro now. And because those guys are going pro faster, we're in position to get more of them.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I don't fully agree that our profile has changed. We are getting the same kids as 20 years ago, but the times have changed. We have a long history of getting top recruits. Brand, Battier, Jason Williams, Deng, McRoberts, and Livingston were all top-5 recruits. Boozer, Duhon, Shelden Williams, Paulus, Henderson, and Singler were top-10 guys. Burgess, Redick, Maggette, Randolph, Sanders, and Henderson were top-15 guys If they were recruited today, almost all would be one-and-done candidates. And we were recruiting other top-10 guys that we didn't land along the way.

Where things HAVE changed is compared to the mid/late 2000s. In that time frame, we were largely missing on the top-10 guys and entirely on the top-5 guys. We were still trying to get those guys though (Brandan Wright, Love, Monroe, and Barnes were top-5ish players that we went after but missed on). That turned with the recruitment of Irving and Rivers, and the success those guys had.

But again, I don't think Coach K has changed his philosophy. He's always recruited top talent. And from 1997-2005, he was getting that top talent in droves. It was just that stretch from 2006-2009 where we got just the one top-5ish recruit (Singler) in which things drifted a bit. Now we're back to getting those guys again.

The combination of returning to success in landing those guys and the one-and-done era exploding means we have a ton more one and dones, and that has compounded upon itself the last few years.

That said, I agree that the podcast is largely BS. I mean, really, part of his argument is that it was overwhelming talent against experienced intelligence? Did he not watch the 1999, 2001, 2002, or 2004 Duke teams? Those teams were loaded with talent. Or the 1992 and 1993 teams? They were stacked too.

And the argument that we aren't trying to win? Ridiculous. Coach K is as competitive as anyone. He is absolutely trying to win.

And I don't think Duke fans are saying that we're still the same program of juniors/seniors as in the old days. But very few consistently elite teams are. And the ones that are still that way are only that way because they have failed to get top-5 talent.

Haters gonna hate.

Another asinine statement from Frazier (or was it Titus?) in that podcast: Villanova and Michigan State are the top programs of college basketball over the past 5 years. The "perception" that Duke will flame out early in the tournament. Duke in the past 5 NCAA tournaments:

2017: Second Round
2016: Sweet 16
2015: National Champions
2014: First Round
2013: Elite 8
Total Wins: 11

Villanova in the past 5 NCAA Tournaments
2017: Second Round
2016: National Champions
2015: Second Round
2014: Second Round
2013: First Round
Total Wins: 9

Michigan State in the past 5 NCAA Tournaments
2017: Second Round
2016: First Round
2015: Final 4
2014: Elite 8
2013: Sweet 16
Total Wins: 10

North Carolina in the past 5 NCAA Tournaments
2017: National Champions
2016: National Runner Up
2015: Sweet 16
2014: Second Round
2013: Second Round
Total Wins: 15

Kentucky in the past 5 NCAA Tournaments
2017: Sweet 16
2016: Second Round
2015: Final Four
2014: National Runner Up
2013: NIT First Round
Total Wins: 12

If anything, no one team has been particularly great outside of a two-year stretch.

[throatybeard]

Duke MBB recruiting certainly has escalated, but those recruiting rankings weren't handed down from Moses--they're predictions. The rankings more than a few seasons old just aren't very useful because you can see how guys turned out.

[Natty_B]

Most, all, of the people who rag on "the Brotherhood" are paunchy middle aged dudes who are online most of the day so not the target audience (elite 18 year old athletes who don't tweet their face off and listen to podcasts all day). I feel that gets missed when some reporter or online opinion guy makes what they think is a so trenchant point about Duke "marketing."

[Troublemaker]

Never said we wouldn't recruit him. Just saying we wouldn't have gotten him. To me, Zion never seemed like a typical Duke recruit. Before everyone gets their panties in a bunch, let me explain. Zion is off the charts as an athlete. As a talent, he's really good but not great, especially for a top 3 player. On the surface, he looks like the opposite of Jayson Tatum (high skill, medium athleticism. Although we know Jayson's athleticism is underrated).

Duke - prior to 2016 - has missed on a bunch of insane athletes: Myles Turner, Shabazz Muhammad, John Wall, etc. Of course, Duke has gotten some, like Winslow and Maggette, but I feel it's always been the exception and not the rule. That's just my take on our recruiting prior to 2015. Coach K values talent and skill on the court moreso than sheer athleticism.

That's why I wasn't surprised by Barrett's or Reddish's committment: both are highly polished, highly talented wings. Zion is a different beast.

However, with what's happened over the last 3 years, all Duke stigmas and perceptions go out the window. It's like Coach K can cherry pick whoever the hell he wants.


Even in those glory years (98-05. RSCI only starts in '98), Duke had zero classes with 2 recruits in the top 5 (and only counting recruits who actually went to college instead of the NBA). The last 3 classes have featured at least 2 top 5 players. That's nuts!

I fully accept that recruits are much more interested in Duke now than they were 5 years ago. And I fully understand that Coach K will always go after the best talent. But I 100% believe the recruiting tactics, messaging, marketing, ability of Assistant Coaches to relate to recruits, etc has ALL changed in the last ~5-6 years.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. To me, things certainly have changed. And, unlike some, I love change.

We fundamentally agree then if you, like me, believe we would've recruited Zion in the past but just may not have landed him.

That's a benign point, though, and I don't think that's what the two guys on the podcast were going for. I think they were making poor assumptions about Zion's personality, academic prowess, ethics, etc and saying that Duke would not have recruited such a player in the past.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I would argue that Brand and Battier were both top-5 recruits. Arguably #1 and #2 in fact. And when we recruited Burgess, he was also top-5, though he faded in his senior year. That 1997 class was very similar in nature to this year's class. Not quite as dominant, but pretty darn similar.

Times have changed. Results have certainly changed (especially relative to the mid/late-2000s, but even historically). Coach K's approach/philosophy hasn't.

And what the podcast is arguing is that Duke fans can't accept that our philosophy has changed, when it hasn't changed. We're just getting those guys again, and those guys are going pro now. And because those guys are going pro faster, we're in position to get more of them.

I think we'll agree to disagree. To me, there is a recruiting philosophy change in addition to outcomes.

[DavidBenAkiva]

I think we can all refute many/most/all of the points made on the podcast. As a highly attuned Duke fan, I was mostly sensitive to the perception that Duke fans have our collective heads in the sand, but maybe that's what the media hears from an artificially outsized social media cohort (which tends to be overspoken and underinformed in my opinion - not on this platform of course)

A change that I have perceived is the tsunami moving from Duke as a brand to K himself, and a lot of it is media driven.

I feel like people used to generally hate DUKE but liked/respected K. The hate was driven by a combo of winning, the elitism of the school, the distaste for its overachiveing/scrappy/annoying white players, etc.

I think the worm has turned a bit on K. Jim Sumner probably has the best handle on the truth behind what I perceive, but I sense that save for a few media members he has cultivated over the recent years (Dan Patrick being the prime example), K doesn't let many people "in" and, in general, is pretty snarky/short with them. This is in contrast to coaches who allow much more media access and are much more "real" in those interactions like Cal, Bill Self, Izzo. The sense is that K is so media trained that you are always getting a carefully plotted soundbite meant to forward a carefully plotted agenda. For example, Cal's recent shade thrown over Zion, the feeling is K would never "be real" like that. But, the times when his real competitive nature comes to the fore, like when he said Hansborough shouldn't have been in the game when Gerald smashed his nose, or when he lectured Dylan Brooks about showboating/woofing, he sticks to his guns even when it appears that he may be in the wrong. Obviously, much of this is based on a career-worth of interactions with the media and the man can do what he pleases, but I sense that he's resented for not owning up to what is perceived to be his true nature/true feelings, thus the claims of hypocrisy - and the latest perceived slight in that area is not admitting that he's changed the focus of his program to go all in on the one-and-done because he wants the best talent. What he says is that he hasn't changed anything as far as his standards, the environment changed and the quality of the kids has changed - and he makes great logical sense when he explains it in depth (as he did on JJ Redicks pod last year). Maybe the simplest answer is that anyone as successful as K will be a lightning rod no matter what he does.

Beautifully written.

[Natty_B]

Another asinine statement from Frazier (or was it Titus?) in that podcast: Villanova and Michigan State are the top programs of college basketball over the past 5 years. The "perception" that Duke will flame out early in the tournament. Duke in the past 5 NCAA tournaments:

2017: Second Round
2016: Sweet 16
2015: National Champions
2014: First Round
2013: Elite 8
Total Wins: 11

Villanova in the past 5 NCAA Tournaments
2017: Second Round
2016: National Champions
2015: Second Round
2014: Second Round
2013: First Round
Total Wins: 9

Michigan State in the past 5 NCAA Tournaments
2017: Second Round
2016: First Round
2015: Final 4
2014: Elite 8
2013: Sweet 16
Total Wins: 10

North Carolina in the past 5 NCAA Tournaments
2017: National Champions
2016: National Runner Up
2015: Sweet 16
2014: Second Round
2013: Second Round
Total Wins: 15

Kentucky in the past 5 NCAA Tournaments
2017: Sweet 16
2016: Second Round
2015: Final Four
2014: National Runner Up
2013: NIT First Round
Total Wins: 12

If anything, no one team has been particularly great outside of a two-year stretch.

Yep and you can include Virginia:

2013: NIT
2014: Sweet 16
2015: Round of 32
2016: Elite 8
2017: Round of 32
Total Wins: 7

The lesson here may simply be DON'T LISTEN TO PODCASTS HOSTED BY IC'S MANBABIES.

[COYS]

Hmmm, the admittedly anecdotal evidence i've seen indicates that Duke's recent recruiting success has actually made the school MORE popular with casual college basketball fans and with fans of non-blue-blood/non-ACC schools. Obviously Kansas, UK, and UNC fans want their programs to be known as THE best and are predisposed to finding ways to rationalize why DUKE SUCKS. I mean, we Duke fans all have our reasons for thinking Duke is a better program than -insert blue-blood program name here-. But I've had friends who follow schools like Temple, St. John's, Auburn, and others comment how the 2015 Duke team was impossible to hate because it was fun to watch. These same friends REALLY wanted Butler to win in 2010, for obvious reasons. It was a pretty awesome underdog story. But they also had no particular hatred for anyone on Duke's team that season. When Zion, a native of my dad's hometown of Spartanburg, SC, committed, my brother-in-law (who went to Temple and is a big basketball junkie who had seen Zion's viral highlight videos) sent out an excited text message to my family about how cool it was that we'd all be able to watch Zion next season. And while he was pumped when Temple beat Duke back in 2011-2012, he took no special glee in rubbing it in (he's also a Celtics fan and Doc was still coaching them at the time, so he also liked watching Austin play).

Fans like that want to watch entertaining basketball. They are passionate about their chosen school's team, but since their programs are rarely directly battling Duke, they are also interested in watching exciting basketball. That means they love watching the most exciting players. Right now, many of the most exciting players are picking Duke. These fans will happily root against Duke if their school happens to play them. They'll celebrate like they won the NCAAT if they beat Duke. But they hold no special hatred toward Duke.

I also do think that things like Coach K's success with NBA players for the national team, DukeBluePlanet videos, and the impressive social media presence of the Duke program have helped. The personality of Duke's players have come through a lot more which helps with both recruiting and the general public image.

Fans of other schools will (hopefully) ALWAYS be ecstatic to beat Duke, but that's because Duke is viewed by many as the best. However, I think most fans outside of UK/UNC/Kansas/etc do not have a unique hatred for Duke these days . . . especially if they are interested in watching entertaining basketball.

[flyingdutchdevil]

We fundamentally agree then if you, like me, believe we would've recruited Zion in the past but just may not have landed him.

That's a benign point, though, and I don't think that's what the two guys on the podcast were going for. I think they were making poor assumptions about Zion's personality, academic prowess, ethics, etc and saying that Duke would not have recruited such a player in the past.

If the folks on the podcast did their research right, they'd realize that a few Dukies in the 90s and 00s were not academically-inclined. I have never thought Duke seeks out academically-inclined players. I think it's the other way around. And now, the draw of academics is probably even a bigger gap to the draw of Coach K than ever before. But that's pure speculation.

[Dukiedevil]

It's interesting to me that Duke has somewhat been accepted as being mainstream by the recruits. I know a lot of people on this board don't follow the NBA, but it's important to realize that all the recruits do and that the guys they idolize are all in the NBA. It's complicated but I think the change in perception comes from a couple of different areas:

1. K's association with USA basketball and the overwhelming positive response from everyone he's played for

2. The NBA's recent trend of building super teams - I think that's why you are seeing recruits over the past 5+ year starting mirror this behavior. It started with Lebron, Wade and Bosh in Miami and has since been copied by the Warriors, Houston and to some extent Oklahoma City. Now we are seeing high level recruits copying his behavior at Duke and Kentucky. Both coaches can now point to championships won with high level freshmen making large contributions.

3. Kyrie's obvious affection for Duke also resonates with the recruits. The amount of style in both his game and personality is counter to some of the old stereotypes about Duke.

I think all of this contributes to the die-down of "everyone hates Duke" noise.

[Dev11]

I think the worm has turned a bit on K. Jim Sumner probably has the best handle on the truth behind what I perceive, but I sense that save for a few media members he has cultivated over the recent years (Dan Patrick being the prime example), K doesn't let many people "in" and, in general, is pretty snarky/short with them. This is in contrast to coaches who allow much more media access and are much more "real" in those interactions like Cal, Bill Self, Izzo. The sense is that K is so media trained that you are always getting a carefully plotted soundbite meant to forward a carefully plotted agenda. For example, Cal's recent shade thrown over Zion, the feeling is K would never "be real" like that. But, the times when his real competitive nature comes to the fore, like when he said Hansborough shouldn't have been in the game when Gerald smashed his nose, or when he lectured Dylan Brooks about showboating/woofing, he sticks to his guns even when it appears that he may be in the wrong. Obviously, much of this is based on a career-worth of interactions with the media and the man can do what he pleases, but I sense that he's resented for not owning up to what is perceived to be his true nature/true feelings, thus the claims of hypocrisy - and the latest perceived slight in that area is not admitting that he's changed the focus of his program to go all in on the one-and-done because he wants the best talent. What he says is that he hasn't changed anything as far as his standards, the environment changed and the quality of the kids has changed - and he makes great logical sense when he explains it in depth (as he did on JJ Redicks pod last year). Maybe the simplest answer is that anyone as successful as K will be a lightning rod no matter what he does.

I appreciate this analysis. K is sort of like a politician in a changing landscape. He has too much history in different eras, so no matter how the haters want to frame their arguments against him, they have ammunition spanning decades. In many ways, he's adapted, but people will always be able to poke holes in his philosophy or methods because it appears that he has changed so much.

The notion that Duke used to win with plucky nerds who stuck to a system is silly. K has had high school All-Americans featured on every team going back to Johnny Dawkins.

[tbyers11]

I am resurrecting this thread that I started (and forgot I started) because I feel like the Zion signing was an earthquake that has potentially revved up another Duke hatred tsunami. What's most interesting is that the reasons I stated in the original post, for the tsunami abating, are the same ones that are causing it to rev back up.

Ground zero for this take is the Ringer's "One Shining Podcast" with Tate Frazier and Mark "Club Trillion" Titus that hit this week.

https://www.theringer.com/2018/1/23/16924962/zion-williamson-duke-brotherhood

Now, I understand the source here...Frazier is a recent Carolina grad and Titus is largely an instigator and they are both trying to make the show funny/entertaining. As Titus says, "Unless you went to Duke, most people hate Duke", so he is pandering. However, Frazier makes the anti-Duke case and it's a rare one for a Heel. I am doing this from memory, but these were the key points:

-"The Brotherhood" is a marketing message and it's a bunch of BS. Dean Smith was the inventor of the concept of a team and program being a family and Duke turning it into a recruiting tactic is gauche.

-Frazier's sad that the Duke he used to hate is no longer the same Duke. The Duke v UNC rivarly was about overwhelming talent (UNC) facing highly intelligent hard-nosed execution (Duke). That was the magic. Duke has essentially sold it's old self out, and it makes him sad for what has been lost.

-Both hosts go hard on the idea that K is a complete hypocrite who wanted nothing to do with one-and-done talent until he started losing to it. Now, he's sold all that out yet no one calls him out on it.

-Per the recent success with one-and-dones, the credit is given to Capel whose tenure at OU ended in recruiting scandal. Yet, despite this, no one dares suggest that Duke may be doing something shady in recruiting, like paying families/handlers, etc. Everyone is very quick to accuse Cal every time he gets a great class, but no one dares suggest that K is doing the same thing, he is somehow beyond reproach.

-Finally, Duke fans are also delusional, suggesting that nothing has changed, Duke is still the same Duke from the 80s and 90s who were scholar-athletes who overachieved through collective effort and smarts, and continue to feel this way despite the commitment of a highlight-reel kid like Zion who never would have been a "Duke kid" in the past.

-Villanova and UVA and programs of that ilk are the REAL programs in college basketball. Duke and Kentucky aren't even trying to win titles, they are just trying to win the recruiting/NBA draft headlines.

-Overall, the feeling is that K has taken the program in a completely different direction yet claims its the same as it always was, that the Duke fans fall right into line behind their svengali, and that the national media and "everyone else" refuses to call Duke out on it.

I don't need to list out all the ways that their argument is highly flawed, but I was surprised to see a college basketball writer I respect, Sam Vecenie, chime in on Twitter this AM in affirmation:

@Sam_Vecenie
The first 25 minutes here are basically perfect about Duke. Love them calling out the bull****.

In the replies, I was happy to see local media guys Ben Swain and Joe Ovies clap back at Vecenie and the pod.

I know people can be sensitive about giving Duke-bashing a forum here on DBR, but I think this is a topic worth keeping an eye on. As with the rest of it, it can be easily summarized with "They hate us cause the aint us" and "Haters gonna hate", but I do feel like the stress on K's supposed hypocrisy and the eyerolls at "The Brotherhood" is a new wrinkle.

Agree that a lot of this is a nothing burger outside of UK and UNC fans (sore losers) and media who follow CBB closely and don't like Duke/K for whatever reason (restricted access etc.).

Few comments:


I don't recall K ever saying that he didn't want to recruit one-and-done talent (maybe he did, but I've never seen it). He says that as long as a kid unpacks his bags and buys in, he'll take him. He also said that he's always tried to get the top talent (who doesn't). It's just that the top talent in the 90s didn't leave after one year and we missed on fair amount of the TOP talent (late 00's). The perception that Duke won with elite but not super elite talent by being smarter or working harder is a projection by fans (both Duke and rival fans).

As for the whining about the Brotherhood, Ben Swain nails in this recent article (https://www.sportschannel8.com/dukes-brotherhood-strikes/). Key excerpt:

Look, every school in America has a “brotherhood”. All due respect to Dean Smith and his “Carolina Family”, there is not one program out there that doesn’t mobilize a network of alums to build a lasting, effective connection based on shared experiences, values and identify. Coach Smith may have been the first, no one really knows, but that’s hardly relevant. What North Carolina did, and what Duke does now, is not unique. And apologies for bursting millions of bubbles, none of them are “more real” or “less manufactured” than others. It’s all marketing, but it’s also all genuine.
People are just mad because Duke has the most successful marketing this at the moment. Shout out to Duke Blue Planet for laying the groundwork to make this possible well before the #TheBrotherhood existed

I've never found Sam Vecenie a particularly enlightening or well-written CBB writer. However, I am surprised to see such naked hatred/bias from a "respected" national journalist.

[wobatus]

Brand and Battier were both top-5 recruits. Arguably #1 and #2 in fact. And when we recruited Burgess, he was also top-5, though he faded in his senior year. That 1997 class was very similar in nature to this year's class. Not quite as dominant, but pretty darn similar.

Times have changed. Results have certainly changed (especially relative to the mid/late-2000s, but even historically). Coach K's approach/philosophy hasn't.

And what the podcast is arguing is that Duke fans can't accept that our philosophy has changed, when it hasn't changed. We're just getting those guys again, and those guys are going pro now. And because those guys are going pro faster, we're in position to get more of them.

I think the "hatred" has morphed from a class/racial aspect to where it is now more just overwhelming success breeds contempt. just like non-Yankee fans all freak out that the Yankees developed Judge, then get Stanton, and likely next year will get Bryce Harper (who is a polarizing guy anyway; also a Duke fan). I mean, the top 3 recruits? That's pretty unheard of.

But I don't think there's as much hatred now anyway, other than typical idiot fandom kind of hate of rival teams. I don't think your average fan thinks about it, other than wouldn't it be cool if some other teams besides Duke/Kansas/Kentucky/UNC made the Final 4 or won. So much of recruiting now seems concentrated at the top. UNC excepted of course. They've had some OK classes, but their last RSCI top 5 recruit was in 2010. You don't need that to be a very successful college program. Witness Villanova. Villanova now may be more akin to what Duke was years ago.

Some of it is the coach. K is of course hugely successful and that can breed contempt. But face it, he isn't exactly a lovable guy like a Valvano, even if they were buddies.

But like I said, I don't sense the hatred as much. Especially from players. They seem to respect the program and want to play there. Frankly, the anti-Duke vitriol always bothered me as a UNC fan. I mean, I didn't like it when K won his second in a row, topping anything Dean had done. I wasn't too upset with the first one, and preferred Duke to the Fab 5, so even number 2 I was conflicted. I grew up an ACC fan generally and recalled you guys being top dog after going to the '78 finals, and rooted for you against Kentucky.

I had a friend who wrote an anti-Duke diatribe for the DTH years ago they still pull out now and then. He still goes to the Duke-UNC game in Chapel Hill every year and posts about it on facebook. I find the still elevated hatred levels childish. He apparently felt some snobbery when he visited Duke's campus when applying for college. Get over it. It's funny he doesn't get that everyone thinks UNC fans are huge snobs and this has gone on for far longer than even the Af-Am scandal itself. I daresay we are even less liked than you, but at this stage deservedly so, and not to get into a pissing contest of who is more hated or deserves it.

I really wouldn't worry too much about it. It's envy of success, and I think the twinge of class/race alleged privilege (when Laettner was just a kid from a struggling family himself, this was always an overplayed theme). And like I said i think that is dying out somewhat.

[Hingeknocker]

I just listened to The Ringer podcast, and have some thoughts.

1) I've long since given up hope that the majority of media will abandon their anti-Duke stances on everything we do. Not that we're above criticism, but...haters gonna hate.

So given that, I should probably just stop there, but...

2) I don't understand the anger and consternation about "bag guys" (a Titus/Frazier coined phrase) and if the players are getting under-the-table payments. First of all, the players deserve to be paid, so if they're getting money I don't care. But what's particularly galling about their Zion anger is that they bring up the "bag guy" phenomenon as if that same issue wouldn't have applied no matter where Zion chose to go. As they say, they're mad that Duke doesn't get labeled with this...but then I also guess they didn't listen to a full 10 minutes of their own podcast, or read Reddit, or read Twitter, where Duke is explicitly labeled with it.

3) Titus makes the claim that he wouldn't want Ohio State to adopt the Duke strategy of signing the top 3 players in a class. Please. This is delusional. One of the best parts of following recruiting is seeing the losing fanbases adopt the "we didn't want him" or "we're better off without him" posture. Every school in the country would say yes if Williamson, Barrett, and Reddish showed up with pens in their hands to sign LOIs. The fictions we tell ourselves...

4) Frazier finally gives away the game about 20 minutes into their discussion. He says he misses the days when UNC was the team with all of the elite players, and Duke was the team with the less-talented players but the greater sum of the parts. So it's jealously. That's all it is, and all it has ever been, and all it ever will be.

5) Titus claims that Duke presents itself as something that it's not. That Krzyzewski thinks Duke is Butler, and still wants to be the underdog. That Duke isn't honest about the type of players it recruits and the goals it has for the program. That Duke needs to "cut the 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.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.." What evidence is there for this? Perhaps he doesn't follow all of the Duke social media outlets like I do, but I think it's pretty obvious that Duke has fully embraced the OAD recruiting strategy since 2010, celebrates that fact, and does not shy away from what the program is trying to do (#SI6HTS). He goes on to claim that Duke and Krzyzewski have "pulled the wool" over America's eyes. What is he talking about? Oh, he's referencing the old canards of Lance Thomas, Chris Duhon, and Corey Maggette.

6) I was so happy that Frazier finally brought up the Carolina family thing. I'm amazed at the lack of self-awareness that Carolina fans have to be mad about #TheBrotherhood while still holding up the Carolina family as the one true college basketball family. Titus is correct when he says that Duke isn't the only program where the players all care about each other. I think that Duke's players like each other just as much as the average D1 team. What's different about Duke is that we've had the same coach for 30+ years, and so things like K Academy can tie together players from a wide range of eras. But I'll just close with my reaction to when Frazier said that Dean Smith never used the "Carolina family" as a marketing tool, and that it was just something that was true: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA.

[JasonEvans]

Brand and Battier were both top-5 recruits. Arguably #1 and #2 in fact. And when we recruited Burgess, he was also top-5, though he faded in his senior year. That 1997 class was very similar in nature to this year's class. Not quite as dominant, but pretty darn similar.

Because of the lack of internet resources, folks forget about that 1997 class and how ridiculously good it was. Almost everyone had Brand as the #1 player in the class by the end of the year, but Battier was #1 before Brand was. Burgess had been #1 in the class when they were all juniors and did fade a bit as a senior, but he was still top 10 (he was a first team Parade All-American that year). Avery was a ways back of the other three, ranked by most folks in the low-20s, though he did make the Mickie Dee All-Star game.

The "three Bs and an A" were as good a recruiting class as Duke had ever seen and still ranks up there with the all-time great classes. It was arguably alongside the Fab Five as the best class of all time up until about the past 7 or 8 years when Kentucky and Duke began dominating recruiting in a way we really have not seen before.

-Jason "worth noting that prior to the past 5-7 years it was sorta impossible to have 2 or 3 classes in a row with multiple studs because there would not be playing time for all of them prior to the explosion of the OAD era" Evans

[Trooper]

That said, I agree that the podcast is largely BS. I mean, really, part of his argument is that it was overwhelming talent against experienced intelligence? Did he not watch the 1999, 2001, 2002, or 2004 Duke teams? Those teams were loaded with talent. Or the 1992 and 1993 teams? They were stacked too.




The reality is that no, Frazier did not watch. At least not in any meaninful way. Tate frazier was 6 to 11 years old from 1999 - 2004. His formative years, ages 13-20ish, correspond with Duke 2006-2013. Those teams largely fit the stereotype he's pandering too. Redick, Singler, Lance Thomas, Matt Jones, Zoubek, Shav, Scheyer, Paulus, McRoberts, Ryan Kelly, etc. would probably all be fairly described as having their strengths lie in basketball skills (shooting/dribbiling/passing) and basketball IQ over elite NBA level run/jump/lateral quickness oriented forms of athelticism. All those guys were McDonald's all-americans (save Zoubek) and supremely talented, but it's obviously not the same sort of run/jump athlete (or even talent) that the 1998-2004 and 2015-2018 squads had/have/will produce.

There is also a racial overlay here. Duke has always done substantially better recruiting the uber-talented white high school players than they have African American ones, which can lead to unfair stereotypes about run/jump athleticism, and frankly intelligence/effort from lazy, and even racist people (not saying Frazier in particular is either). From the high school classes of 2002-2011 (as far back as I had data), there were 33 white McDonald's all americans and Duke got 10 of them. That's an insane 30% hit rate. In that same time frame, there were 207 african american McD's guys and duke got 11, for a 5% hit rate. We got 9% overall.

From 2012 to 2018, Ther were 8 white McDonald's all americans and we got 2 of them for a 25% hit rate. there were 162 african americans, and we got 20 of them for a 12% hit rate (including Giles and Bagley being added to denominator and numerator). We got 13% overall. So, this cuts a few ways. One, we simply are getting ~45% more all americans per year (a big increase!). Two, the % gap of white vs. african american hit rate has shrunk (this could easily be randomness, or maybe it's having Capel/James on the bench vs. Collins/Wojo?). And finally Three -- the % of McD's players who are white is shrinking over time. It has fallen from 14% to 5% over this sample. So Duke has both more talented players on average now, and the racial make-up of the team is far more African American, which dissipates much of the lazy Duke stereotype that has historically been a big part of the program's reputation.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I just listened to The Ringer podcast, and have some thoughts.

2) I don't understand the anger and consternation about "bag guys" (a Titus/Frazier coined phrase) and if the players are getting under-the-table payments. First of all, the players deserve to be paid, so if they're getting money I don't care. But what's particularly galling about their Zion anger is that they bring up the "bag guy" phenomenon as if that same issue wouldn't have applied no matter where Zion chose to go. As they say, they're mad that Duke doesn't get labeled with this...but then I also guess they didn't listen to a full 10 minutes of their own podcast, or read Reddit, or read Twitter, where Duke is explicitly labeled with it.

I disagree with everything you said except "players deserve to be paid." Paying players is illegal. If someone levels accusations at Duke about paying players, I will defend Duke's honor. If they provide proof Duke is paying players, I will be wildly disappointed and lose a lot of respect for K and the program.

Regardless of how you feel about the rules, they exist. If you flaunt the rules, you may as well be down the road a piece. Because you are giving your program an unfair advantage.

[sagegrouse]

Do you count Batter and Langdon as African-American? Why?

[wobatus]

I mean, the top 3 recruits? That's pretty unheard of.


Kentucky actually had 1, 2 and 6 in the 247 composite in 2011 (Davis, Kidd-Gilchrist and Teague). Still, 1 2 and 3 is amazing. And i thought your class last year was pretty amazing at the time. Giles just never had the health after his knee injuries.

As far as UNC's recruiting, I know we have actually had some good classes and most schools would love a jackson/Pinson/Berry class. But it just doesn't match up anymore year after year with Duke, Kentucky, Kansas and Arizona. That upper echelon of recruiting success is bound to get teeth-gnashing from rival school fans. It's always been a concentrated thing but this level is pretty unprecedented the last few years.

Apologies to interject on this topic, as i know this is a Duke board, and you all live it more than I do. Just offering a bit of an outsider take.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Do you count Batter and Langdon as African-American? Why?

As someone who is bi-racial, I would absolutely count more towards "Asian" instead of "Caucasian" if "both" isn't an option. Duke missed on having their first Asian basketball player by not recruiting me.

[Hingeknocker]

I disagree with everything you said except "players deserve to be paid." Paying players is illegal. If someone levels accusations at Duke about paying players, I will defend Duke's honor. If they provide proof Duke is paying players, I will be wildly disappointed and lose a lot of respect for K and the program.

Regardless of how you feel about the rules, they exist. If you flaunt the rules, you may as well be down the road a piece. Because you are giving your program an unfair advantage.

My real point was that it's hypocritical for Titus/Frazier to complain about Zion going to Duke because of a "bag drop" while simultaneously admitting (and essentially endorsing) that that same thing happens elsewhere.

[Natty_B]

The reality is that no, Frazier did not watch. At least not in any meaninful way. Tate frazier was 6 to 11 years old from 1999 - 2004. His formative years, ages 13-20ish, correspond with Duke 2006-2013. Those teams largely fit the stereotype he's pandering too. Redick, Singler, Lance Thomas, Matt Jones, Zoubek, Shav, Scheyer, Paulus, McRoberts, Ryan Kelly, etc. would probably all be fairly described as having their strengths lie in basketball skills (shooting/dribbiling/passing) and basketball IQ over elite NBA level run/jump/lateral quickness oriented forms of athelticism. All those guys were McDonald's all-americans (save Zoubek) and supremely talented, but it's obviously not the same sort of run/jump athlete (or even talent) that the 1998-2004 and 2015-2018 squads had/have/will produce.

I agree but what's funny is UNC from 06-13 was most notable for having the Carolina Christ himself Tyler H. who also wasn't a NBA athlete type (as evidenced by the stamps on his passport). It's ALMOST like this podcast, which isn't even very highly ranked among sports podcasts - The Ringer overall is a major dud, was just a bunch of known Duke haters throwing dumb poo against the wall with no real facts or logic.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Do you count Batter and Langdon as African-American? Why?

Do people count Obama as the first black president? I don't understand these rules, I don't know who created them, but there you go.

[devildeac]

Kentucky actually had 1, 2 and 6 in the 247 composite in 2011 (Davis, Kidd-Gilchrist and Teague). Still, 1 2 and 3 is amazing. And i thought your class last year was pretty amazing at the time. Giles just never had the health after his knee injuries.

As far as UNC's recruiting, I know we have actually had some good classes and most schools would love a jackson/Pinson/Berry class. But it just doesn't match up anymore year after year with Duke, Kentucky, Kansas and Arizona. That upper echelon of recruiting success is bound to get teeth-gnashing from rival school fans. It's always been a concentrated thing but this level is pretty unprecedented the last few years.

Apologies to interject on this topic, as i know this is a Duke board, and you all live it more than I do. Just offering a bit of an outsider take.

No apology needed. Outsider take always welcome. I believe your format/thoughts/perspectives/analyses have been very well presented, organized and received and highly unlikely (I think) to provoke a personal outbreak and/or widespread epidemic of celiac sprue or gluten-sensitive enteropathy. ;)

[wobatus]

Because of the lack of internet resources, folks forget about that 1997 class and how ridiculously good it was. Almost everyone had Brand as the #1 player in the class by the end of the year, but Battier was #1 before Brand was. Burgess had been #1 in the class when they were all juniors and did fade a bit as a senior, but he was still top 10 (he was a first team Parade All-American that year). Avery was a ways back of the other three, ranked by most folks in the low-20s, though he did make the Mickie Dee All-Star game.

The "three Bs and an A" were as good a recruiting class as Duke had ever seen and still ranks up there with the all-time great classes. It was arguably alongside the Fab Five as the best class of all time up until about the past 7 or 8 years when Kentucky and Duke began dominating recruiting in a way we really have not seen before.

-Jason "worth noting that prior to the past 5-7 years it was sorta impossible to have 2 or 3 classes in a row with multiple studs because there would not be playing time for all of them prior to the explosion of the OAD era" Evans

I have to admit i forgot that those guys were all so highly ranked.

[JasonEvans]

I have to admit i forgot that those guys were all so highly ranked.

The three Bs and an A class even gave rise to a term on DBR. When Brand and Battier were on board and it appeared we were also going to get Burgess, folks starting talking about how they were giddy over the class. Pretty soon, many of us were using the term, GGLC (getting giddy, losing control), to describe our feelings. It stuck and there is still a DBR poster to this day who goes by the posting name GGLC (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/member.php?5058-GGLC).

-Jason "I feel pretty GGLC about next year's recruiting haul, that's for sure" Evans

[Trooper]

Do you count Batter and Langdon as African-American? Why?

Those guys weren't in the sample set -- way before the data. The data started in 2002. Not sure how Austin Rivers was counted.

[devildeac]

Those guys weren't in the sample set -- way before the data. The data started in 2002. Not sure how Austin Rivers was counted.

One if by land.

Two if by sea.

Three if by Rivers.

[DavidBenAkiva]

OK, so it's clear that Duke has put together an unprecedented string of recruiting success over the past 4 years. As I think about this in depth, I see three eras of Duke recruiting under Coach K. And what I see is a man and a program that adapts to the environment.

Era 1, 1980-1994: Almost every recruit goes to college and most players remain in college for 2-4 years
We all know about this era. Coach K built the Duke program back after the Bucky Waters years. Duke adjusted to the era by putting together a great recruiting class, most notably 1982 and 1988 while supplementing that with a few or one or two superior players in the between years. This was an era marked by Duke dominance over college basketball. Between 1986 and 1994, Duke went to 7 of 9 Final Fours and won 2 National Championships.

Era 2, 1995-2005: More and more recruits go straight to the NBA, but most go to college and stay 2-4 years
Kevin Garnett became the first player since Moses Malone to forgo college and go straight to the NBA. In subsequent years, more and more high school players go "preps-to-pros." Duke continues stringing together big, top-rated classes every 2-3 years while supplementing those classes with one or two Top 25 recruits in the in-between years. This also coincides with a re-invigorated Duke program that has a rather dominant stretch of performance between 1997 and 2004 that included 3 Final Fours and a National Championship. As the era progresses, fewer and fewer Top 25 players want to go to college. Duke famously went after a few of these guys (Shaun Livingston most notably). Here's a look at the number of preps-to-pros, using the RSCI database, that went straight to the NBA.

1998: Top 3 recruits, based on RSCI (#1 Al Harrington, #2 Rashard Lewis, and #3 Korleone Young) go straight to the NBA
1999: 2 of the Top 12 recruits (#8 Jonathan Bender, #12 Leon Smith)
2000: 2 of the Top 6 (#3 Darius Miles, #6 DeShawn Stevenson)
2001: 5 of the Top 8 (#1 Eddy Curry, #4 Tyson Chandler, #5 Ousmane Cisse, #6 Kwame Brown, #8 Desangna Diop)
2002: #1 player (Amare Stoudemire)
2003: 5 of the Top 20 (#1 LeBron James, #4 Ndudi Ebi, #5 Kendrick Perkins, #14 Travis Outlaw, #20 James Lang)
2004: 6 of the Top 8 (#1 Dwight Howard, #2 Shaun Livingston, #3 Al Jefferson, #4 Josh Smith, #6 Sebastian Telfair, #8 Robert Swift)
2005: 8 of the Top 18 (#2 Monta Ellis, #3 Martell Webster, #5 Louis Williams, #10 Andrew Bynum, #12 C.J. Miles, #14 Amir Johnson, #16 Gerald Green, #18 Anday Blatche)

The ear ends with a trip to the Final 4 and ironically, the second of two pre-one-and-done players as Luol Deng leaves behind a team made up mostly 4-year players.

Era 3, 2006-Present: The one-and-done era, where Duke switches strategies to ultimately embracing one-and-done recruits
Ohip State, of all schools, is the first school to successfully feature one-and-done talent on a top team. They lose to repeat-champion Florida in the National Championship game with a roster that included Greg Oden, Mike Conley, Jr., and Daquan Cook. Meanwhile, Duke enters a rough stretch while laying down the foundation for future success with recruiting classes that very much resembles classes of the previous era:

2006: Gerald Henderson (RSCI #10), Lance Thomas (#20), Brian Zoubek (#25), Jon Scheyer (#28)
2007: Kyle Singler (#6), Nolan Smith (#18), Taylor King (#27)
2009: Ryan Kelly (#14), Mason Plumlee (#18), Andre Dawkins (NR, reclassified)

These players form the core of a squad that went to a Sweet 16, National Champions, Sweet 16, First Round, and then Elite 8, good for 13 NCAA Tournament wins in 5 seasons. Prior to the Elite 8 run in 2013, Coach K starts explicitly targeting one-and-done players. In 2010, it's Kyrie Irving. In 2011, Austin Rivers. In 2013, it's Jabari Parker. Then the floodgates open as Duke assembles its first successful team featuring multiple one-and-done players in 2014-15, the class of Grayson Allen, Tyus Jones, Jahlil Okafor, and Justise Winslow. We know what's happened from here.

I think this shows a program that adapts to changes. Around the time of these changes in era, Duke has struggled. In 1995, Coach K's injury and other issues contributed to the last time the team failed to make the NCAA Tournament. In 2007, the first time Duke lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament (following a stretch of 9 consecutive trips to the Sweet 16) since 1996. This era has been punctuated by volatility in roster, partly due to health but mostly due to one-and-done players. I read this history as one of adaptation, willingness to embrace change. I hope that Duke doesn't falter as the era of the one-and-done appears to end. So, too, might Coach K's reign as the head of the Duke basketball program. Ideally, he should go out on top, showing that he has adapted once again to the era. It's unlikely to happen, but I would love it if Duke could win consecutive titles again at the end of Coach K's career just to show that he is the best. It'd be great for the players and the program, too. We're nearing 40 years of Coach K at Duke and it's been a wildly successful ride. Here's to the thrilling conclusion (whenever that happens)!

[Owen Meany]

There is a crushing irony to a UNC grad calling out Duke for appearances vs reality. I can truly not conceive of a bigger gap in the reality vs the cultivated and marketed perception of a program than has been exposed at UNC (the recent scandals at UNC and the administration's response vs the sanctimony of "the Carolina Way" that was pushed down everyone's throat for years).


Dean Smith was a great coach. He did some very good things off the court also. But I think overzealous UNC fans cheapen his memory by attributing broad, non-specific "things" to him. It's odd to claim he invented pointing. Its odd to claim he was the first ACC coach to recruit and sign a black player when he was not. And its odd to claim he invented family. UNC did/does have a large alumni base in the NBA, and they have sold it like crazy (i.e. Jordan would pop up conveniently to meet big recruits - or even, most effectively, the mom of a recruit who was so obsessed that she gave the middle name Jordan to 2 of her children). But Smith didn't invent "family", networking, players bonding, etc.


Coach K has always pushed relationships within the program. He wisely "institutionalized" and formalized it with the K Academy to ensure that players had a specific time to come, get back together, etc. Its a remarkable thing, with a very large number of basketball alumni getting together every year. I can't think of anything similar anywhere else. But it stayed, largely, unknown and unremarked upon for years. And it obviously still is for the majority of the public, particularly those crying about the "brotherhood". But Coach K made a very conscious decision a few years ago to combat the Duke negativity by having the program market itself. Someone, very wisely in hindsight, attached "The Brotherhood" moniker to what Duke already had in place. The name is new, but the network and its benefits took years to build and has been in place for many years.


I can understand someone, particularly someone looking for a reason to hate Duke, looking with a jaundiced eye at a OAD athlete talking about the brotherhood. But the reality is that these kids can, and have, benefited greatly from this. The NBA is a unique challenge for a young man with a ridiculous amount of money who is on his own suddenly. These young men are in very, very unique situations that only an extremely small number of people can relate to. It just so happens that, thanks to Coach K's and Duke's success, the Duke program is overflowing with such people. Its invaluable to have a home to touch base with. Somewhere where you are surrounded by others who understand the challenges you face, who can give advice and share experiences, and who have their own success and are not looking to profit from you. Duke definitely offers that. And it has a very real value.

[subzero02]

I hope the hatred Tsunami never subsides. If they don't hate you, that means you probably aren't relevant and definitely aren't feared.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I hope the hatred Tsunami never subsides. If they don't hate you, that means you probably aren't relevant and definitely aren't feared.

Like Indiana?

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Like Indiana?

What's an "Indiana?"

[flyingdutchdevil]

What's an "Indiana?"

It's a place where you throw chairs, chock college students, and say senile things.

[CDu]

It's a place where you throw chairs, chock college students, and say senile things.

"chock"?

[cato]

I hope the hatred Tsunami never subsides. If they don't hate you, that means you probably aren't relevant and definitely aren't feared.


Like Indiana?


What's an "Indiana?"

Yep.

That said, to the extent the Duke hate tsunami reached my little corner of the West Coast, it has subsided. For years, when I asked someone to put the Duke game on at a bar, I would get at least one, “I hate Duke” comment.

Now, I only get that if there happens to be an ACC fan sitting near by. Or a Kentucky fan, but I don’t see many of those in the wild.

[tbyers11]

"chock"?

Choke. I assume. As in Bob Knight and Neil Reed

[CDu]

Choke. I assume. As in Bob Knight and Neil Reed

I know, I was just jocking around. ;) Giving the Dutchman a good-natured hard time.

[tbyers11]

I know, I was just jocking around. ;) Giving the Dutchman a good-natured hard time.

I should have assuming you were jocking :)

I also had to pause for a second and think if chocking was something the cool kids were doing that I'm too old to be aware of.

Like the Tide Pod Challenge

[DarkstarWahoo]

OK, so it's clear that Duke has put together an unprecedented string of recruiting success over the past 4 years. As I think about this in depth, I see three eras of Duke recruiting under Coach K. And what I see is a man and a program that adapts to the environment.

Era 1, 1980-1994: Almost every recruit goes to college and most players remain in college for 2-4 years
We all know about this era. Coach K built the Duke program back after the Bucky Waters years. Duke adjusted to the era by putting together a great recruiting class, most notably 1982 and 1988 while supplementing that with a few or one or two superior players in the between years. This was an era marked by Duke dominance over college basketball. Between 1986 and 1994, Duke went to 7 of 9 Final Fours and won 2 National Championships.

Era 2, 1995-2005: More and more recruits go straight to the NBA, but most go to college and stay 2-4 years
Kevin Garnett became the first player since Moses Malone to forgo college and go straight to the NBA. In subsequent years, more and more high school players go "preps-to-pros." Duke continues stringing together big, top-rated classes every 2-3 years while supplementing those classes with one or two Top 25 recruits in the in-between years. This also coincides with a re-invigorated Duke program that has a rather dominant stretch of performance between 1997 and 2004 that included 3 Final Fours and a National Championship. As the era progresses, fewer and fewer Top 25 players want to go to college. Duke famously went after a few of these guys (Shaun Livingston most notably). Here's a look at the number of preps-to-pros, using the RSCI database, that went straight to the NBA.

1998: Top 3 recruits, based on RSCI (#1 Al Harrington, #2 Rashard Lewis, and #3 Korleone Young) go straight to the NBA
1999: 2 of the Top 12 recruits (#8 Jonathan Bender, #12 Leon Smith)
2000: 2 of the Top 6 (#3 Darius Miles, #6 DeShawn Stevenson)
2001: 5 of the Top 8 (#1 Eddy Curry, #4 Tyson Chandler, #5 Ousmane Cisse, #6 Kwame Brown, #8 Desangna Diop)
2002: #1 player (Amare Stoudemire)
2003: 5 of the Top 20 (#1 LeBron James, #4 Ndudi Ebi, #5 Kendrick Perkins, #14 Travis Outlaw, #20 James Lang)
2004: 6 of the Top 8 (#1 Dwight Howard, #2 Shaun Livingston, #3 Al Jefferson, #4 Josh Smith, #6 Sebastian Telfair, #8 Robert Swift)
2005: 8 of the Top 18 (#2 Monta Ellis, #3 Martell Webster, #5 Louis Williams, #10 Andrew Bynum, #12 C.J. Miles, #14 Amir Johnson, #16 Gerald Green, #18 Anday Blatche)

The ear ends with a trip to the Final 4 and ironically, the second of two pre-one-and-done players as Luol Deng leaves behind a team made up mostly 4-year players.

Era 3, 2006-Present: The one-and-done era, where Duke switches strategies to ultimately embracing one-and-done recruits
Ohip State, of all schools, is the first school to successfully feature one-and-done talent on a top team. They lose to repeat-champion Florida in the National Championship game with a roster that included Greg Oden, Mike Conley, Jr., and Daquan Cook. Meanwhile, Duke enters a rough stretch while laying down the foundation for future success with recruiting classes that very much resembles classes of the previous era:

2006: Gerald Henderson (RSCI #10), Lance Thomas (#20), Brian Zoubek (#25), Jon Scheyer (#28)
2007: Kyle Singler (#6), Nolan Smith (#18), Taylor King (#27)
2009: Ryan Kelly (#14), Mason Plumlee (#18), Andre Dawkins (NR, reclassified)

These players form the core of a squad that went to a Sweet 16, National Champions, Sweet 16, First Round, and then Elite 8, good for 13 NCAA Tournament wins in 5 seasons. Prior to the Elite 8 run in 2013, Coach K starts explicitly targeting one-and-done players. In 2010, it's Kyrie Irving. In 2011, Austin Rivers. In 2013, it's Jabari Parker. Then the floodgates open as Duke assembles its first successful team featuring multiple one-and-done players in 2014-15, the class of Grayson Allen, Tyus Jones, Jahlil Okafor, and Justise Winslow. We know what's happened from here.

I think this shows a program that adapts to changes. Around the time of these changes in era, Duke has struggled. In 1995, Coach K's injury and other issues contributed to the last time the team failed to make the NCAA Tournament. In 2007, the first time Duke lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament (following a stretch of 9 consecutive trips to the Sweet 16) since 1996. This era has been punctuated by volatility in roster, partly due to health but mostly due to one-and-done players. I read this history as one of adaptation, willingness to embrace change. I hope that Duke doesn't falter as the era of the one-and-done appears to end. So, too, might Coach K's reign as the head of the Duke basketball program. Ideally, he should go out on top, showing that he has adapted once again to the era. It's unlikely to happen, but I would love it if Duke could win consecutive titles again at the end of Coach K's career just to show that he is the best. It'd be great for the players and the program, too. We're nearing 40 years of Coach K at Duke and it's been a wildly successful ride. Here's to the thrilling conclusion (whenever that happens)!

Livingston actually committed to Duke, did he not? He's a guy I'm really glad to see get his career back on track after that horrific injury.

DeSegana Diop was going to take Pete Gillen's program to the next level. He's still a meme on the Sabre - anytime someone asks how to pronounce a name or a word, one of the answers will inevitably be "Jop."

[devildeac]

I should have assuming you were jocking :)

I also had to pause for a second and think if chocking was something the cool kids were doing that I'm too old to be aware of.

Like the Tide Pod Challenge

I actually thought fdd meant "chucking" as in chucking a chair (or student) in a similar manner. :o:rolleyes:

[wobatus]

OK, so it's clear that Duke has put together an unprecedented string of recruiting success over the past 4 years. As I think about this in depth, I see three eras of Duke recruiting under Coach K. And what I see is a man and a program that adapts to the environment.

Era 1, 1980-1994: Almost every recruit goes to college and most players remain in college for 2-4 years
We all know about this era. Coach K built the Duke program back after the Bucky Waters years. Duke adjusted to the era by putting together a great recruiting class, most notably 1982 and 1988 while supplementing that with a few or one or two superior players in the between years. This was an era marked by Duke dominance over college basketball. Between 1986 and 1994, Duke went to 7 of 9 Final Fours and won 2 National Championships.



What happened to the Bill Foster years? Duke made the '78 Finals, Banks was one of the biggest recruits in the country and K inherited him (he was considered 1 of the top 2 I think with Albert King in his class; Earvin Johnson was big but I don't think had quite the rep of King and Banks in HS), and Duke had number 1 rankings at some point in '78-'79 and '79-'80, the year before K got there. He didn't inherit an awesome squad but Duke was already a national power. And Emma, Engelland and Tissaw was considered a pretty good class from the year before he got there. Emma was a Street & Smiths AA in High School. This is a quibble, he had to build it back up again, but he wasn't building back up from the Bucky Waters years, because Foster had already done that. I just think K needed a few years to restock with his kind of guys.

[flyingdutchdevil]

I know, I was just jocking around. ;) Giving the Dutchman a good-natured hard time.

:(

Sad Dutchman

[The Gordog]

What's an "Indiana?"

We called the DOG Indiana!

[Bob Green]

Coach K built the Duke program back after the Bucky Waters years.

Perhaps I am interpreting your post too literally but...

There were two coaches at Duke between Bucky Waters and Coach K: Neill McGeachy and Bill Foster. Duke played in the 1978 National Championship game under Coach Bill Foster so if any coach "built the Duke program back after the Bucky Water years" the credit goes to Bill Foster.

[rasputin]

Of course, the hatred tsunami didn't start until we had won some national titles. Before the titles, people liked us. Lots of people were happy that Duke beat UNLV in the '91 semis.

[kAzE]

Of course, the hatred tsunami didn't start until we had won some national titles. Before the titles, people liked us. Lots of people were happy that Duke beat UNLV in the '91 semis.

8029

I'm okay with being the villain.

[AGDukesky]

We called the DOG Indiana!

Nice!

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

We called the DOG Indiana!

Username checks out...

[Bull City Proud]

I'm sorry to see such an excellent commentator apparently buying into the ridiculous meme that Coach K is more obnoxious or aggressive to referees than other coaches or somehow "works" them more. This meme drives me nuts. If you actually pay attention to the sideline as much as you can during a TV broadcast or attend a game in person and watch the benches, you will quickly see that K for many years has been actually much less demonstrative than most coaches and does only a moderate amount of talking to the backs of the refs about things he doesn't like-about average I'd say for a head coach.

I agree with you. I don’t think Coach K complains enough to officials like he used to do. He has mellowed in that regard. Contrast that with Huggins, Calhoun, Boeheim(Cryheim) Crean , Sean Miller, etc..

[Bull City Proud]

There is a crushing irony to a UNC grad calling out Duke for appearances vs reality. I can truly not conceive of a bigger gap in the reality vs the cultivated and marketed perception of a program than has been exposed at UNC (the recent scandals at UNC and the administration's response vs the sanctimony of "the Carolina Way" that was pushed down everyone's throat for years).


Dean Smith was a great coach. He did some very good things off the court also. But I think overzealous UNC fans cheapen his memory by attributing broad, non-specific "things" to him. It's odd to claim he invented pointing. Its odd to claim he was the first ACC coach to recruit and sign a black player when he was not. And its odd to claim he invented family. UNC did/does have a large alumni base in the NBA, and they have sold it like crazy (i.e. Jordan would pop up conveniently to meet big recruits - or even, most effectively, the mom of a recruit who was so obsessed that she gave the middle name Jordan to 2 of her children). But Smith didn't invent "family", networking, players bonding, g

Coach K has always pushed relationships within the program. He wisely "institutionalized" and formalized it with the K Academy to ensure that players had a specific time to come, get back together, etc. Its a remarkable thing, with a very large number of basketball alumni getting together every year. I can't think of anything similar anywhere else. But it stayed, largely, unknown and unremarked upon for years. And it obviously still is for the majority of the public, particularly those crying about the "brotherhood". But Coach K made a very conscious decision a few years ago to combat the Duke negativity by having the program market itself. Someone, very wisely in hindsight, attached "The Brotherhood" moniker to what Duke already had in place. The name is new, but the network and its benefits took years to build and has been in place for many years.


I can understand someone, particularly someone looking for a reason to hate Duke, looking with a jaundiced eye at a OAD athlete talking about the brotherhood. But the reality is that these kids can, and have, benefited greatly from this. The NBA is a unique challenge for a young man with a ridiculous amount of money who is on his own suddenly. These young men are in very, very unique situations that only an extremely small number of people can relate to. It just so happens that, thanks to Coach K's and Duke's success, the Duke program is overflowing with such people. Its invaluable to have a home to touch base with. Somewhere where you are surrounded by others who understand the challenges you face, who can give advice and share experiences, and who have their own success and are not looking to profit from you. Duke definitely offers that. And it has a very real value.

Great post, Very good analysis .

[DavidBenAkiva]

Perhaps I am interpreting your post too literally but...

There were two coaches at Duke between Bucky Waters and Coach K: Neill McGeachy and Bill Foster. Duke played in the 1978 National Championship game under Coach Bill Foster so if any coach "built the Duke program back after the Bucky Water years" the credit goes to Bill Foster.

Brain fart - meant to write Bill Foster but wrote Bucky Waters.

What I meant from built it back up is that Coach K had to rebuild his program after inheriting Foster's players.

[BD80]

For those claiming that Duke is recruiting differently, forgoing our claim of academic superiority, is there evidence that our academic standards in recruiting have been lowered?

Perhaps it is not as academically challenging in a single year at Duke as it is to face upper level courses on path to a declared major, but my understanding is that we are still bringing in kids who are up to the academic challenge at Duke and require that they meet the academic standards.

[hurleyfor3]

What's an "Indiana?"

Why, it's the state national championships come from, that and Minnesota.

More generally, I like being better than other people, so hate on.

[duketaylor]

I actually thought fdd meant "chucking" as in chucking a chair (or student) in a similar manner. :o:rolleyes:

I resemble that remark.:cool:

[left_hook_lacey]

For those claiming that Duke is recruiting differently, forgoing our claim of academic superiority, is there evidence that our academic standards in recruiting have been lowered?

Perhaps it is not as academically challenging in a single year at Duke as it is to face upper level courses on path to a declared major, but my understanding is that we are still bringing in kids who are up to the academic challenge at Duke and require that they meet the academic standards.

I think that's how we, and other schools, are pulling this off with some of these players. Does anyone know if you have to be enrolled in a degree program? Couldn't you take the "fun" classes like "Varsity Athletics" and "Beer 101: A Devildeac approach to hops"? NCAA rules say a student athlete must take at least 12 credit hours per semester. They're only here, what, two semesters? That's 24 credit hours. Could they, or do they, just take these type of classes the short time they're in school?

I hear a lot of UNC fans claim that our one and dones actually take some classes at NC Central. Is there any truth to that? Or, is that normal?

[grad_devil]

I think that's how we, and other schools, are pulling this off with some of these players. Does anyone know if you have to be enrolled in a degree program? Couldn't you take the "fun" classes like "Varsity Athletics" and "Beer 101: A Devildeac approach to hops"? NCAA rules say a student athlete must take at least 12 credit hours per semester. They're only here, what, two semesters? That's 24 credit hours. Could they, or do they, just take these type of classes the short time they're in school?

I hear a lot of UNC fans claim that our one and dones actually take some classes at NC Central. Is there any truth to that? Or, is that normal?

In Division II, the first two years (4 semesters) any courses can be taken, as long as the SA is meeting GPA and hour requirements. Starting in the 5th semester, the SA must start meeting Progress Toward Degree (PTD) requirements. I'm fairly certain Division I follows a similar model.

[CDu]

I think that's how we, and other schools, are pulling this off with some of these players. Does anyone know if you have to be enrolled in a degree program? Couldn't you take the "fun" classes like "Varsity Athletics" and "Beer 101: A Devildeac approach to hops"? NCAA rules say a student athlete must take at least 12 credit hours per semester. They're only here, what, two semesters? That's 24 credit hours. Could they, or do they, just take these type of classes the short time they're in school?

I hear a lot of UNC fans claim that our one and dones actually take some classes at NC Central. Is there any truth to that? Or, is that normal?

I think they are required to take the freshman writing course. But aside from that, I think they can take anything so long as they are full-credit classes.

I would imagine that there is a healthy dose of easy courses for these guys, even at Duke.

For those around longer than one year, it would get more complicated, as then you need to be on path to graduate. I.e., you need to be making progress towards a degree in some major.

Of course, many non-science degrees have fairly low number of required courses such that you could still complete the degree after not really making much progress the first two years. I got a second major in economics having taken just two econ courses through my first two years, all while also completing an engineering degree. So I imagine that even with two years of fluffier courses, a student in Trinity can stay on track to finish.

[devildeac]

I think that's how we, and other schools, are pulling this off with some of these players. Does anyone know if you have to be enrolled in a degree program? Couldn't you take the "fun" classes like "Varsity Athletics" and "Beer 101: A Devildeac approach to hops"? NCAA rules say a student athlete must take at least 12 credit hours per semester. They're only here, what, two semesters? That's 24 credit hours. Could they, or do they, just take these type of classes the short time they're in school?

I hear a lot of UNC fans claim that our one and dones actually take some classes at NC Central. Is there any truth to that? Or, is that normal?

I'm not aware of any course like that being available at Duke. Yet:o. But, I have some free time in the evenings if they're looking for an instructor. No sampling, obviously, unless you're 21 years old. :o;)

[left_hook_lacey]

I'm not aware of any course like that being available at Duke. Yet:o. But, I have some free time in the evenings if they're looking for an instructor. No sampling, obviously, unless you're 21 years old. :o;)

Perhaps you can teach abroad in Germany during the summer? Drinking age is 16 for beer. :cool:

http://www.dw.com/en/the-highs-and-lows-of-germanys-drinking-culture/a-2226609

[Atlanta Duke]

Given these sleazy insinuations today by Mark Titus in The Ringer that Duke is paying recruits, I would say the hate remains strong

You think Duke is paying recruits, too? Please. Don’t be such a hater. Without mentioning the names Corey Maggette, Chris Duhon, or Lance Thomas, show me even one instance of recruiting violations ever happening under Coach K’s watch. And without bringing up how Jeff Capel was fired from Oklahoma in the midst of a scandal that pertained to how one his players was paid, name one time that Duke’s top assistant — whose hiring in 2011 just happened to coincide with the start of the Blue Devils’ remarkable recruiting surge — has ever been in the same stratosphere as an NCAA violation. That’s right, you can’t.

https://www.theringer.com/2018/1/26/16934626/college-basketball-power-rankings-zion-williamson-commitment

[uh_no]

Perhaps you can teach abroad in Germany during the summer? Drinking age is 16 for beer. :cool:

http://www.dw.com/en/the-highs-and-lows-of-germanys-drinking-culture/a-2226609

I think teaching abroad in germany during the last two weeks of september would be more optimal.

[devildeac]

Perhaps you can teach abroad in Germany during the summer? Drinking age is 16 for beer. :cool:

http://www.dw.com/en/the-highs-and-lows-of-germanys-drinking-culture/a-2226609

Ha! Funny you should mention Deutschland as I just responded to Reilly in another thread about Duke Alumni excursions and mentioned Germany and Belgium. I'm not free, but I'm reasonable. Plus, I took 3 years of German while at Duke so I'm highly quaffed, err, qualified.

:o

[devildeac]

I think teaching abroad in germany during the last two weeks of september would be more optimal.

Not during Duke FB season. :p

[left_hook_lacey]

Ha! Funny you should mention Deutschland as I just responded to Reilly in another thread about Duke Alumni excursions and mentioned Germany and Belgium. I'm not free, but I'm reasonable. Plus, I took 3 years of German while at Duke so I'm highly quaffed, err, qualified.

:o

Funny, sorta related story.....

My manager comes to our huddle meeting this morning panicked.

Her: I need an excel expert now! Who knows excel the best? You know those data packs I've been trying forever to get from the manufacturer?

Group: Yeah.

Her: Well, they finally came. They're excel files. I've been trying for two days to get them to load in excel, but I couldn't. I finally got them to work this morning and everything is in German!! I'm supposed to be finished with this before the small pox run tomorrow!! Who knows how to get excel to translate this?

Me: It might be quicker to just learn German. :o

[Rich]

Funny, sorta related story...

My manager comes to our huddle meeting this morning panicked.

Her: I need an excel expert now! Who knows excel the best? You know those data packs I've been trying forever to get from the manufacturer?

Group: Yeah.

Her: Well, they finally came. They're excel files. I've been trying for two days to get them to load in excel, but I couldn't. I finally got them to work this morning and everything is in German!! I'm supposed to be finished with this before the small pox run tomorrow!! Who knows how to get excel to translate this?

Me: It might be quicker to just learn German. :o

So many questions...

[IrishDevil]

Funny, sorta related story...

My manager comes to our huddle meeting this morning panicked.

Her: I need an excel expert now! Who knows excel the best? You know those data packs I've been trying forever to get from the manufacturer?

Group: Yeah.

Her: Well, they finally came. They're excel files. I've been trying for two days to get them to load in excel, but I couldn't. I finally got them to work this morning and everything is in German!! I'm supposed to be finished with this before the small pox run tomorrow!! Who knows how to get excel to translate this?

Me: It might be quicker to just learn German. :o


So many questions...

Agreed, Rich. My two best guesses: either a rather tardy charity race or a very sinister shopping trip.

[left_hook_lacey]

So many questions...

I work in pharmaceuticals. Sterile injectable manufacturing, specifically. Once in a while, we have to make a special run of small pox vaccine for the government.

We've made more in the last 3 months than in the last 3 years, or so I'm told. North Korean tensions for 1,000 Alex!

[BandAlum83]

I work in pharmaceuticals. Sterile injectable manufacturing, specifically. Once in a while, we have to make a special run of small pox vaccine for the government.

We've made more in the last 3 months than in the last 3 years, or so I'm told.

New administration, new set of conspiracy theorists in charge....

I'll stop there. Please return to your regularly scheduled programming. :)

[killerleft]

What's an "Indiana?"

Indiana - let it go.

[Truth&Justise]

Given these sleazy insinuations today by Mark Titus in The Ringer that Duke is paying recruits, I would say the hate remains strong

You think Duke is paying recruits, too? Please. Don’t be such a hater. Without mentioning the names Corey Maggette, Chris Duhon, or Lance Thomas, show me even one instance of recruiting violations ever happening under Coach K’s watch. And without bringing up how Jeff Capel was fired from Oklahoma in the midst of a scandal that pertained to how one his players was paid, name one time that Duke’s top assistant — whose hiring in 2011 just happened to coincide with the start of the Blue Devils’ remarkable recruiting surge — has ever been in the same stratosphere as an NCAA violation. That’s right, you can’t.

https://www.theringer.com/2018/1/26/16934626/college-basketball-power-rankings-zion-williamson-commitment

He can be entertaining as a writer -- he has a knack for getting the pulse of a fanbase. But printing these insinuations show he's nowhere close to being a journalist.

So to answer the question of this thread: when will the "hate tsunami" stop? When we're no longer winning consistently.

[alteran]

Duplicated upthread, deleted.

[Sir Stealth]

For those who don't listen to One Shining Podcast regularly, it's important to know that it's always done extremely tongue in cheek. The whole "dropping the bag" thing caught on with them so much as a slogan that pretty much anyone who lands a top recruit is labeled a "bag guy," and any payment to anyone for any reason has become "dropping the bag." They just like saying it. Tate is an unabashed classic UNC homer who intentionally gives the most homer take possible for anything UNC/Duke related, even when it's obvious he doesn't even himself believe it, and Titus routinely mocks him on UNC-homer matters. It's usually pretty entertaining, and they do seem to follow all of college basketball closely and mix in a good amount of informed discussion.

There's always a risk with this kind of things that the hosts/writer will attempt to have it both ways, and want to get away with unserious commentary before abruptly shifting gears into analysis that they want taken seriously. Even for a fan of the show, this episode got pretty frustrating in that Titus seemed strangely serious about his criticism of Duke hypocrisy, and there was a list of obviously factual errors and easily rebutted arguments a mile long (I would have love to have been able to rebut these points one by one). The timeline suggesting that Coach K did an about-face in recruiting strategy as a reaction to UNC's title makes no historical sense for many reasons, as does the idea that Duke didn't previously recruit athletic players and on and on and on. It was still worth listening to just to hear how authentically crushed Tate was for Duke to land Zion even in the current reality where he has to be used to Duke already landing all of the top players. And as others have pointed out, his peak-UNC homerism was actually not even all the Duke hate, but the hilarious idea that Dean Smith somehow invented the "family" concept on a basketball team. If there's anything that Carolina fans haven't claimed that Dean somehow invented I've yet to hear of it. UNC is despicable, but you have to appreciate Tate's homer purity.

[Natty_B]

UNC is despicable, but you have to appreciate Tate's homer purity.

He's trying to rip off his boss Bill Simmons with that bit which from a career perspective I would counsel against since Simmons peaked 10 years ago.

[mgtr]

He's trying to rip off his boss Bill Simmons with that bit which from a career perspective I would counsel against since Simmons peaked 10 years ago.

I'd guess that the cost of commas in your area must be high!:D

[billy]

Ben Swain with commentary on how racism might be involved in the Kevin Ollie "scandal," and, as relates to this thread, in Titus' comments on Jeff Capel in his piece:

https://www.sportschannel8.com/racism-heart-ncaa-recruiting-scandals/

[cato]

Ben Swain with commentary on how racism might be involved in the Kevin Ollie "scandal," and, as relates to this thread, in Titus' comments on Jeff Capel in his piece:

https://www.sportschannel8.com/racism-heart-ncaa-recruiting-scandals/


This past week, noted racists Tate Frazier and Mark Titus discussed on “One Shining Podcast” that Duke, and specifically assistant coach Jeff Capel, were “cheating their asses off” in basketball recruiting. Well, I don’t know if they’re really racist or not (I’m fairly certain that they aren’t), but I have as much evidence of them being racists as they do of Jeff Capel paying Zion Williamson to commit to Duke.

Ben Swain FTW

[BD80]

Here I am generally fixated on how poor the editorial efforts in the "news" these days. Absolutely no proofreading, etc

It is like worrying about the arrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic.

This is journalism? Or fourth grade recess?