FB: Duke 10, Northwestern 19 - Post Game Thread

[loran16]

In-Game Thread is a mess, so let's try and be a bit more understanding and comprehensible here.

Rough Game. The Defense should get a lot of stickers - they got clearly worn down by the end of the 3rd and the 4th, but they were constantly on the field, and they were basically dominant for most of the game. In fact, Duke STILL even outgained Northwestern. And until the end, Duke's D was even stout against the run, which has been a huge weakness the last few years. So that's a good sign going forward. If Georgia tech was in a few weeks, I'd feel pretty confident on that game. Unfortunately it's this coming week, and that'll require a huge leap from.....

the offense that was dreadful. Sirk checked down on nearly every play, often extremely quickly, rather than letting his guys get open. Can't do that vs a good defense, they'll stop you with ease. Other defenses might allow more rushing yards to take some pressure off sirk, but cmon man, you're a mobile QB, use your legs to buy time if you need to and find the open man. Some of this was probably playcalling, but the rest just was god awful. Improvement is necessary against better teams. Northwestern's D is very good, but Duke just refused to test them time and time again, and you can't do that.

Special teams were also awful today - the kickoff return is not acceptable, as was the punt muff and the blocker running into our own punt returner. And Monday could've tried to pin em deep a few times sure (enough about that guys, seriously). But that's almost certain to improve. The O is another story.

[brevity]

Overheard after the game...

Duke official: "Here's to forgetting today."
Coach K: (silent)

And to those of you who think the offense didn't show up, a little perspective. The offense was there; DBR Chat was not. Where's our First Amendment right to freely assemble in the chat room?

[subzero02]

I am glad I didn't watch the 2nd half. Obviously our interception and fumble at the end of the first half didn't help our effort.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

When I was a kid starting out in little league baseball, maybe 8 or 9 years old, for a whole year I was scared to swing the bat. I don't know why. I would hit the ball all over the place in practice. But in a game, I just sat there with my bat on my shoulders and didn't swing once the entire season.

Sirk was that version of me today.

The next season I swung on the first pitch and at a great many of the subsequent pitches, probably more pitches than I should've. Hopefully, Sirk will grow into that version of me by the end of the season because otherwise we're in a whole lot of trouble.

Just like it's hard to win a baseball game if you never swing the bat, it's hard to win a football game if you never throw a forward pass.

[loran16]

Overheard after the game...

Duke official: "Here's to forgetting today."
Coach K: (silent)

And to those of you who think the offense didn't show up, a little perspective. The offense was there; DBR Chat was not. Where's our First Amendment right to freely assemble in the chat room?

More than a few of us use another duke site's chat and home games always have less people there. How it is

[75Crazie]

Mabdul, I was going to say something about "deer in headlights", but your analogy is better (or at least much less trite). And yes, I am hoping that Sirk's mental game will improve with experience.

[CameronBlue]

Not to carry over an argument from the closed thread but punting was clearly a net positive. The defense was spectacular in the first half and acceptable in the 2nd half. Duke lost because of the limitations of a new quarterback who lacked the experience of dealing with a big, athletic defensive front, a lack of confidence in making downfield reads/throws and probably most importantly turnovers. Hard to say from the sidelines but I wonder if the game was just a little too fast for Sirk today. He'll learn from this.

The primary difference in a game between two evenly matched teams is going to be a play here or there: Skura's? unsportsmanlike penalty killed one drive; Sirk's interception and Wilson's fumble took points off the board for Duke; a lapse by the special teams and that's the ball game folks. A learning experience for a program that is still on the rise. It stings a little bit but Duke football is still in a pretty good place. Next week is another big opportunity.

[loran16]

Not to carry over an argument from the closed thread but punting was clearly a net positive. The defense was spectacular in the first half and acceptable in the 2nd half. Duke lost because of the limitations of a new quarterback who lacked the experience of dealing with a big, athletic defensive front, a lack of confidence in making downfield reads/throws and probably most importantly turnovers. Hard to say from the sidelines but I wonder if the game was just a little too fast for Sirk today. He'll learn from this.

The primary difference in a game between two evenly matched teams is going to be a play here or there: Skura's? unsportsmanlike penalty killed one drive; Sirk's interception and Wilson's fumble took points off the board for Duke; a lapse by the special teams and that's the ball game folks. A learning experience for a program that is still on the rise. It stings a little bit but Duke football is still in a pretty good place. Next week is another big opportunity.

It was right tackle Lucas patrick. Same guy also beat on the interception and on the almost lateral fumble return.

A BAD game for him that he will hear from cut about

[Mabdul Doobakus]

Not to carry over an argument from the closed thread but punting was clearly a net positive. The defense was spectacular in the first half and acceptable in the 2nd half. Duke lost because of the limitations of a new quarterback who lacked the experience of dealing with a big, athletic defensive front, a lack of confidence in making downfield reads/throws and probably most importantly turnovers. Hard to say from the sidelines but I wonder if the game was just a little too fast for Sirk today. He'll learn from this.

The primary difference in a game between two evenly matched teams is going to be a play here or there: Skura's? unsportsmanlike penalty killed one drive; Sirk's interception and Wilson's fumble took points off the board for Duke; a lapse by the special teams and that's the ball game folks. A learning experience for a program that is still on the rise. It stings a little bit but Duke football is still in a pretty good place. Next week is another big opportunity.

It wasn't Skura. I could probably pick the culprit out of a lineup, but I remember that it was not Skura. I think that Sirk INT at the end of the half was the key play of the game. A FG there and we're up 10? The whole game changes. I highly doubt that QB was up to a comeback against our defense.

EDIT: yeah, what loran16 said. Lucas Patrick.

[grossbus]

I still suspect our wideouts were not getting any separation.

[uh_no]

it was hot out. if i speak my mind now, i might get points docked on my DBR license...

[duke09hms]

I still suspect our wideouts were not getting any separation.

Yeah, it was a perfect storm that shut down our offense today:
-Northwestern's D-line was dominant
-WRs no separation
-Sirk checking down to quickly, afraid to let it fly
-Unimaginative play-calling

Positives:
-We may actually have a legit run defense now. We'll find out for sure next week.
-Our run game actually was pretty good. 177 yds on 5.1 ypc against a top-10 defense.

The game really turned on a handful of plays, and outside of the 2 ints, we didn't have any of them.
-Sirk's first INT and Wilson's fumble really gave away all the positive momentum we had. Their offense is not catching up by 2 scores with their nonexistent passing game and running game that we shut down until late.
-Special teams killed us with that KO TD to start the 2nd half.

[CameronBlue]

Is Duke is going to have to turn Wade into an internment camp to get more than 30K warm bodies there?

[uh_no]

Is Duke is going to have to turn Wade into an internment camp to get more than 30K warm bodies there?

if'ts it's going to be 90 degrees at noon, then yes.

[Wander]

That looked like it was from a high school game with the little swing passes getting intercepted, muffed punt, kickoff return, etc. Or more accurately, it looked like a Duke game from before Cutcliffe. Strange decisions when we were down two scores too. Though I agree the defense was very good and just worn out by the end.

[YmoBeThere]

America's history with internment camps is not good, may I suggest we get away from that whole topic/line of reasoning?

[loran16]

Is Duke is going to have to turn Wade into an internment camp to get more than 30K warm bodies there?

A reminder (I'm not sure if you're a Duke Alum, but if you are, you should know this already):
1. Duke is a small private school that has less students - even including grad students - than its capacity for filling the stadium. In fact, even if the entire student base was in the stadium, the stadium would be half full (less with renovations I believe). So Duke must draw the remaining seats from outside sources.
2. Duke is in a location where the local population is largely in support of the other local schools. In addition, Duke's football is historically bad and not known for being good or entertaining. So even those with Duke interests are often uninterested about coming to a football game.
3. The weather sucks as previously noted.
4. Oh and as you should know, most of our alumni base is out of state. If they would come in for a football game, it would be for the UNC game or homecoming. Not games vs Northwestern or Georgia Tech.

Getting a consistent sell out at Wally Wade is going to be an uphill battle for a while. So games like this can have big effects.

[NYBri]

Bad day.

Learn.

Next week.

Go DEVILS!

9F!

[-jk]

Sorry folks - I was out of town today and found myself surprised to have no mobile service and so couldn't turn on DBR Chat.

-jk

[DukePA]

America's history with internment camps is not good, may I suggest we get away from that whole topic/line of reasoning?

Thank you.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

if'ts it's going to be 90 degrees at noon, then yes.
I was hotter than all get out. I saw a number of older fans leaving at the end of the first quarter. And I know a bunch of folks couldn't make it back in after halftime b/c of the heat today. It was god awful.

[Olympic Fan]

It was right tackle Lucas patrick. Same guy also beat on the interception and on the almost lateral fumble return.

A BAD game for him that he will hear from cut about

I don't know what you think you saw, but Lucas Patrick is a guard. The right tackle is Casey Blaser.

And Blaser was not at fault on either the interception or the almost lateral. Cut talked about that in postgame -- in both cases, the left DE flared instead of rushed the passer. The mistake was Sirk's, not Blaser's. I didn't see who got the personal foul ...

I don't think Duke's performance was as terrible as some of you think. Duke's offense moved the ball better on the NW defense than Stanford and until the latter stages of the fourth quarter, Duke's defense dominated the NW offense in a way Stanford never did.

We lost the game by failing in the area where over the last two years Duke has beaten some superior teams -- the kicking game and execution. I agree that Thomas Sirk has a rough game in terms of his decision marking. He was too quick to check down to his dump off receivers and none of them could make a play in space. But the rushing game did produce 177 yards at 5.1 yards a carry and the defense was dominant until it got worn out late -- really until the bust on the 55-yard TD run. Northwestern had 138 yards total offense after three quarters.

We lost the game on three plays in the middle of the game.

(1) The Sirk interception on the tipped ball. We go in for a TD there or even settle for a chip-shot field goal and we go into halftime with a two score lead and the way Northwestern's passing game was sputtering, they never would have caught up.

(2) The fumble after a 14-yard gain on the next offensive play. The defense came in and stopped NW, but the turnover gave them a gift three points.

(3) the second half kickoff return for a touchdown. That's nine points when our defense was absolutely shutting them down. That put us in the hole for the rest of the game, a hole we didn't have enough firepower to get out of.

A horrible day. A disappointing loss. And a tough game coming up with a battered and frustrated Georgia Tech team coming up. Some very good things today, especially on defense. But Sirk has to make better decisions if Duke is going to beat any decent team.

PS Duke is probably coming out of this weekend in the top 10 nationally in pass defense. With Georgia Tech, Boston College, Army and Virginia Tech coming up, Duke could very well be leading the nation in pass defense when Miami comes to town on Halloween.

[loran16]

I don't know what you think you saw, but Lucas Patrick is a guard. The right tackle is Casey Blaser.

And Blaser was not at fault on either the interception or the almost lateral. Cut talked about that in postgame -- in both cases, the left DE flared instead of rushed the passer. The mistake was Sirk's, not Blaser's. I didn't see who got the personal foul ...

I don't think Duke's performance was as terrible as some of you think. Duke's offense moved the ball better on the NW defense than Stanford and until the latter stages of the fourth quarter, Duke's defense dominated the NW offense in a way Stanford never did.

We lost the game by failing in the area where over the last two years Duke has beaten some superior teams -- the kicking game and execution. I agree that Thomas Sirk has a rough game in terms of his decision marking. He was too quick to check down to his dump off receivers and none of them could make a play in space. But the rushing game did produce 177 yards at 5.1 yards a carry and the defense was dominant until it got worn out late -- really until the bust on the 55-yard TD run. Northwestern had 138 yards total offense after three quarters.

We lost the game on three plays in the middle of the game.

(1) The Sirk interception on the tipped ball. We go in for a TD there or even settle for a chip-shot field goal and we go into halftime with a two score lead and the way Northwestern's passing game was sputtering, they never would have caught up.

(2) The fumble after a 14-yard gain on the next offensive play. The defense came in and stopped NW, but the turnover gave them a gift three points.

(3) the second half kickoff return for a touchdown. That's nine points when our defense was absolutely shutting them down. That put us in the hole for the rest of the game, a hole we didn't have enough firepower to get out of.

A horrible day. A disappointing loss. And a tough game coming up with a battered and frustrated Georgia Tech team coming up. Some very good things today, especially on defense. But Sirk has to make better decisions if Duke is going to beat any decent team.

PS Duke is probably coming out of this weekend in the top 10 nationally in pass defense. With Georgia Tech, Boston College, Army and Virginia Tech coming up, Duke could very well be leading the nation in pass defense when Miami comes to town on Halloween.

My bad. correct, the plays on the pick/fumble (not really) were #71 Blaser - the penalty was Patrick.

[dukelifer]

I was hotter than all get out. I saw a number of older fans leaving at the end of the first quarter. And I know a bunch of folks couldn't make it back in after halftime b/c of the heat today. It was god awful.

That was one of the main reasons I did not go. It can be brutal at that time of day. I have learned my lesson. If Duke wants fans in the seats for a game with a team whose fan base that does not travel well- they need to give a bunch away to youth groups or others in the community. There are not enough local fans who are willing to shell out 75 bucks for a family of 4 for a hot day at Wallace Wade.

[75Crazie]

If Duke wants fans in the seats for a game with a team whose fan base that does not travel well- they need to give a bunch away to youth groups or others in the community. There are not enough local fans who are willing to shell out 75 bucks for a family of 4 for a hot day at Wallace Wade.
How about we just stick with night games through September and tell TV to go pound salt? Yeah, I know, when pigs fly.

[loran16]

How about we just stick with night games through September and tell TV to go pound salt? Yeah, I know, when pigs fly.

Times are decided by TV. Not up to Duke entirely.

[fuse]

Caveat- I only got to watch/listen through part of the third quarter.

This game was a good litmus test for this year.

I figured if we won today, it would bode well for the season.
While I am not ready to write off the season by any means, I do think the loss to Northwestern can and should bring expectations down to earth.

The defense played awesome until they had nothing left to give.

Regardless of the source of the issue (play calling or execution), if the offense can't be more creative, it's going to be a long season.

I expect we can earn enough wins to be bowl eligible and that the emphasis will be on earned, not given.

Let's go Duke!

[Bob Green]

-Unimaginative play-calling

The game really turned on a handful of plays, and outside of the 2 ints, we didn't have any of them.

-Sirk's first INT and Wilson's fumble really gave away all the positive momentum we had. Their offense is not catching up by 2 scores with their nonexistent passing game and running game that we shut down until late.
-Special teams killed us with that KO TD to start the 2nd half.

I've just arrived home from the game and haven't read through the entire thread; however, the quoted items above sum up my thoughts. Our defense played their butts off! The offense never seemed in gear. We couldn't string multiple good plays together to create a good possession.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

As someone sequestered to a hospital room without TV coverage, I lamented the lack of chat. Best I could tell via ESPN'S cappy gamecast, we gave up two big plays and could not make an offensive play of more than 7 yards. Sounds excruciating to watch.

[Acymetric]

Times are decided by TV. Not up to Duke entirely.


It's actually not up to Duke at all, which is a real shame. When the ACC took less money on their new deal, we should have at least stipulated that we can have some control over non-TV (i.e. ESPN3) game times. We are getting boxed into terrible start times every freaking week for years because of ESPN and they aren't even putting the damn games on TV.

On the flipside, an impartial observer would not have enjoyed that game at all (not that any of us did), so hard to blame them for making us the only game involving a top 25 team that wasn't available on a cable channel.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

As someone sequestered to a hospital room without TV coverage, I lamented the lack of chat. Best I could tell via ESPN'S cappy gamecast, we gave up two big plays and could not make an offensive play of more than 7 yards. Sounds excruciating to watch.

Second half in particular was brutal to watch since we immediately lost the lead and from that point it started to become clear just how impotent our offense was. It wasn't only that we COULDN'T make a play of more than 7 yards, it was that we didn't believe in our chances enough to even try. I'm not sure if Sirk completed a single pass that travelled more than say 8 yards or so downfield in the air.

It was so bad the game thread devolved into a two hour argument about punting.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Second half in particular was brutal to watch since we immediately lost the lead and from that point it started to become clear just how impotent our offense was. It wasn't only that we COULDN'T make a play of more than 7 yards, it was that we didn't believe in our chances enough to even try. I'm not sure if Sirk completed a single pass that travelled more than say 8 yards or so downfield in the air.

It was so bad the game thread devolved into a two hour argument about punting.

Even if the punting is phenomenal, it is a bad sign if it is the most notable part of your game.

[6th Man]

A noon game on a sunny September Saturday at Wallace Wade feels about like what I imagine being cooked in a pot feels like. I used to buy season tickets up until the last 3 years, but the noon time slot in September is so hot, I just can't enjoy it. When deciding to purchase season tickets I always look to see how many home games we have in September. (Usually quite a few) 4 of our 6 home games are done by October 3 this year. In addition to the heat, sometimes it's nice to not have so many back to back weeks as I have somewhat of a drive to Durham. I do plan on attending the last 2 games as the weather should be much cooler. I contemplated attending the game today, but I must admit that the heat was the determining factor.

As far as the game goes, I couldn't tell on TV if Sirk was giving up too fast or if the receivers were just not doing their job. It's been quite a while since we haven't had Conner Vernon or Jamison Crowder on the field. These guys were exceptional talents, but I just don't feel like we have that play maker right now. Rahming seems like he may at some point have that ability, but he isn't there yet. I do firmly believe in Cutcliffe and know that he will get the offense playing better. I really did enjoy our defense today and I was thinking it was actually the first time in a long time that I really enjoyed watching our D get after it. Cash is a special player. It's nice to see the improvements at Wade and even after today's loss we are so far ahead of where we were as a program. Cut will get it figured out.

[dukelifer]

How about we just stick with night games through September and tell TV to go pound salt? Yeah, I know, when pigs fly.

Could not afford an athletics program without the ACC football TV money. It pays most of the bills for all sports. They make the rules if you want to stay in the ACC.

[Olympic Fan]

It's actually not up to Duke at all, which is a real shame. When the ACC took less money on their new deal, we should have at least stipulated that we can have some control over non-TV (i.e. ESPN3) game times. We are getting boxed into terrible start times every freaking week for years because of ESPN and they aren't even putting the damn games on TV.


We do have control over ESPN3 game times. ESPN3 games are never noon in themselves.

However, the ACC deal with ESPN does provide that all ACC Network games are also available on ESPN3. That's what happened today -- the Duke-Northwestern game was on the ACC Network and those games are always at 12:30 p.m. ESPN3 was just along for the ride.

Next week's game is a noon start dictated by ESPN -- but it will be on air (probably ESPNU since we both lost today ... if would have been ESPN2 with a win or two).

The one ESPN3 only game for Duke this year was the NCCU game ... and that one was a 6 p.m. start, chosen by Duke.

[duke2x]

A noon game on a sunny September Saturday at Wallace Wade feels about like what I imagine being cooked in a pot feels like. I used to buy season tickets up until the last 3 years, but the noon time slot in September is so hot, I just can't enjoy it. When deciding to purchase season tickets I always look to see how many home games we have in September. (Usually quite a few) 4 of our 6 home games are done by October 3 this year. In addition to the heat, sometimes it's nice to not have so many back to back weeks as I have somewhat of a drive to Durham. I do plan on attending the last 2 games as the weather should be much cooler. I contemplated attending the game today, but I must admit that the heat was the determining factor.

We need to shut down WW early to finish the press box. My speculation is that Duke asked for home games at the start of the year and got them.

Be careful what you wish for in terms of scheduling. A way too early projection at next year's schedule is NCCU, @Louisville, @Northwestern, @Notre Dame next September. You could also sneak @Miami or a bye in one the first two weeks for Louisville. That's a lot of travel where we could be 1-3 out of the gate.

I respect those who will laugh at this next idea. With the decline in college football attendance, I wonder why we can't include shade for the seats like Washington and Oregon State have. We're going to be playing noon games under the current TV contract if we play any P5 opponent at home. It didn't start to shade on the home side until after 2:00. Please note that I am thinking out loud and not trying to criticize the renovations we needed. It seems like one answer to attendance concerns if you aren't interested in a luxury box.

Northwestern probably has one of the better defenses we'll see this year. Today's loss was not good but not the end of the season. Our best chances are BC (lost QB and will be similar in style to today's game), Army, Pitt, UVA, and Wake (may have lost QB today v. Army). We need to beat 4/5 now.

[duke09hms]

We need to shut down WW early to finish the press box. My speculation is that Duke asked for home games at the start of the year and got them.

Be careful what you wish for in terms of scheduling. A way too early projection at next year's schedule is NCCU, @Louisville, @Northwestern, @Notre Dame next September. You could also sneak @Miami or a bye in one the first two weeks for Louisville. That's a lot of travel where we could be 1-3 out of the gate.

I respect those who will laugh at this next idea. With the decline in college football attendance, I wonder why we can't include shade for the seats like Washington and Oregon State have. We're going to be playing noon games under the current TV contract if we play any P5 opponent at home. It didn't start to shade on the home side until after 2:00. Please note that I am thinking out loud and not trying to criticize the renovations we needed. It seems like one answer to attendance concerns if you aren't interested in a luxury box.

Northwestern probably has one of the better defenses we'll see this year. Today's loss was not good but not the end of the season. Our best chances are BC (lost QB and will be similar in style to today's game), Army, Pitt, UVA, and Wake (may have lost QB today v. Army). We need to beat 4/5 now.

bright side is we'll likely get a bowl opponent we will actually beat!

[nyesq83]

Our descent into
the box
allowed Northwestern to gamble on stuffing us
and so we lost
should we have tried Parker?
Downfield passing seemed to never be an option.

[75Crazie]

Could not afford an athletics program without the ACC football TV money. It pays most of the bills for all sports. They make the rules if you want to stay in the ACC.
You say that as if that's a good thing. College sports has sold its collective soul to the altar of TV football (primarily) and basketball, to the point where it's not really college sports any more, it is semi-pro sports. Even on this board, it's all about what channel our next game is going to be on.

I don't care what financial strings are being pulled ... when a southern school, with a home stadium fitted with lights, hosts a mid-September football game in the middle of the day, it is basically telling its paying local fans to bend over and take it. And everybody here seems relatively happy for it to be that way. I know there is no changing the situation ... but at least I am disconnected from it enough to recognize the hypocrisy of that situation.

[brlftz]

It was so bad the game thread devolved into a two hour argument about punting.

"Monday averaged an impressive 55 yards per punt. But six of those punts were touchbacks. Monday only had eight touchbacks all of last season. Cutcliffe said that Monday should be disappointed in that statistic."

- Jim Sumner's game article on the front page

Your insistence on using a cumulative, season long stat to ignore obvious bad plays was infuriating. If Miguel Cabrera hits .400 in a season, but strikes out 5 times in a game swinging at balls over his head, he had a bad game. And, if you kick 6 punts through the end zone, you also had a bad game. We didn't lose because of the punter, but sheesh, it was like you refused to admit that not blasting it through the uprights on a punt is not desirable. If you want to keep arguing, tell us how Coach Cutcliffe is wrong also.

[dukelifer]

You say that as if that's a good thing. College sports has sold its collective soul to the altar of TV football (primarily) and basketball, to the point where it's not really college sports any more, it is semi-pro sports. Even on this board, it's all about what channel our next game is going to be on.

I don't care what financial strings are being pulled ... when a southern school, with a home stadium fitted with lights, hosts a mid-September football game in the middle of the day, it is basically telling its paying local fans to bend over and take it. And everybody here seems relatively happy for it to be that way. I know there is no changing the situation ... but at least I am disconnected from it enough to recognize the hypocrisy of that situation.
No- I don't think it is a good thing- but the reality of college sports today. Duke spent millions on stadium renovations that prettied up the joint but a noon game in Sept remains a poor experience. TV money has changed sports and probably not for the good. The irony is that with more TV coverage there are less reasons to "take it". You can watch from the comfort of your house because almost every game has an outlet. Duke believed if you build it - they will come. They will not watch a game in person with the sun in their eyes and the temps above 85. Big money in college sports has not made the game day experience better- if anything it has driven up the price of everything and now fans are making serious choices about how to spend their money. I am a Duke fan but I am not a fan of shelling out big dollars to watch a game in person. The money is there in the system to reduce the prices to near zero if the athletic dept ran a very lean ship and coaches and administrators were only paid like the rest of the faculty and staff at the University and most games were within bus distance. But of course that is not going to change either.

[Bob Green]

I am a Duke fan but I am not a fan of shelling out big dollars to watch a game in person.

It is hard to complain about the price of Duke football tickets. My family plan of four General Admissions tickets cost me $350. Three hundred fifty divided by 24 equals $14.58 per ticket. Less than $15 per ticket is a good deal.

[devildeac]

"Monday averaged an impressive 55 yards per punt. But six of those punts were touchbacks. Monday only had eight touchbacks all of last season. Cutcliffe said that Monday should be disappointed in that statistic."

- Jim Sumner's game article on the front page

Your insistence on using a cumulative, season long stat to ignore obvious bad plays was infuriating. If Miguel Cabrera hits .400 in a season, but strikes out 5 times in a game swinging at balls over his head, he had a bad game. And, if you kick 6 punts through the end zone, you also had a bad game. We didn't lose because of the punter, but sheesh, it was like you refused to admit that not blasting it through the uprights on a punt is not desirable. If you want to keep arguing, tell us how Coach Cutcliffe is wrong also.

From the "Three Who Mattered" part of another article this morning:

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/duke-now/article35829471.html

"Will Monday: Duke’s best offensive player averaged 55 yards per punt and switched field position several times in the first half..."

What is in the print version and not the on-line edition:

(...though Cutcliffe wasn't overly pleased with his six touchbacks).

So, some merit to the punting discussion but the blames lie at the feet/arms/minds of others here as folks upthread have summarized: 3 TO, too many "dump" passes, defense that succumbed to the Southern heat and humidity, poor special teams, 1 quick whistle:mad: and 1 bad defensive decision/execution on 3rd and 1 (IIRC). Not a fun afternoon at WW for the home team.

[oldnavy]

"Monday averaged an impressive 55 yards per punt. But six of those punts were touchbacks. Monday only had eight touchbacks all of last season. Cutcliffe said that Monday should be disappointed in that statistic."

- Jim Sumner's game article on the front page

Your insistence on using a cumulative, season long stat to ignore obvious bad plays was infuriating. If Miguel Cabrera hits .400 in a season, but strikes out 5 times in a game swinging at balls over his head, he had a bad game. And, if you kick 6 punts through the end zone, you also had a bad game. We didn't lose because of the punter, but sheesh, it was like you refused to admit that not blasting it through the uprights on a punt is not desirable. If you want to keep arguing, tell us how Coach Cutcliffe is wrong also.

I agree totally. Monday actually had the opportunity to pin them back several times and he didn't. A fellow seating behind me commented on one of his later punts before he kicked that "at least he won't kick this one into the end zone" Monday was standing on his own 40(?) yd line. And Monday proceeded to blast it right into the end zone. I am not sure why he never once angled the ball towards the sideline??

This in no way was responsible for the loss but it did add to my frustration with our play calling and execution on offense.

I am pretty sure we ran the read option dive play about 50% of the time or at least it seemed that way to me. I kept thinking that we would at some time pull out a reverse or some type of misdirection derivative of that play, but we never really did. Play calling and poor execution frustrated me all day. I was however VERY pleased with the defense over all, but some of the exuberance has to be curbed because the NW QB missed a couple of pretty open receivers that would have shifted the score and stats in NW's favor.

Here's hoping that we have a good week of practice and do a better job next week!!

I am still pumped about the overall direction of our FB program! The stadium already looks amazing, and I can't wait to see the finished product next fall!


Go Duke!!

[dukelifer]

It is hard to complain about the price of Duke football tickets. My family plan of four General Admissions tickets cost me $350. Three hundred fifty divided by 24 equals $14.58 per ticket. Less than $15 per ticket is a good deal.

This is true if you and the gang make every game which for various reasons is not likely in my case. I also prefer to go at night or when the weather is not brutally hot- but the schedule is not predetermined when you buy your tickets. The usual single game deal for okay seats is $140 for 4 tickets 4 hotdogs and drinks for a single game. Duke was selling tix yesterday before game time at $20 for adults and $10 for youth. While I like watching football - I don't find the at game experience to exceed TV- most often worse. Basketball is a very different story but even there the cost per ticket is getting crazy.

[mr. synellinden]

Northwestern probably has one of the better defenses we'll see this year. Today's loss was not good but not the end of the season. Our best chances are BC (lost QB and will be similar in style to today's game), Army, Pitt, UVA, and Wake (may have lost QB today v. Army). We need to beat 4/5 now.

The same Stanford team that was held to 6 points by Northwestern hung 41 on #6 USC on the road.

Just for some perspective on how good Northwestern's defense is.

[richmclean]

I still suspect our wideouts were not getting any separation.

This.

[TruBlu]

I am still pumped about the overall direction of our FB program! The stadium already looks amazing, and I can't wait to see the finished product next fall!


Go Duke!!

Yes. A few years ago, a 19-10 setback at the hands of a top 25 team would have been considered a moral victory.

[J.Blink]

I didn't go to the Central game, so this was my first time seeing the new stadium. Hard to compare to previous years, but I didn't think attendance was too bad. About what I would expect in a September game. Northwestern had a very decent contingent, as usual. The stadium did clear out a good bit at halftime, but that's just to be expected.

http://carolinascience.com/IMG_4253.JPG

The new media board is truly amazing, but as far as I can tell they actually show less football related information this year than in previous years! I bet it was stupid entertainment stuff (catch the flying dollar bills!) or--primarily--large flashing advertisements 3/4 of the game. But, when the replays were on, they did look phenomenal. I also think that due to superior acoustics, the volume in the stadium was less earsplitting than in previous years, so that was a big improvement! I didn't get the 8-bit pixel art motif--is that something they are going to change every game?

I could really do without all the flashing animated ads located around the stadium. As others have said, it just makes you truly aware that you are not really watching college athletes anymore, you're watching a semi-pro group of athletes who also go to school.

If Duke didn't spend tens of millions on multiple new football buildings, new practice fields, new high-def media boards (I wonder how many fulltime staff positions are needed just to maintain, run, and produce content for the new board), new stadium seating (that will be unlikely to be filled?), sinking the field, and not to even mention the vast increases in coaching staff, etc., would Duke really have to sell out for the TV contracts? It really seems like a nuclear arms race or a death spiral, depending on your perspective! I'm happy that Duke is vastly improved, but I have to say, I'm not entirely satisfied with the new. For me personally, and for my connection to Duke, I don't think it's worth it. I don't believe that what happened at UNC could ever happen at Duke, but it seems the role of athletics spending on campus is just getting bigger and bigger. Maybe I'm just jaded and curmudgeonly (given that I'm in my 30s, that's not good news for me)!

Football-wise it was a fairly boring game, and I also don't feel like we can draw too many conclusions from this one performance. There was barely a single fun drive to watch out of either team. A few really crucial errors flipped the score to something that wasn't quite representative, imho. Northwestern made some good adjustments and came out firing in the second half--the difference was palpable. I don't know if the problem was our play calling or the capabilities of the players, but, having said that, I didn't get our play calling at all. The catcalls around where I was sitting were getting reminiscent (ok, vaguely reminiscent) of the last pre-Cut days of endless sides passes and repeated ineffectual plays. Major kudos to the defense, I'm sure they must have been gassed by the end.

[killerleft]

It is hard to complain about the price of Duke football tickets. My family plan of four General Admissions tickets cost me $350. Three hundred fifty divided by 24 equals $14.58 per ticket. Less than $15 per ticket is a good deal.

Not only that, but most games it is easy to "upgrade" to a sideline seat early in the game. There are always issues that keep people from coming to Duke football games.

[J.Blink]

Not only that, but most games it is easy to "upgrade" to a sideline seat early in the game. There are always issues that keep people from coming to Duke football games.

Are the sideline seats the ones at the very bottom of the stadium (immediately adjacent to the wall) that are gated off from the rest of the seating?

[Olympic Fan]

I agree totally. Monday actually had the opportunity to pin them back several times and he didn't. A fellow seating behind me commented on one of his later punts before he kicked that "at least he won't kick this one into the end zone" Monday was standing on his own 40(?) yd line. And Monday proceeded to blast it right into the end zone. I am not sure why he never once angled the ball towards the sideline??


I was also frustrated by Monday's many touchbacks -- and no one of them were close to being downable inside the 10 (unlike his only previous touchback this season, which was almost downed at the one-foot line). It's funny, because Monday has always been one of the best at that.

But ... I will say this -- the way you measure "net" punting is to take the total punting yardage, subtract by punt return yardage AND 20-yards per touchback, then divide by the total number of punts. Saturday, Monday had 11 punts for 605 yards ... Northwestern had 12 yards in punt return yardage, so that's 593 yards. Subtract 120 for the six touchbacks and that makes it 472 yards . Divided by 11, that's a net punting average of 43.0 yards a kick. In the first two games -- when six of his seven punts were downed inside the 20 -- he was averaging 38.0 yards on net punts. A year ago, when he was excellent at avoiding touchbacks (8 on 57 punts -- 17 inside the 20), his net average was 39.7.

I'm not saying that Duke wouldn't have been better off with most of those touchbacks shorter and downed inside the 20. Still, Monday had an effective punting day -- In fact, I wonder if any kicker in Duke history has ever had nine 50-plus kicks in a game before?

We wouldn't be complaining about this without the three turnovers and the kickoff return touchdown.

[Saratoga2]

In reality, the team played a ranked opponent, made their offense ineffective for the majority of the game and out gained them. Clearly the offense was Duke not effective and all too predictable, but the turnovers killed scoring opportunities. By not controlling the ball more effectively, the defense was made to play in the heat for long periods with little rest. Lots of teachable moments for the kids and we can cross our fingers and hope for a better effort going forward.

[killerleft]

Are the sideline seats the ones at the very bottom of the stadium (immediately adjacent to the wall) that are gated off from the rest of the seating?

For me a sideline seat is any seat that gives you a viewing angle that allows you to get a good idea as to whether a runner is gaining yards or not during a play. Personally, I would never choose a seat too close to the field because of players in the way and the loss of the birds'-eye view.

[brlftz]

I was also frustrated by Monday's many touchbacks -- and no one of them were close to being downable inside the 10 (unlike his only previous touchback this season, which was almost downed at the one-foot line). It's funny, because Monday has always been one of the best at that.

...

I'm not saying that Duke wouldn't have been better off with most of those touchbacks shorter and downed inside the 20. Still, Monday had an effective punting day -- In fact, I wonder if any kicker in Duke history has ever had nine 50-plus kicks in a game before?

We wouldn't be complaining about this without the three turnovers and the kickoff return touchdown.

Agree, it's not at all why we lost, and this is just a side issue. Monday was punting spectacularly well if you ignored context, but it was just weird that he didn't even seem to be trying to kick something down-able. The fact that Coach Cut said anything at all about it makes me think he was irritated. Sometimes you need to give your home run hitter the bunt sign, and if he ignores the signal and swings for the fences anyway, that's a discussion. It doesn't make your slugger a bad hitter, but it does make you wonder what's going on.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

"Monday averaged an impressive 55 yards per punt. But six of those punts were touchbacks. Monday only had eight touchbacks all of last season. Cutcliffe said that Monday should be disappointed in that statistic."

- Jim Sumner's game article on the front page

Your insistence on using a cumulative, season long stat to ignore obvious bad plays was infuriating. If Miguel Cabrera hits .400 in a season, but strikes out 5 times in a game swinging at balls over his head, he had a bad game. And, if you kick 6 punts through the end zone, you also had a bad game. We didn't lose because of the punter, but sheesh, it was like you refused to admit that not blasting it through the uprights on a punt is not desirable. If you want to keep arguing, tell us how Coach Cutcliffe is wrong also.

I can't believe we're still doing this. As mentioned upthread, he had a 43 yard net punting average, which if carried out over a whole season would probably be best in the NCAA. A touchback that nets you 35 yards is not great, but it's not like a touchback that only nets you 20 yards. He was booming these from his own 40 and NOT the opponents 40, and there is a world of difference in what a touchback means in each of those situations. And if he was booming touchbacks from the opponents side of the field, it would be reflected in his net punting average. Again, he wasn't perfect, and he is not beyond criticism, but my objection in that thread was to the use of the word "mediocre" to describe his performance, which is way off, I think.

Do you know how hard it is to pin a team inside the 20 when you're punting from your own 40? You have to kick it over 40 yards with enough hang time to allow your team to cover and not allow any kind of return. A touchback in that scenario is NOT a bad outcome. It is a bad outcome when punting on your opponent's side of the field, but not when you're kicking on your own 40. Or 45, as happened to be the case at least a couple of times. It's not optimal, no. We all agree on this. But I don't get this standard by which we're judging Monday. 43 yards net is amazing but you guys are insisting it should've been more like 48.

EDIT: To summarize, my argument is not that Monday was perfect and has nothing he needs to work on. It's simply that he wasn't mediocre, and I think it's a very easy argument to make.

Also, if Cutcliffe thinks Monday had a bad day of punting, then he's wrong about that, too. Coaches are not infallible.

[brlftz]

EDIT: To summarize, my argument is not that Monday was perfect and has nothing he needs to work on. It's simply that he wasn't mediocre, and I think it's a very easy argument to make.

I agree that he wasn't mediocre from a raw "kick it a million miles" standpoint (quite the opposite), and it could well be that he was just having an unbelievable day where the ball was carrying and his calibration was off. The objection, however, is based not on whether he was punting well from a raw distance standpoint, but on whether he was even trying at all to take some distance off for the good of the team. It sure didn't look like it to me, but maybe it did to you. I'm willing to let it go at that.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

I agree that he wasn't mediocre from a raw "kick it a million miles" standpoint (quite the opposite), and it could well be that he was just having an unbelievable day where the ball was carrying and his calibration was off. The objection, however, is based not on whether he was punting well from a raw distance standpoint, but on whether he was even trying at all to take some distance off for the good of the team. It sure didn't look like it to me, but maybe it did to you. I'm willing to let it go at that.

It's not raw distance that I'm even interested in. It's net distance. That's almost his entire job description. Maximize his net distance. The only time that isn't his entire job description is when he's punting from a short field. My guess is that a punter punting from his own 40 is just trying to kick it as hard as possible because most guys couldn't punt it 60 yards if they tried. But I don't know. I don't know what he was trying to do. I would like to believe he was trying to maximize his net punting average, and like you said, maybe was having TOO GOOD a day from a raw distance standpoint.

EDIT: And to clarify, even when punting from a short field his actual job is to maximize his net distance, but you have to judge it differently. 30 yards net may be reasonable in such a situation.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

While we talk about how the team as a whole played and how individual players played, let's not forget the human context for all of this.

In addition to the typical adjustments and ongoing development which are part of being a college player, the toll of grief related to serious illnesses of close family members and the loss of close family members is a fresh wound for a remarkable number of these young men. Many of their families' stories are not public. I've not tried to survey Division I to determine whether Duke is hit harder with such occurrences than other teams, so I can't make such a comparison. Perhaps that's just as well. Grieving is not competitive.

I agree that many aspects of yesterday's game were very disappointing, but these players are my guys. Their play on the field will improve.

[nyesq83]

We had them back on their heels and failed to aggressively attack them, no downfield energy and no special teams hits.

I was shocked by Cut's admission that Monday was not told to kick into the end zone every time.

[TruBlu]

In reality, the team played a ranked opponent, made their offense ineffective for the majority of the game and out gained them. Clearly the offense was Duke not effective and all too predictable, but the turnovers killed scoring opportunities. By not controlling the ball more effectively, the defense was made to play in the heat for long periods with little rest. Lots of teachable moments for the kids and we can cross our fingers and hope for a better effort going forward.

Regarding the heat, would it not make sense for the Home team to elect predominantly White uniforms in September/early October for noonish game times in the South?

When I attend these games, I always wear light colored clothing. It makes a difference, and I'm not running around expending a lot of energy like the players (except for the trips to the men's room . . . with little rest).

[Bob Green]

New polls are out. Northwestern improves to #16 in the AP and #19 in the Coaches:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

[Duke_92]

Regarding the heat, would it not make sense for the Home team to elect predominantly White uniforms in September/early October for noonish game times in the South?

When I attend these games, I always wear light colored clothing. It makes a difference, and I'm not running around expending a lot of energy like the players (except for the trips to the men's room . . . with little rest).

Had this same discussion with a friend at the game. I didn't realize that in football the visitors wear white! I guess this is different than basketball where the home team wears white.

[DU82]

Regarding Monday's kicking, we thought in the stands that he was hitting the ball too low. He has a great technique where he's able to get backspin on the ball, so it hits and then comes back. Will had a couple like that against NCCU. He typically doesn't aim for the corner, he normally tries a sand wedge approach instead. Yesterday he was hitting a bit too flush. But, still better than shanking them. It's not like we constantly let them March downfield from the 20.

We've been so spoiled with his kicks, we forget, as mentioned above, that he's human, and has other things to worry about at times.

(There was an article in SI relatively recently about this technique, an interesting shift from the coffin corner approach.)

We had somebody near us yesterday that complained continuously about the screen passes and game calling and that Cut was terrible. Finally, the guy behind me told him to cheer not whine, that's something they do in Cheeter Hill. That shut him up.

Northwestern is a lot better on D than anybody thought, and they won the game, not the other way around. They didn't give our offense and relatively inexperienced QB a lot of openings. Hopefully our team will learn and come out against a more familiar foe next week and take it to them.

[jimsumner]

I agree that Monday's performance wasn't the deciding factor. But I would also argue that pinning a team back inside its 5 has an advantage greater than just 15 yards. It just restricts what an opponent can do.

And the net punting average is skewed a bit by the last punt of the half, 71 yards, OOB on the 2. But time expired on the play so Duke derived no more benefit from that than if he had punted 30 yards.

Monday had six touchbacks as a freshman, six as a sophomore, eight as a junior. So, six in one game is a big aberration.

Cut commented on Monday because I asked him to.

Here's the transcript.

Q."Will averaged 55 yards per punt but he had six touchbacks. Is that a trade-off you're willing to make?"

A. "No. He's not trying to do that. He's pretty good at trying not to. He'd tell you he's disappointed at laying the ball in the end zone. It's a lot easier said than done. But he can obviously be better in that regard."

Sirk? I'll be very interested to hear what Cut has to say after watching game film. It's important to keep in mind that most of the short passes to Powell and Wilson were designed to be passes downfield that Sirk elected to dump off to a running back.

Why? It seems to me that one of three things happened. The receivers were open but Sirk didn't see them, Sirk wasn't allowing time for the play to develop or the receivers simply weren't getting any separation and Sirk didn't have any alternative except to go to an RB.

I suspect all three happened at some point. But is there a correctable trend? If so, what does Duke do about it? Is the play-calling at fault? Does Duke need to simplify the schemes, rework them, try somebody different at WR? At QB? Something else? How much of the problem was schematic, how much was execution, how much was personnel?

I guarantee you there is going to be a lot of film being analyzed by a lot of people. Cut is big on process, on practice, on preparation. He said after the game that he didn't see any signs of slippage during practice but I'm sure they'll take a look at everything.

Northwestern is good, Duke expected them to play well and everything said along those lines by Duke was sincere. But Duke absolutely expected to win this game and Duke absolutely believes that they lost it more than Northwestern won it.

Duke had a big one on the line and let it slip away. The season could go either way, IMO. I could see 10-2, I could see 6-6. This is a huge week of preparation for a huge game. The loss raised a lot of questions and I'm anxious to see how they'll be answered.

[uh_no]

Are the sideline seats the ones at the very bottom of the stadium (immediately adjacent to the wall) that are gated off from the rest of the seating?

Those are ADA seats that are not open to the general public.

Source: am an usher who mans the ADA seating.

[Bob Green]

How much of the problem was schematic, how much was execution, how much was personnel?

Thanks, Jim. The answer to the quoted question above is key. In the stands, we mostly just complained about the play calling.

[luvdahops]

I agree that Monday's performance wasn't the deciding factor. But I would also argue that pinning a team back inside its 5 has an advantage greater than just 15 yards. It just restricts what an opponent can do.

And the net punting average is skewed a bit by the last punt of the half, 71 yards, OOB on the 2. But time expired on the play so Duke derived no more benefit from that than if he had punted 30 yards.

Monday had six touchbacks as a freshman, six as a sophomore, eight as a junior. So, six in one game is a big aberration.

Cut commented on Monday because I asked him to.

Here's the transcript.

Q."Will averaged 55 yards per punt but he had six touchbacks. Is that a trade-off you're willing to make?"

A. "No. He's not trying to do that. He's pretty good at trying not to. He'd tell you he's disappointed at laying the ball in the end zone. It's a lot easier said than done. But he can obviously be better in that regard."

Sirk? I'll be very interested to hear what Cut has to say after watching game film. It's important to keep in mind that most of the short passes to Powell and Wilson were designed to be passes downfield that Sirk elected to dump off to a running back.

Why? It seems to me that one of three things happened. The receivers were open but Sirk didn't see them, Sirk wasn't allowing time for the play to develop or the receivers simply weren't getting any separation and Sirk didn't have any alternative except to go to an RB.

I suspect all three happened at some point. But is there a correctable trend? If so, what does Duke do about it? Is the play-calling at fault? Does Duke need to simplify the schemes, rework them, try somebody different at WR? At QB? Something else? How much of the problem was schematic, how much was execution, how much was personnel?

I guarantee you there is going to be a lot of film being analyzed by a lot of people. Cut is big on process, on practice, on preparation. He said after the game that he didn't see any signs of slippage during practice but I'm sure they'll take a look at everything.

Northwestern is good, Duke expected them to play well and everything said along those lines by Duke was sincere. But Duke absolutely expected to win this game and Duke absolutely believes that they lost it more than Northwestern won it.

Duke had a big one on the line and let it slip away. The season could go either way, IMO. I could see 10-2, I could see 6-6. This is a huge week of preparation for a huge game. The loss raised a lot of questions and I'm anxious to see how they'll be answered.

Thanks for your posts Jim

On the subject of punting, I have a friend that coaches special teams in high school, and he views net punting average as a "first level stat" that, while useful, does not capture situational aspects of the game. In other words, not all yards and not all situations are equal, which is the same point you make above. And there is a reason why touchbacks and times downed inside the 20 are stats that are also tracked for punters. At a minimum, booming 2 straight 1st half punts from our 47 through the back of the end zone warranted a chewing out from the staff, especially because we arguably had them on the ropes at the time, so the potential advantage of pinning them back - with an inexperienced QB and an offense not getting anything done - was significant. I felt the same way on Monday's first punt in the second half, when the Duke offense had stalled after the NU touchdown return. That was a fairly critical juncture when the positional advantage from pinning them way down could have made a difference, too. To be clear, I am not arguing that Monday cost us the game. Just trying to further explain why I view his performance for the day was mixed at best.

It is also worth noting that Northwestern's Hunter Niswander had 10 punts for a 41.3 gross and net average for the day. He does not have the same kind of leg as Monday, but his hang time and directional effectiveness resulted in zero net return yards, and the hang time was probably also a factor on Smith's fumble. So the difference in net punting yards was a +1.7 to Duke overall, and -1.1 if you exclude Monday's 71 yarder on the last play of the first half. And -1 on turnovers. Either way, it is pretty hard to argue that punting overall was a net advantage to Duke. And we usually count on having that.

[Dukehky]

Disappointed in the outcome, but Jeremy Cash is a revelation. He is a top 3 safety in football. The only one who I can think of that is better is Jalen Ramsey from FSU. Cash is stupid good.

[devildeac]

Thanks, Jim. The answer to the quoted question above is key. In the stands, we mostly just complained about the play calling.

Speak for yourself (oh, wait, I sat just in front of you and complained more than you did:o).

More good info, Jim. Thanks again for sharing. Would have been very interesting to have been up 10-0 or 14-0 at the half instead of 7-3.

[Faison1]

Not only that, but most games it is easy to "upgrade" to a sideline seat early in the game. There are always issues that keep people from coming to Duke football games.

In full agreement with this. My excuse is I'm in California. Having said that, I was REALLY bummed when I saw the stands....this was a big game. I know it was hot, but holy smokes, the stands looked empty by the end of the 1st quarter. Out of curiosity, did anyone see photos of the UNC game going on at the same time? Were they struggling with attendance? I'm asking because I don't know.

As I've asked for several years now, does Duke's Athletic Department have a strategy in place to fill the stands? Or is it, build it and they will come?

[J.Blink]

As I've asked for several years now, does Duke's Athletic Department have a strategy in place to fill the stands? Or is it, build it and they will come?

I don't know what other programs with comparable stadiums and attendance issues do, but it seems like Duke does a lot. There are family packs available at cheap prices (as mentioned earlier in thread). At least a couple of games each year I believe tickets are given away to any Duke employees and their families. There's the military appreciation day and the new "Heroes Corner" portion of the stadium (with a large banner covering up several sections of seats near the closed GA end of the stadium) with tickets donated to military and first responders. At least one game a year they usually bring in a bunch of highschoolers, boy scouts, and the like. There have been buses with ads for the football season plastered on the side around, and I think I even saw a billboard or two around town.

Of my bright ideas, speeding up the game by getting rid of so many interminable TV timeouts is never going to happen, a parking deck is already being built for ease of parking, and so that leaves bringing in better food options (no Chickfila, Cosmic, or BBQ anymore?) and beer. Beer might do it!

Edit: I forgot to mention--my assumption is that Duke already maxed out attendance of dedicated fans years ago and so now needs to appeal to casual/social only fans.

[Mike Corey]

That's a question for Jim Sumner, to be sure.

My somewhat informed guess is that it's a multi-tiered plan, that heavily relies upon the interdependent improvement we've seen under the Cutcliffe era: Better salaries, better coaches, better facilities, better recruits, better player development, better football, better seasons, better bowls, with better fan support growing all the while.

This program has improved dramatically, quickly. Fan support requires a cultural change. And I suspect if we looked at student attendance data--real student attendance data--we'd see that cultural change is very clearly there. But we need the city of Durham, and the fast-growing cities around it, to come out in droves, as well. Every week. And we need alums from around the state willing to make that trip, too.

That sort of cultural change has more inertia to overcome, because the Duke football brand has to compete with UNC, NC State, NC Central, Wake, etc., etc., etc.

It'll get there. And we can do it a few games out of the year. But we're not there yet.

[75Crazie]

In full agreement with this. My excuse is I'm in California. Having said that, I was REALLY bummed when I saw the stands....this was a big game. I know it was hot, but holy smokes, the stands looked empty by the end of the 1st quarter. Out of curiosity, did anyone see photos of the UNC game going on at the same time? Were they struggling with attendance? I'm asking because I don't know.

As I've asked for several years now, does Duke's Athletic Department have a strategy in place to fill the stands? Or is it, build it and they will come?
If I still lived in or near Durham, I would NOT have gone to that game, in part because I cannot take the combination of sun and heat, but also in part as a completely futile one-person complaint against the general sellout to TV money and the impacts it has on local fans. I have no proof, but I'm willing to believe that the stadium would have been less than half as empty if that game had been at night. I for one am not blaming the fans one whit for not showing up.

[Bob Green]

If I still lived in or near Durham, I would NOT have gone to that game, in part because I cannot take the combination of sun and heat, but also in part as a completely futile one-person complaint against the general sellout to TV money and the impacts it has on local fans. I have no proof, but I'm willing to believe that the stadium would have been less than half as empty if that game had been at night. I for one am not blaming the fans one whit for not showing up.

75Crazie, I'm not specifically calling you out, I'm just using your post as a vehilcle to post my peeve...

As a young boy and teenager, I attended a lot of games in Wallace Wade Stadium (and a few before the name change) prior to the "general sellout to TV money" and they all started at 1 or 2 pm.

The whole "it is way too hot for football" rings hollow for me. It is a convenient excuse for our modern couch potato society. My 84 year old father and my 10 year old grandson sat right beside me for all 60 minutes on Saturday and neither was bothered by the heat. We applied sun block in appropriate quantity and drank lots of water.

I'll be back in the stands this coming Saturday for the Georgia Tech game and I'll go on record right here and now and state I prefer boiling sun and heat to the rain currently forecast. Of course a few clouds would be welcome.

[OldPhiKap]

I live in Georgia. The Dawg fans I know generally prefer the noon games, and dislike the later "moved for TV" games because it takes up the whole day and they don't get back home until pretty late.

Although it gets pretty darn hot in Athens during September afternoons, well -- this is the South and it kinda comes with the territory. I was outside all of yesterday afternoon in 90+ weather with not much shade. Not proud or bragging -- just saying that's part of living in this region of the country. Sun block, hat and hydrate.

Bottom line is, I guess one can find happiness or unhappiness wherever one wants to look. Personally, I am glad that we are even on television and the idea of complaining about that is kinda crazy.

[Olympic Fan]

As a young boy and teenager, I attended a lot of games in Wallace Wade Stadium (and a few before the name change) prior to the "general sellout to TV money" and they all started at 1 or 2 pm.

Exactly ... Wade Stadium didn't even have lights until 1983 -- and those were a temporary set of lights rented for a Thursday night Thanksgiving weekend gam with NC State.

During the great years of Duke football -- from the early 1930s to the mid 1960s, when Duke was the best program in the state and the ACC -- home kickoffs were always at 1 p.m. or 1:30 p.m. -- in the heat of the day. And, as Bob, that was long before TV started dictating start times.

Don't blame the "sellout to TV" for afternoon games on hot days.

[Class of '94]

In all seriousness, it is not my intention to troll any of you. I would love to get insight from any of you that watched the game if the coaches should take a closer look at Parker B; and give him an opportunity to at least play significant minutes in the GT game. I'm not giving up on Sirk after 3 games; but I do wonder if the staff should give Parker more playing time. Sirk appears to be a QB that is more of a natural runner who can throw the ball while Parker may be of more of a natural passer who can run when needed. Sirk could be inserted to be the dual threat QB (a la Brandon Connette) and Parker more the passing QB that is capable of running to keep the defense honest (a la Boone). Crazy or bad idea?

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

I arranged my fall semester class schedules to allow me plenty of time after class to get back to the dorm, dress up for the game and have lunch before heading to West Campus for a 2P kickoff. It was important to get there early in order to get seats in the student section that allowed me to be close to the action on the field!

[OldPhiKap]

In all seriousness, it is not my intention to troll any of you. I would love to get insight from any of you that watched the game if the coaches should take a closer look at Parker B; and give him an opportunity to at least play significant minutes in the GT game. I'm not giving up on Sirk after 3 games; but I do wonder if the staff should give Parker more playing time. Sirk appears to be a QB that is more of a natural runner who can throw the ball while Parker may be of more of a natural passer who can run when needed. Sirk could be inserted to be the dual threat QB (a la Brandon Connette) and Parker more the passing QB that is capable of running to keep the defense honest (a la Boone). Crazy or bad idea?

I'd say no. Sirk is by all accounts our best down-field quarterback. Whether the lack of tries was due to play calling or (what I suspect) Northwestern just taking the deep stuff away from us is something that can be addressed schematically and through coaching.

We made too many errors as a team, and did not take care of the little things (like getting punts down within the 20). I don't think it is reason for a change, and I still think Sirk will continue to grow into the role.

[jimsumner]

I'm not sure looking at TV is the best way to tell attendance of a hot, sunny day. The few times I ventured out of the air-conditioned, temporary media digs, it seemed like the concourse was SRO, people looking for shade, wind, something to drink. In other words, lot of people in the stadium but not in their seats, seats which radiate heat a lot more than the old wooden seats, albeit without the splinters.

Olympic Fan makes some good points but fails to mention that football season started later in those nine-game-season-days. Duke's first home game in 1934 was on October 6, October 2 in 1937, October 6 in 1956. Lots of other examples. The fourth Saturday of September was the traditional opening date for decades.

So, lots less need to adjust for hot weather. Wade and Murray sure never had to deal with a home game before Labor Day and neither did their crowds.

Much brighter minds than me are at work on increasing attendance. It's not just the small size of the student body that's a problem. That small student body leads to a small alumni base and the nature of a national university means that most of those alumni just don't live within easy driving distance. Just look at this board and how many knowledgeable posters don't attend games because they're just too far away.

For years, Duke has tried to lure the mythical non-aligned Triangle football fan. Either they don't exist in very large numbers or Duke hasn't figured out the best way to capture them.

Duke can have big crowds. Spurrier's last two home games at Duke had crowds of 38,621 and 41,200, the latter against NC State, which brought a sizeable contingent. Goldsmith's only good Duke team had crowds of 36K (ECU), 29.4K (Clemson), 34K (Virginia) and 40K (Carolina). And the Triangle's population has exploded since Spurrier left. So, good teams help. It also helps if the other team brings lots of folks. Duke could play ECU on a regular basis but does it help Duke to have 15K fans of the other team in the stands?

I honestly don't know what Duke could do better. Tickets are affordable and there are a lot of bundle options. Duke has the standard promotions. Are there less-standard promotion options that could be considered? And the head coach is an admirable, articulate sort of guy who goes out of his way to promote the program.

As others have noted, kick-off times are largely determined elsewhere. Does that suck? Sure. But college athletics made a Faustian Bargain with the entertainment industry back in the 19th century when Ivy League schools started importing tramp athletes to fill large stadiums that bore no discernible relation to higher education.

I'm not sure there's any way out short of blowing up the whole thing and starting over, and no I'm not suggesting anyone abandon reform attempts. But we all know about the relationship between money and evil and power and sometimes it seems like the good guys are just whacking at more moles than can be whacked.

But it's Monday, I have a sore throat and the future of intercollegiate athletics is not the topic of this thread. Tomorrow is another day.

[Dukehky]

I'd say no. Sirk is by all accounts our best down-field quarterback. Whether the lack of tries was due to play calling or (what I suspect) Northwestern just taking the deep stuff away from us is something that can be addressed schematically and through coaching.

We made too many errors as a team, and did not take care of the little things (like getting punts down within the 20). I don't think it is reason for a change, and I still think Sirk will continue to grow into the role.

Let Pierre run the wildcat sometimes!!!

I think I have the most irrational love for a player who hasn't every really played. You wanna win, let Nico spin!

It surprises me that two of our most highly rated and most athletic recruits recently in Pierre and Lloyd haven't gotten on the field on offense. Obviously the coaching staff knows what's up, but it's surprising.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

Let Pierre run the wildcat sometimes!!!

I think I have the most irrational love for a player who hasn't every really played. You wanna win, let Nico spin!

It surprises me that two of our most highly rated and most athletic recruits recently in Pierre and Lloyd haven't gotten on the field on offense. Obviously the coaching staff knows what's up, but it's surprising.
One thought comes to mind: the staff recruits few to play specific positions. They recruit good athletes who can adapt to changing needs. Sometimes players are recruited to be part of an evolving position or concept. Kyler Brown is a very example of this idea. He was recruited as an LB, evolved and was coached up to be a DE .... look at his body shape as he has grown and aged while at Duke. Now he plays a hybrid position which was the staff's long range plan from the beginning.

[duke blue brewcrew]

I haven't been able to make myself look at this thread before now. I have still only browsed here and there, so if I repeat earlier parts of this thread already discussed, my apologies. Saturday was disappointing as we all know. I must tip my cap to the Defense, they did all they could and played their hearts out. It sucked to see them give up that gash scoring play after seeing them work so hard all game. Special teams, especially the punting game were outstanding. As for the offense, there were obvious growing pains that Duke needs to overcome, and there's no time like the present given GT is coming to town this weekend. Sirk looked like a deer in headlights at times after some initial success early in the game.

I live in Atlanta, so it's difficult for to me to make many home games. This year, I have plans for 3 (NCCU, GT and Miami), plus a hopeful bowl game assuming logistics work out. I was greatly saddened by the lack of attendance for a Top 25 team coming into WW. I get it was a warm Saturday noon game, but the NCCU game was far better attended than a televised Big 5 match-up...smh. On TV, NW fans could be heard at times over the Duke fans. The cameras tried to avoid panning the crowd, b/c there just wasn't much of one. That's disappointing for a Duke program who's made great strides at rebuilding itself.

[jimsumner]

I haven't been able to make myself look at this thread before now. I have still only browsed here and there, so if I repeat earlier parts of this thread already discussed, my apologies. Saturday was disappointing as we all know. I must tip my cap to the Defense, they did all they could and played their hearts out. It sucked to see them give up that gash scoring play after seeing them work so hard all game. Special teams, especially the punting game were outstanding. As for the offense, there were obvious growing pains that Duke needs to overcome, and there's no time like the present given GT is coming to town this weekend. Sirk looked like a deer in headlights at times after some initial success early in the game.

I live in Atlanta, so it's difficult for to me to make many home games. This year, I have plans for 3 (NCCU, GT and Miami), plus a hopeful bowl game assuming logistics work out. I was greatly saddened by the lack of attendance for a Top 25 team coming into WW. I get it was a warm Saturday noon game, but the NCCU game was far better attended than a televised Big 5 match-up...smh. On TV, NW fans could be heard at times over the Duke fans. The cameras tried to avoid panning the crowd, b/c there just wasn't much of one. That's disappointing for a Duke program who's made great strides at rebuilding itself.

I don't see how we can call special teams "outstanding." Duke allowed a KOR for a touchdown, fumbled away a punt--on a fair catch--didn't spring anything close to a decent return, either kickoff or punt, and notched a half-dozen touchbacks. Northwestern punted 10 times, which Duke turned into zero return yards. Five kickoff returns--one a squib-for 79 yards. One of the best KOR guys in the NCAA averaged 19.3 yards per return because he didn't get any blocks.

I agree that the defense was outstanding and deserved better. But the special teams bear as much responsibility for the loss as does the offense, IMO.

[duke blue brewcrew]

I don't see how we can call special teams "outstanding." Duke allowed a KOR for a touchdown, fumbled away a punt--on a fair catch--didn't spring anything close to a decent return, either kickoff or punt, and notched a half-dozen touchbacks. Northwestern punted 10 times, which Duke turned into zero return yards. Five kickoff returns--one a squib-for 79 yards. One of the best KOR guys in the NCAA averaged 19.3 yards per return because he didn't get any blocks.

I agree that the defense was outstanding and deserved better. But the special teams bear as much responsibility for the loss as does the offense, IMO.

Good points Jim, I retract my compliments to the special teams. I was thinking of the numerous monster Will Monday punts, but to OPK's point earlier in this thread, there were plenty that ended up as touch-backs.

[killerleft]

75Crazie, I'm not specifically calling you out, I'm just using your post as a vehilcle to post my peeve...

As a young boy and teenager, I attended a lot of games in Wallace Wade Stadium (and a few before the name change) prior to the "general sellout to TV money" and they all started at 1 or 2 pm.

The whole "it is way too hot for football" rings hollow for me. It is a convenient excuse for our modern couch potato society. My 84 year old father and my 10 year old grandson sat right beside me for all 60 minutes on Saturday and neither was bothered by the heat. We applied sun block in appropriate quantity and drank lots of water.

I'll be back in the stands this coming Saturday for the Georgia Tech game and I'll go on record right here and now and state I prefer boiling sun and heat to the rain currently forecast. Of course a few clouds would be welcome.

I'm with you, Bob. I'm 63 and only get a fair amount of walking as exercise. I did just as you said, water, hat, sunscreen. No issues at all. But certainly some people have issues and some just don't like it hot:).

I've come to realize that the population in general just isn't as likely to come to Duke football games like happened with regularity before Duke's administration dropped the ball back in the late sixties. Lots of folks have just forgotten the art of enjoying themselves outside, I think. If it wasn't too hot it might be too cold, rainy, or who knows. Several friends insist they'd like to see a Duke game sometime, but I no longer ask them, because they've turned down free tix even in perfect weather multiple times.

I would never chastise anyone for not coming to Duke football games. But I do wish more would come out and say they don't want to be there.

[uh_no]

I honestly don't know what Duke could do better. Tickets are affordable and there are a lot of bundle options. Duke has the standard promotions. Are there less-standard promotion options that could be considered? And the head coach is an admirable, articulate sort of guy who goes out of his way to promote the program.


I think we all know what they could do better, but don't.

10 bucks for parking?
can't bring in an EMPTY BOTTLE to fill up at the water stations?
the generally absurd cost for food (not as absurd as some stadiums....but 8 dollars for what amounts to a slice of crappy pizza? what does the soda cost? 3 bucks? 4-5x markup on mushy chicken sandwiches?) Do you know how many people they'd get if they just stocked the concourse with triangle area food trucks instead of the junk they currently have? they do it a few times a year at bulls games and everyone shows up.
no beer (seriously...appropriately priced beer would probably fix the attendance problem for any college team...)
crappy replays (too busy showing advertisement animations so half the time they couldn't even show the full play before the next one started
too much dead time during timeouts....sometimes they have something going on...a contest...but that's about the only exciting thing....nobody cares about the presentations to random people (i'm sure it's great for the people who get honored....but for the rest of the stadium, in honesty, its just "another presentation"...zzzzz). most of the time it's just crappy music or adverts that play on the scoreboard.

do they get higher returns overall for doing all this stuff? of course. and the cost is butts in seats.


the number one thing they could do? not lose games like they did on saturday and last year against carolina. how many people do you think were in that stadium and said "here we go again," and how many people do you think were at home saying "glad i didn't waste my time going to that." It's harsh, but it's the truth.

So anyway, revenues are important, and not being competitive all the time is something that you can't flick a switch and change.

[jimsumner]

I think we all know what they could do better, but don't.

10 bucks for parking?
can't bring in an EMPTY BOTTLE to fill up at the water stations?
the generally absurd cost for food (not as absurd as some stadiums....but 8 dollars for what amounts to a slice of crappy pizza? what does the soda cost? 3 bucks? 4-5x markup on mushy chicken sandwiches?) Do you know how many people they'd get if they just stocked the concourse with triangle area food trucks instead of the junk they currently have? they do it a few times a year at bulls games and everyone shows up.
no beer (seriously...appropriately priced beer would probably fix the attendance problem for any college team...)
crappy replays (too busy showing advertisement animations so half the time they couldn't even show the full play before the next one started
too much dead time during timeouts....sometimes they have something going on...a contest...but that's about the only exciting thing....nobody cares about the presentations to random people (i'm sure it's great for the people who get honored....but for the rest of the stadium, in honesty, its just "another presentation"...zzzzz). most of the time it's just crappy music or adverts that play on the scoreboard.

do they get higher returns overall for doing all this stuff? of course. and the cost is butts in seats.


the number one thing they could do? not lose games like they did on saturday and last year against carolina. how many people do you think were in that stadium and said "here we go again," and how many people do you think were at home saying "glad i didn't waste my time going to that." It's harsh, but it's the truth.

So anyway, revenues are important, and not being competitive all the time is something that you can't flick a switch and change.

Some good points. Very much agree about food. Same thing with Cameron. Options limited and unattractive ones at that.

But Duke doesn't have much say in beer sales or the length of timeouts. One of the more amusing things about any college football game is watching both teams line up for the first play after a timeout and then stand around twiddling their thumbs until the officials get the go-ahead from the TV guy on the sideline that the car commercial is over and they can resume play.

Not only do the TV networks dictate the start times, they also dictate the length of timeouts. And the wait can be agonizing.

My impression is that the ceremonies are slotted into the long time outs and don't add any time to the games.

[6th Man]

75Crazie, I'm not specifically calling you out, I'm just using your post as a vehilcle to post my peeve...

As a young boy and teenager, I attended a lot of games in Wallace Wade Stadium (and a few before the name change) prior to the "general sellout to TV money" and they all started at 1 or 2 pm.

The whole "it is way too hot for football" rings hollow for me. It is a convenient excuse for our modern couch potato society. My 84 year old father and my 10 year old grandson sat right beside me for all 60 minutes on Saturday and neither was bothered by the heat. We applied sun block in appropriate quantity and drank lots of water.

I'll be back in the stands this coming Saturday for the Georgia Tech game and I'll go on record right here and now and state I prefer boiling sun and heat to the rain currently forecast. Of course a few clouds would be welcome.

I don't know that you were very fair in your assessment that choosing not to attend Saturday's game is a convenient excuse for our modern couch potato society. I was one of the posters stating that they chose not to attend due to the heat. I am also not even close to being a couch potato as I am avid about physical fitness. The reality is that I have been in Wallace Wade on days like Saturday and know what that feels like. As a matter of personal preference I do not find that to be an enjoyable experience. The heat is a real issue with September games and if anyone saw the kickoff for UNC on TV, they appeared to have the same issue. I didn't watch more than the beginning of their game, but at least at the beginning UNC had very poor attendance as well. I know that Duke football attendance has bigger problems than the heat, but for me that was certainly the determining factor. Don't get me wrong, I greatly appreciate you and everyone else that chose to attend. You guys are the super fans and I am glad the team has your support. I look forward to being in Wallace Wade this season!

[75Crazie]

The whole "it is way too hot for football" rings hollow for me. It is a convenient excuse for our modern couch potato society. My 84 year old father and my 10 year old grandson sat right beside me for all 60 minutes on Saturday and neither was bothered by the heat. We applied sun block in appropriate quantity and drank lots of water.
There are plenty of things that I would do 50 years ago that I do not do now. I grew up in Virginia without any kind of air conditioning (house or car), and thought nothing of it back then (because I did not know what I was missing). I went to my share of September Duke football games in the 70s and 80s (whether hot and humid or pouring rain). I would not do that today, because I am now intolerant of the combination of southern heat and humidity (not to mention living nowhere near Durham any more). But I think my point is still valid. Wallace Wade DOES have lighting now, and there is no excuse other than TV revenues for not playing any September game at night. Before TV expanded to the point that it would even show Duke games during the day, our September games were predominately played at night once the lights were installed. So I cannot help but continue to consider the schools' and league's acceptance of TV money for day games, understandable as it is, as a big middle finger to all students and locals who want to support those schools by attending games in person.

[uh_no]

Some good points. Very much agree about food. Same thing with Cameron. Options limited and unattractive ones at that.

But Duke doesn't have much say in beer sales or the length of timeouts. One of the more amusing things about any college football game is watching both teams line up for the first play after a timeout and then stand around twiddling their thumbs until the officials get the go-ahead from the TV guy on the sideline that the car commercial is over and they can resume play.

Not only do the TV networks dictate the start times, they also dictate the length of timeouts. And the wait can be agonizing.

My impression is that the ceremonies are slotted into the long time outs and don't add any time to the games.

I'm aware that the TV runs the timeouts, I think the though, the marketing people don't do near enough to keep fans engaged during them. someone trying to catch balls at midfield? engaging. someone trying to punt pass and kick a ball to win free appetizers for himself (or everyone!)? engaging. Someone telling us to go buy more bojangles? not engaging. hearing "turn down for what" or the "na-na-na-na-hey-hey-hey" knockoff rap song over and over? not engaging. TWEET THIS! not engaging. Announcing the heat management plan for the 100th time? not engaging.

Basically, IMO, if you want people to show up at games, they can't be bored. ever. Obviously you can't control the action on the field, but you can control the action during timeouts....and it's mostly a snoozefest thus far.

lets get students having wheel barrow races to win stuff
two kids making paper airplanes to see who can make it go the furthest
songs that people can get engaged with....sweet carolina, YMCA, living on a prayer, (aka stuff that would actually attract families and professionals in the area...)
bouncing bulldogs???? can they even do outside? who knows.

instead during every timeout I'm taking out my phone and looking at scores, news, emails and thinking "this would be easier if I were at home."

Keep people's eyes on the field, keep their minds off the advantages of being at home.

[jimsumner]

There are plenty of things that I would do 50 years ago that I do not do now. I grew up in Virginia without any kind of air conditioning (house or car), and thought nothing of it back then (because I did not know what I was missing). I went to my share of September Duke football games in the 70s and 80s (whether hot and humid or pouring rain). I would not do that today, because I am now intolerant of the combination of southern heat and humidity (not to mention living nowhere near Durham any more). But I think my point is still valid. Wallace Wade DOES have lighting now, and there is no excuse other than TV revenues for not playing any September game at night. Before TV expanded to the point that it would even show Duke games during the day, our September games were predominately played at night once the lights were installed. So I cannot help but continue to consider the schools' and league's acceptance of TV money for day games, understandable as it is, as a big middle finger to all students and locals who want to support those schools by attending games in person.

I think it is unfair to characterize Duke as giving a middle finger to anyone by playing games when the TV networks mandate them. That ship sailed long ago. Without TV revenues, Duke could not compete on this level. Neither could anyone else. It's an arm race fueled by TV money.

Might not like it. Might not be a good idea. But, as I said earlier in the thread, that's part of a broader, meaning-of-life discussion on the nature of intercollegiate athletics.

The only choice Duke would have would be to drop out of the ACC--and take a big financial hit for doing so--and dropping down a level or two. And it's been done. The Ivies did it. The University of Chicago did it. Others have.

But the amount of money Duke has raised, spent and committed to spend on intercollegiate football in recent years rather suggests that Duke has a fair amount of skin in the game. Until and unless that changes--and I don't see it changing--there is no chance in Hades (analogy intended) that Duke is going to turn down televised games in September in the early afternoon. Might as well ask for flying cars.

[BigWayne]

The heat is a real issue with September games and if anyone saw the kickoff for UNC on TV, they appeared to have the same issue. I didn't watch more than the beginning of their game, but at least at the beginning UNC had very poor attendance as well.

Yep. UNC has some of the same issues. (http://wncn.com/2015/09/21/attendance-woes-plague-fedora-heels/)
Money quote: The only ranked team Fedora’s Heels have beaten was the No. 25 Duke Blue Devils in 2014.




But Duke doesn't have much say in beer sales.

Jim, Did something change? Other ACC schools serve alcohol. There is not an ACC rule preventing it. (http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/09/beer_sales_at_carrier_dome_app.html) Also, Kevin White was quoted as saying that the new luxury suites at Wally Wade will serve alcohol. (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article10070828.html) I believe Duke could sell beer to the regular fans, but so far they are only worrying about the big spenders.

[jimsumner]

Yep. UNC has some of the same issues. (http://wncn.com/2015/09/21/attendance-woes-plague-fedora-heels/)
Money quote: The only ranked team Fedora’s Heels have beaten was the No. 25 Duke Blue Devils in 2014.




Jim, Did something change? Other ACC schools serve alcohol. There is not an ACC rule preventing it. (http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/09/beer_sales_at_carrier_dome_app.html) Also, Kevin White was quoted as saying that the new luxury suites at Wally Wade will serve alcohol. (http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/duke/article10070828.html) I believe Duke could sell beer to the regular fans, but so far they are only worrying about the big spenders.

I'm not sure I've ever seen three posts on the same thread at the same time.

I believe it's a North Carolina law that prohibits beer sales at intercollegiate athletic events. Luxury suites don't apply. Which enhances their attractiveness. Has that law been changed?

I'm not a drinker but I understand the appeal. Miles Wolff has stated a number of times that he would never have brought back the Durham Bulls in 1980 had he not been granted the right to sell beer.

Durham Bulls games are strange. People seem to be having a good time, it's a great place to hang out and very few fans actually seem to care all that much who wins. I'm not sure that's what Duke wants. At least the latter part.

uh-no's comments bring up (another) larger question. The pro sports are wrestling with the question of how to make attendance at a game more attractive than watching it at home. At home you can toggle between multiple games, easily check your fantasy league, place an order on Amazon.com and do a boatload of things you either can't do at the stadium or can't do as easily. Wade, Murray, even Spurrier didn't have to compete with 60-inch High-Def TVs.

And I very much agree that the new scoreboards could be better utilized than they have been so far. Is the purpose of the board to enhance revenue or enhance the fan experience? Are they mutually exclusive?

[OldPhiKap]

Beer sales would increase revenue and attendance.

A flow of keg beer drinking in 90 degree weather and sunshine is problematic on several fronts.

I would personally support beer sales at games, but if the law doesn't allow it than it is up to the residents of NC to make that determination as an initial matter. (I am with Jim, I thought that was the law but have never looked -- trying to recall my last ACC and NCAA games in Greensboro or Charlotte . . . .)

[jimsumner]

In case anyone is curious, alcohol is not made available in the media facilities.

If you're not curious, it's still not available. :)

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

I'm aware that the TV runs the timeouts, I think the though, the marketing people don't do near enough to keep fans engaged during them. someone trying to catch balls at midfield? engaging. someone trying to punt pass and kick a ball to win free appetizers for himself (or everyone!)? engaging. Someone telling us to go buy more bojangles? not engaging. hearing "turn down for what" or the "na-na-na-na-hey-hey-hey" knockoff rap song over and over? not engaging. TWEET THIS! not engaging. Announcing the heat management plan for the 100th time? not engaging.

Basically, IMO, if you want people to show up at games, they can't be bored. ever. Obviously you can't control the action on the field, but you can control the action during timeouts....and it's mostly a snoozefest thus far.

lets get students having wheel barrow races to win stuff
two kids making paper airplanes to see who can make it go the furthest
songs that people can get engaged with....sweet carolina, YMCA, living on a prayer, (aka stuff that would actually attract families and professionals in the area...)
bouncing bulldogs???? can they even do outside? who knows.

instead during every timeout I'm taking out my phone and looking at scores, news, emails and thinking "this would be easier if I were at home."

Keep people's eyes on the field, keep their minds off the advantages of being at home.

I would add one more simple thing to help bring the crowd together: run the words to our songs on that big screen so people who don't know the words can join in and sing while our band plays. The songs are part of our traditions and our history. Lots of people singing fight songs or the alma mater can be powerful and energizing..... it's what the songs were created to do!

[jimsumner]

I would add one more simple thing to help bring the crowd together: run the words to our songs on that big screen so people who don't know the words can join in and sing while our band plays. The songs are part of our traditions and our history. Lots of people singing fight songs or the alma mater can be powerful and energizing..... it's what the songs were created to do!

If you had heard me sing, you might rethink that.

Besides, no singing in the press box. :)

But Duke has done great work revitalizing the band. It looks and sounds great. That would seem to be an experience enhancer.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

If you had heard me sing, you might rethink that.

Besides, no singing in the press box. :)

But Duke has done great work revitalizing the band. It looks and sounds great. That would seem to be an experience enhancer.

If enough people are singing, Jim, a few of key just adds to the texture!

[J.Blink]

If you had heard me sing, you might rethink that.

Besides, no singing in the press box. :)

But Duke has done great work revitalizing the band. It looks and sounds great. That would seem to be an experience enhancer.

I meant to mention that earlier! The band looks huge this year and sounds really good. They didn't seem to get too much time on the field at halftime, but definitely a big step up from past years.

[devildeac]

If you had heard me sing, you might rethink that.

Besides, no singing in the press box.

But Duke has done great work revitalizing the band. It looks and sounds great. That would seem to be an experience enhancer.

Are you allowed to cheer against c*rolina or m*ryland or any other non-rivals in the press box? ;) :rolleyes:

TO: OPK

I don't know what rules/laws would apply for alcohol sales at the limited number of ACC games played in Charlotte if they are played at TWC Arena or BoA Stadium.

It sure would help revenue. Think about those overpriced sodas, pizzas and mushy chicken sammiches. "Beers" would likely go for about $10-12 each for a 16 ounce cup:eek:. I'll still continue our beer tastings with the TB'CC at our tents before the game;).

[devildeac]

I meant to mention that earlier! The band looks huge this year and sounds really good. They didn't seem to get too much time on the field at halftime, but definitely a big step up from past years.

And nobody fumbled their trombone. Nor were there any interceptions in the tuba section. :o

I did notice that the drum players executed a lot of short routes.

[BigWayne]

I believe it's a North Carolina law that prohibits beer sales at intercollegiate athletic events. Luxury suites don't apply. Which enhances their attractiveness. Has that law been changed?



I didn't know about that one so I looked it up. It's quite a piece of gerrymandered legislation. See section 18B-1006. (http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bychapter/chapter_18b.html) Its wording is not crystal clear, but it appears to cover public universities and should not apply to Duke.

This section starts with: No permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages shall be issued to a business on the campus or property of a public school, college, or university. emphasis added.

The subsections after that explain exemptions which confirm the application to public universities:

This subsection shall not apply to the following:
(6) Any golf courses owned or leased by the public college or university and open to the public for use.
(7)b. Any stadiums that support a NASCAR-sanctioned one-fourth mile asphalt flat oval short track, that are owned or leased by the public college or university, and that only sell malt beverages, unfortified wine, or fortified wine at events that are not sponsored or funded by the public college or university.

[jimsumner]

I didn't know about that one so I looked it up. It's quite a piece of gerrymandered legislation. See section 18B-1006. (http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bychapter/chapter_18b.html) Its wording is not crystal clear, but it appears to cover public universities and should not apply to Duke.

This section starts with: No permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages shall be issued to a business on the campus or property of a public school, college, or university. emphasis added.

The subsections after that explain exemptions which confirm the application to public universities:

This subsection shall not apply to the following:
(6) Any golf courses owned or leased by the public college or university and open to the public for use.
(7)b. Any stadiums that support a NASCAR-sanctioned one-fourth mile asphalt flat oval short track, that are owned or leased by the public college or university, and that only sell malt beverages, unfortified wine, or fortified wine at events that are not sponsored or funded by the public college or university.


Thanks for clarifying that. Would James B. Duke rise from the dead if Duke sold beer but not tobacco? Should Duke start out by selling beer at the racetrack?

Lots of questions. For the record, I haven't heard even the slightest hint that Duke is considering selling beer. I'll see if I can find out anything more.

[DU82]

I believe we talked about this last season. The Baptists sell beer at their football games, so I believe the Methodists can, too.

http://www.wakeforestsports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/090414aaa.html

[DukieInKansas]

I believe we talked about this last season. The Baptists sell beer at their football games, so I believe the Methodists can, too.

http://www.wakeforestsports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/090414aaa.html

As long as it isn't on church property - no alcohol on Methodist property per the Book of Discipline. Do I confess my sin of breaking this rule (twice) to the Pope while he is in the country? :o

[devildeac]

I believe we talked about this last season. The Baptists sell beer at their football games, so I believe the Methodists can, too.

http://www.wakeforestsports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/090414aaa.html

Then they must consider having this on their menu:

5509

[hallcity]

I meant to mention that earlier! The band looks huge this year and sounds really good. They didn't seem to get too much time on the field at halftime, but definitely a big step up from past years.

The band is vastly improved. Now, if we can get to the point that the band isn't giving the same halftime show each game.

[uh_no]

The band is vastly improved. Now, if we can get to the point that the band isn't giving the same halftime show each game.

they practice two times a week....unlike most major university bands which practice daily. It would be very difficult to turn around a new show in a week at the level of quality the band is currently doing.

They'll do 2-3 shows a year....and I'm okay with that, since I know many of the students in the band contribute greatly to the university in other aspects that they wouldn't be able to would they practice every day.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

they practice two times a week....unlike most major university bands which practice daily. It would be very difficult to turn around a new show in a week at the level of quality the band is currently doing.

They'll do 2-3 shows a year....and I'm okay with that, since I know many of the students in the band contribute greatly to the university in other aspects that they wouldn't be able to would they practice every day.

I'd like to chime in a bit here. There is no performance major in music at Duke. There are no music majors in our band. The students who take part are largely volunteers who work very hard to entertain the fans and to encourage our participation in supporting the team. Until a few years ago, there were no scholarships or stipends associated with band membership. At one point, funds were made available to support stipends to recruit and retain sousaphone players... we had only one or two then.

Consider the performances they give not only at football games (home and some away), but also at a number of other athletic events... not just men's and women's basketball. Time management and resiliency are key qualities to be able to spend that much time performing in addition to the other rigorous demands of being a Duke student.

A campaign to create a $2.5 million dollar endowment for the marching band has just been announced.
http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_LANG=C&ATCLID=210360930&DB_OEM_ID=4200

[gep]

Here's my 2 cents on attendance. If TV money is "that good" such that game times are totally dictated by such... what about just not charging any admission to attend the games. Keep concessions reasonable (gotta pay for the cost of goods, at least). Until there's a bunch of "sell-outs" (full stadium), just keep admission free to all. Get butts in the stands... maybe they keep coming back.:confused:

[Bob Green]

I don't know that you were very fair in your assessment that choosing not to attend Saturday's game is a convenient excuse for our modern couch potato society. I was one of the posters stating that they chose not to attend due to the heat. I am also not even close to being a couch potato as I am avid about physical fitness.

I'll concede the point that my "couch potato society" comment does not apply to everyone. However, it does apply to large numbers of people.

[Dukehky]

Thanks for clarifying that. Would James B. Duke rise from the dead if Duke sold beer but not tobacco? Should Duke start out by selling beer at the racetrack?

Lots of questions. For the record, I haven't heard even the slightest hint that Duke is considering selling beer. I'll see if I can find out anything more.

If Wally Wade sold loosies, I wouldn't miss a game ever.

Also, the band, that's not part of the pageantry of ACC football I really care about.

[devildeac]

I know it's waaay early in the season, but we're #8:


http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/22


Unfortunately, we just played the team 2 spots above us:(.


And, look who's #1 :eek: .

[duke blue brewcrew]

I know it's waaay early in the season, but we're #8:


http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/22


Unfortunately, we just played the team 2 spots above us:(.


And, look who's #1 :eek: .

Like you said, it's early. However, so far there's some good Defense being played in the ACC according to these numbers. Five of the Top 10 including #1 and #2. It's interesting that Duke's next opponent is ranked #38.

[CameronBornAndBred]

songs that people can get engaged with....sweet carolina, YMCA, living on a prayer, (aka stuff that would actually attract families and professionals in the area...)



I would add one more simple thing to help bring the crowd together: run the words to our songs on that big screen so people who don't know the words can join in and sing while our band plays. The songs are part of our traditions and our history. Lots of people singing fight songs or the alma mater can be powerful and energizing..... it's what the songs were created to do!


If you had heard me sing, you might rethink that.

Besides, no singing in the press box. :)

Those comments made me think of one thing that I truly loved on game day...the national anthem. It was honestly the first time in forever that I've heard the words sung by the crowd instead of someone else. The band played it and the crowd sang it, and sang it so clearly that I was looking for speakers. It was both amazing and beautiful. It probably happens often, but this is the first time that I actually caught it with my ears.
As to DitBD's point, I heard the two ladies behind me singing the alma mater, so at least they know the words...I don't. I think she's right that it would be nice to see them on the screen.